date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2021/04/25
| 1,884
| 7,164
|
<issue_start>username_0: As an Asian-American I sometimes feel as though I am "stuck." There are certainly many Asian academics, but only a few Asian-Americans. This is complicated by the statistics. In absolute numbers, I think the numbers of Asian-American academics are small. Asian-Americans only make up a small percentage of the overall population of the U.S. (about 5%), and so from that perspective, a statistic that says something like, "9% of academics are Asian-American" (I made this up) can be regarded as saying that Asian-Americans are *overrepresented.*
At the same time, to my knowledge, I was the only Asian-American in my entire PhD program while I was there (not just my year - the entire PhD program), there were to my knowledge no Asian-American faculty in the department, and I can count on my fingers the number of Asian-Americans I see represented in my field.
(Edit: I also want to add that I understand that even the term "Asian-American" is messy because it lumps together several different ethnic groups)<issue_comment>username_1: There is no universal definition of "underrepresented" and also no universal definition of Asian-American, so it's impossible to answer this question accurately. A very rough answer is that it depends on the discipline (eg computer science vs anthropology) and also on which ethnicities are considered Asian-American.
Your personal experience notwithstanding, it is likely that Asian-Americans are overrepresented in academia overall, simply because Asian-Americans are overrepresented among Americans with advanced degrees. But this isn't a very useful metric from the point of view of diversity and equity.
---
**Edit:**
The NSF has a breakdown by race and discipline of US citizens awarded doctorates in 2016:
<https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsf18304/report/which-fields-attract-students/minorities.cfm>
As for faculty, another reason it's going to be hard to find good data on whether Asian-Americans are underrepresented is that *schools* love to pretend that their faculty is more diverse than it is, so they often have rather creative definitions of "underrepresented."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: #### Your suggestion that Asian-Americans are under-represented in US universities sounds wrong to me — more likely they are an "over-represented minority"
To really answer this question in detail, you'd need to clearly specify the scope of interest (i.e., which set of universities, which fields, etc.) and get admissions/employment data to compare with the demographics of the host population. Your choice of the specific group of Asian-Americans is also somewhat curious (and could be considered cherry-picking), insofar as it combines a race/ethnicity with citizenship status. In any case, doing a proper analysis of this issue would be quite a big project and I do not propose to make any attempt here to take that on.
Setting aside that caveat, if you are confining attention mostly to the most elite universities in the US, or the STEM fields in most universities in the US, there is pretty clear evidence that Asians are heavily *over-represented* relative to their population numbers. This is a consequence of what the economist <NAME> has referred to as their status as a "model minority" (i.e., a high-performing racial minority with a number of high outcomes across various social indicators). You might be interested to know that a [recent lawsuit against Harvard university](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Students_for_Fair_Admissions_v._Harvard) involved a controversy over anti-Asian discrimination occurring as a result of affirmative action for other race groups. The materials in that case show that Asians are already heavily *over-represented* in the university, and would be more so if not for favouratism of other race groups on "diversity" grounds. An internal report at Harvard University in 2013 found that Asian-Americans were 19% of the student body, and if the university were to assess admissions applications purely on academic factors, they would have been 43% of the student body (see e.g., news coverage of report [here](https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2018/06/15/harvard-buried-internal-report-that-found.html)).
So, your hunch here sounds wrong to me. Whenever the matter has been subject to analysis of admissions data, the results have generally shown that Asian-Americans are heavily over-represented in university admissions. Harvard is certainly not an aberration from the norm on this issue. It is certainly possible that Asian-Americans might be under-represented as students in some sub-fields, or at particular universities, but the general stream of evidence is the opposite of what you are supposing. As to faculty positions, I'm not sure there, because obviously it takes about a generation for students to flow through to become faculty. It might be that high numbers of Asian-American undergraduates have not yet flowed through heavily into higher degrees and faculty positions, but at least anecdotally, in the STEM field my observation has been the opposite.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Are Asian-Americans considered an “underrepresented minority” in academia in the US?
>
>
>
Both "yes" and "no" are wrong. In my discipline, physics, Asians are over-represented among both non-American and American physicists. But if you look at most social sciences or humanities, you will find far fewer Asian academics. This can be readily seen by searching for pictures of conference attendees at various disciplinary conferences.
There is also a lot of regional variation, and variation by rank.
And yes, you are quite right that the concept of "Asian American" is unclear, as are many other supposed identity categories. National, cultural, language background, etc. vary and should be considered.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Since OP has clarified that they’re in pure math, I wanted to point out that the AMS has great surveys with extensive information about PhD demographics in math and first job outcomes. [Here’s the most recent survey](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/2018Survey-NewDoctorates-Report.pdf)
>
> Among the US citizens earning PhDs, 6 were American Indian or Alaska Native, 81 were Asian, 27 were Black or African American, 34 were Hispanic or Latino, 2 were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 754 were White, and 31 were of unknown race/ethnicity.
>
>
>
That summary is all math, but they do later break out statistics, biostatistics, and applied math separately, so you can work out that in pure math their are 47 Asian US-citizen pure math PhDs that year out of 672 total US-citizen pure math PhDs. That’s almost exactly 7%. Among all American Millennials, 6.4% are Asian. But this calculation is actually quite sensitive to whether you include permanent residents. If you do then it changes to 70/710 = 9.9%.
So Asian-Americans are slightly over represented among US math PhDs by a factor between 1 and 1.5.
(As other answers have said there’s nuance to add to this about more specific ethnicity which I won’t repeat.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/25
| 2,773
| 11,091
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a student who wants me to reply to his emails as soon as he sends them! For example:
>
> I already provided you with .... form in our first meeting. Can you fill the necessary boxes and sign .... to confirm my project? ... It has already been a day, and you have not replied.
>
>
>
My reply:
>
> Thank you for sharing this information. Please find attached the document.
>
>
> However, it is important to note that even if you already provided me with the documents. You should give me at least 3 to 4 working days to reply to your email. It is important that you understand that there are other issues an academic has to deal with, and patience would be really appreciated.
>
>
>
Is there anything wrong with this response? If so, could you please help me understand how to reply to such emails?<issue_comment>username_1: I see nothing wrong with your reply, it's courteous and points out what rubbed you (rightly) the wrong way. It's a good approach if you want to be professional.
In your shoes, I'd have taken twice as long as it usually takes me to finish whatever job the pushy student wants from me, while ignoring any emails during that time (except for - maybe - 'Working on it."). What the professional reply doesn't address - and it would be hard to address in such a reply - is that the formulation of the student's email is arrogant and self-centered. "It has already been a day..." Really? All things considered and the current climate of the educational system taken into account, you did just right. But someone should teach your student that the world doesn't revolve around them.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In the future, you could tell the students at the start of term that it may take several days to reply to emails, and that if there is something urgent they should speak to you right after class or during office hours. This should still work during the pandemic when all is online.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Two words: "Office hours."
I say to students that, if they need immediate feedback, then they should come to my office hours, everything else will be processed as its turn arises.
[During the pandemic, of course, the office hours would be virtual]
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't think you even owe him an apology. The students must be aware that delays of days in answers are perfectly acceptable. If you feel guilty for such an answer I'd suggest <NAME>'s book [A World Without Email](https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/54326146-a-world-without-email), where he argues that people should not be "enslaved" by having to answer emails all day long.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: What worked for me was ignoring the inappropriate parts. Check the student's name to be sure you didn't promise to get back to them ASAP, check there's no new information in the email that needs to be jotted down with your other notes or where-ever. Then go back to work.
The time it takes to write back that you aren't going to write back isn't worth it. I also have no special expertise in teaching communication skills. And I've found that often students are embarrassed at what they wrote. They get nervous and spiral-out about a project and write a demanding email just to be doing something.
Alternately, if you have time, go ahead and do it. If MaryBeth is really excited about starting the project this weekend, why not help her? It won't take any more of your time to do it now than when you were planning on doing it. But, again, not worth it to comment on the crazy/rude parts.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: It's funny because I just dealt with this last week (student complaining they don't see a grade listed online 38 minutes after the due date for a week-long project). I fired off a response somewhat peeved and off-kilter (and also one-handed with my cat on me), and a few minutes later somewhat regretted that I'd let my emotion show a bit.
The best thing in these cases is to be super cool, give minimal information, and don't let it be visible that they got to you. (That can possibly be used against you later in future interactions.) What I *should* have said was:
>
> Note that the syllabus (p. 1) says, "Contact by email is preferred;
> replies are usually sent in one day."
>
>
>
Adjust to taste, of course. But I don't mind having an average expectation like that documented on my syllabus.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I feel like you're doing the student a disservice by being so polite in response to an unprofessional email.
It's not necessarily your job (unless you're a business professor maybe?) to teach email etiquette, but sending an arrogant-sounding email like that demanding faster attention may absolutely harm that student in the future. If you reply politely, will they send a similar email to a professor who won't behave professionally in response to an email like that? To an interviewer for a job after graduation? To a co-worker, or someone they hope to collaborate with? To their boss after they have a job?
I would probably word my reply a bit more sternly:
"Thank you for sharing this information. Please find attached the document.
Also, please note that the tone of your follow-up email was highly inappropriate. Keep in mind for the future that professional etiquette requires patience, and follow-up message should be worded politely."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: As well as the other answers, I think a sentence along the lines of "If there is a specific deadline for requests, include that deadline in both the subject matter and body of the email so that I can see it immediately"
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I receive such e-mails, too. Of course if there is a deadline the students have to observe themselves, I try to answer as soon as possible.
But if there is no such deadline, this behavior is simply childish. Similar to a three-year-old who thows tantrums because they want an ice-cream NOW. In this case, I treat them like a mother would treat a stubborn three-year-old: I keep calm and just ignore their complaints. I send them what they want within a few days, at a time *when it is ok for me*, with a short, polite e-mail, but I do not apologize or refer to their complaints in any other way.
I think it is important to consider the learning effect: If students are successful when they put you under pressure, they will do it again and again. If they learn that they get what they have asked for, but it is you who sets the pace, they will stop sooner or later.
Besides, think of your role at university. The university expects you to teach all students and to do some research work. This means that your time is limited, and you have to set priorities. The university is your boss, not the students, so do not allow them to be bossy with you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: In general, it's best to set a clear expectation for stuff like how quickly you'll reply to emails and what the best way to get in touch with you is in advance. For example, if you have the student in question in a course, this could be stated in the syllabus and/or on the first day of class. This is particularly the case if you have a heavy teaching or research schedule, or if it's a large class. (This applies both to academia and industry by the way).
If you don't set that expectation up front, people will likely expect whatever they're used to getting from other professors (or what you've done in the past). The student in question may simply be used to other professors replying the same day (or you may have replied to their previous emails the same day, in which case they'd expect you to continue this).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: If I was the teacher, I would not be judgemental to the student.
I would try to understand with curiosity, why that student is hurrying so much.
Maybe the student having a hard time.
Maybe the student having an invisible anxiety issue due to ADHD or OCD or Autism.
If it is possible for me to provide a short instant reply, I would.
I would write that I will write further detail when I will get time.
If I am too busy to reply; I would write I cannot response right now, please remind me in the XYz (specific) hours.
I think not trying to understand the student's perspective is a disability rights issue and a human rights iussue. According to the [social model of disability](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_model_of_disability), this is an [attitudinal barrier](https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/disabilityandhealth/disability-barriers.html).
Invisible barriers exist. Ineffective behaviours solved better with curiosity than judgement.
>
> Is there anything wrong with this response?
>
>
>
I don't think anything wrong has been written. However in the next time you may use notice like "please have patience, reply may have take several days" or something like that adds some predictability.
I appreciate that you cared to ask if you have hurt the student. Thats great. The professional world especially academia is much ableist, you can make a difference.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: I think your original reply is much better than what some others have suggested here.
* You responded with the information requested with a cool head.
* You explained that the student's tone came off as rude, and why.
* You encouraged empathy.
* You gave a concrete rule of thumb of how many days to expect from professors in the future.
Maybe the student was rude due to entitlement and impudence, maybe it was poor social skills, maybe it was a disability as suggested elsewhere. Either way, there's no need to get aggressive about it to "teach them a lesson." That is bad advice. It is better to simply be corrective, especially if this is not an ongoing issue.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_13: I don't understand people who do not reply to emails. It is normal to be able to reply in 24hours. If there is something that you have to work on you can send an email like I received the email and I will check and reply within a ...say specified time. I ve seen a lot of busy academics replying almost imeediately, in a day and lot o doing nothings all day replying in 5 days not to say not at all. Unless someone is really sought after, meaning very popular, very busy, too many grants, a lab o 20 people some companies, I don't see any reason why one cannot reply within 24 hours.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_14: This is Academia where pupils are to be taught. Your noting of their ridiculous demand was apt, but next time a simple "I refer your to my syllabus" (where you have properly set-up the pupil-Academic dynamic) will be quicker and deliver your message more clearly.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_15: Personally, I would ignore such an email and after a few days send a mail to the student saying something like: "I seem to remember you has a request for me. Can you remind me of what it was?" Puts the student back in the right place in the food chain.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/04/25
| 1,500
| 6,413
|
<issue_start>username_0: The dataset was not collected by the authors, but the study was conducted on a publicly available dataset. The source of the data is cited, but the source does not have an ethics statement itself. The data is heartbeat time series.<issue_comment>username_1: In general you wouldn't need ethics approval to use this data set; it would be covered by the ethics statement from the original experiment. Presumably the original data collectors had one, even if it's not referenced; if you want to be extra-careful, you should try to find the peer-reviewed publication associated with the data set, and look there for the ethics statement.
More generally, it's hard to see how you could be causing harm by using a **public**, **already collected** data set; you didn't have any interaction at all with the subjects! The exception to this would be if you had reason to believe that the original data set might not have been ethically collected, in which there would be an argument for not using the data even though it has already been collected. Practically speaking, though, if these are data collected in the last few decades, it's likely that the researchers were required to undergo ethics approval before data collection.
There are lots of edge cases here:
* data that were unethically collected, either decades ago (Tuskegee/Nazis/[Stanford Prison study/Milgrom obedience studies](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1747016114523771) etc.) or more recent studies that [slipped through the cracks of the modern research-ethics framework](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4132579/)
* data that are insufficiently anonymized
* data that are OK in the jurisdiction where they were originally collected but not in yours
If possible, you should be careful and follow @DianaPetitti's advice by checking with your university's research ethics board; hopefully they will tell you you're good to go. (Although I absolutely understand why it is so, ethics boards are often cautious to the point of [researcher] frustration even when the probability of harm is almost vanishingly small.)
*Disclaimer*: I am not an ethicist and have not been involved in dealing with ethics statements with the exception of a few surveys and student evaluation exercises.
---
Tracking the source of the data back we get to Greenwald, S.D. (1990). Improved detection and classification of arrhythmias in noise-corrupted electrocardiograms using contextual information. Thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
<https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/29206>
>
> We established a test database of 35 half-hour ECG records ...
> [Some data] are from the MIT/BIH Arrhythmia Database ...
>
> [Some other data] are from the AHA Arrhythmia Database ...
>
> Tapes in the 800 series were collected for this research from long-term Holter records archived in the Beth Israel Hospital Arrhythmia Laboratory ...
>
>
>
This is admittedly a little disappointing; there's no evidence that informed consent was obtained, although from a practical standpoint it seems incredibly unlikely that these records could either be personally identified, or that any significant harm was caused in their collection. (This describes the data that are first presented in the thesis — for complete diligence you'd have to go back farther to the sources of the other two arrhythmia databases listed here and see what they say about sample collection ..)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You should not need ethics clearance at all. There is no ethical impediment to making inferences from publicly available data and reporting your results publicly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I suggest to start your research for answers from expert in the field of ethics and data usage. For example:
<https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/release-data-unethical-experiments>
Please avoid expecting a meaningful response for such kind of delicate questions.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: The following assumes that the analysis is being done as research (i.e., as a systematic investigation intended to contribute to generalizable knowledge) and that the intention is to publish the results of the analysis in a scientific journal.
There are two separate questions here.
**What kind of ethics review is required when analyzing publicly available data about humans?**
**How should the ethical review of data about the analysis of publicly available data about humans be described when submitting a manuscript that reports the results of the analysis?**
The answer to each question is complex. The answer to the first question would be modified by the specific requirements of the author’s institution as well as the local (country) context. The answer to the second question would depend on the specific requirements of any journal in which an attempt is made to publish the results of the analysis of the data.
You should clarify your institution’s requirements for review of publicly available data with an expert on these matters at your institution. They are likely to want to know a lot more about the data: when it was collected, how it was collected, whether the humans whose data are contained in the dataset consented to the data collection and to the use of the data for research, and, importantly in secondary analysis, whether there are elements of the data that could be used to identify or potentially identify a specific living human being.
Medical journals vary widely in what they require in an ethics statement. You should think about what journals might be interested in the results of your analysis and review their requirements for an ethics statement. A review of two or three journals that might be interested would give you an idea of the range of requirements.
A “fail-safe” method for assuring that an analysis of publicly available data about humans will not raise concerns about the ethics of use of the data at the journal submission stage (or worse, after publication) is to submit the plan for the analysis to the institutional entity charged with ethics review and have this entity determine what kind of review is required or deem that the analysis is not subject to (further) review. This sounds like (and is) quite bureaucratic but it also protects the analyst(s) from allegations that ethics were breached in analyzing the data.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/26
| 1,519
| 6,546
|
<issue_start>username_0: Long time lurker first time poster (to this specific Stack Exchange that is). I think its best to start with some context:
I am currently an undergraduate student at a fairly decent computer science school in the US. Over the past few years, I have been extremely fascinated with certain subfields of CS and have been self-studying on my own as well as reading new research papers (just keeping up with the literature in the field I guess you can say). Over the months, I sometimes get some ideas that I think can offer either a. improvement over some result or b. an entirely new, novel approach (more of the latter). To be more specific, at my level of knowledge in the subject, any idea that I have is usually 'applied' (i.e. using computational techniques to solve a problem in another field). I have a bunch of ideas. I am well aware that most are probably not good at all, but I reckon that some have potential (I would also like to clarify that I am not - not even close - claiming that I've found some magical solution to a well known problem like the P NP problem).
So here is the concern I am addressing:
With the pandemic, it is has been quite difficult to collaborate and form connections (especially at the undergrad level for research). I also don't think I have enough theoretical rigor to formally write about a paper, run the code, and publish by myself. I also dislike the feeling of waiting a few years until I gain some more skills and knowledge for two reasons: a. the longer I am removed from my original thought, the less likely it is that I will recall what exactly I meant at the time and b. the (admittedly probably not that high) risk of someone else publishing something similar before me.
In sum, I have thought of a couple of methods for addressing this concern that include emailing around to get some more senior collaborators (I am assume this is the recommended approach) and also this:
What if I post my initial results and/or raw ideas on something like a blog? More specifically, what sort of intellectual property can I claim? Would such material be citable in actual papers? Or would doing this effectively just give away my thoughts for free and allow someone else to take on the initiative without ackowledging my work? If some writeups are longer, serious, and paper-like, can such things be linked on Google Scholar, DOI, etc.? I have come across several posts of similar nature that include things like Bibtex citations at the end (examples: [here](https://haythamfayek.com/2016/04/21/speech-processing-for-machine-learning.html), [here](http://kvfrans.com/stampca-conditional-neural-cellular-automata/), and [here](https://ruder.io/research-highlights-2020/)).
So... what advice would you give? Again, I am very young in terms of the academic world, but I don't want that to be a hindrance—I just feel a little weary not actively pursuing my ideas.<issue_comment>username_1: ### Ask your professors if it would be possible to do an internship over the summer.
If you're an undergraduate student who is really eager to do research, and you've demonstrated your academic talents in your studies, I think that your best course of action would probably be to contact your professors and ask them if it would be possible to do an internship with them over the summer. Many universities have summer internship programs for undergraduates, and your professors might be able to point you in right direction for applying for one.
Then, once you've finished your undergraduate degree, if you've still got a desire for academic research (rather than going into industry to solve problems in "the real world"), you could apply for postgraduate study at your university of choice, and having completed a summer research internship would likely assist you in that.
If you really want to be taken seriously in academia, I would strongly recommend that you do a postgraduate degree; it's very easy for "independent researchers" to wind up getting written off as quacks because they often lack the skills to properly write a high-quality research paper. You're in computer science, however, so if you wind up employed by a company in industry who is performing research in an area, you might be able to use your company as your affiliation to get started in academic publishing rather than that of your university.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have to preface my answer by saying that what you're doing - independent reading and trying to solve problems - is exactly what PhD programs are for and I strongly encourage you to consider pursuing a PhD :)
It sounds like your post boils down to 1. "is finding a more senior collaborator a good idea and how would I do that?" and 2. "is posting my ideas online going to backfire". In short, yes I think finding a more senior collaborator is a good idea, and yes people *might* take your idea if you post it online, but I don't think that will happen. The dominating factor is that, as someone relatively new to academia, your ideas for a research project probably need a lot of adjustment before they can really contribute to your field (nothing personal about this - I'm basing this judgement off of how much my own ideas have needed feedback).
**So what is the best way forward:** Finding a good mentor is the best outcome. They would be able to give you feedback on your ideas, help you learn any new skills you need, and hopefully connect you to other people in the field. A mentor could either be a professor you like personally, or the professor at your school who's subject matter is closest to what you're interested in. If there's no faculty member at your school familiar with the subjects you've read up on, posting your idea online might be your best option for feedback. I doubt people will steal your idea because as someone new to the field, there's a real possibility other people have already considered it. And if it is a novel idea, it probably requires a lot of work to turn into something that can be published or monetized. I would still recommend you go to one of your professor and ask to do research with them. Even if the research isn't actively pursuing one of your ideas, it will still help you learn about the field, best research practices, and prep you for grad school if you decide that's what you want to do.
I think you're right to want to follow up on these ideas now rather than put them off a few years. Even if they don't pan out, you'll learn some great skills along the way.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/26
| 2,806
| 12,432
|
<issue_start>username_0: There are many students (subject being basic sciences) in my university (considered a good university in India) who simply do not care about the subject in a course but have stellar grades. They aren't interested in the subject per se, just the grades. These students never doubt anything that the professor says or whatever is written in lecture notes. They never ask questions. They would happily write in exams what they have memorised without understanding it 'deeply'. When I discuss anything with them about a particular topic which I don't understand, they simply don't care about it and tell me to not think about it 'deeply', and just memorise the stuff. But these students have stellar grades.
A lot of students, almost all that I know at my university, engage in malpractices during the exam, especially in the current online mode when there is no supervision. Some students sit in groups of 6-7 students during an online exam and discuss the questions before submitting, i.e. they solve the exam paper collectively. They often get exactly similar marks as well. Many instructors turn a blind eye towards this.
I sometimes feel jealous of the other students and get agitated at the university system as well. The 'other' students get good opportunities for research internships when they have explicitly mentioned to me that they don't care about research and are doing internships just for the sake of improving their resume.
I, on the other hand, have extremely poor grades. I've failed a 3 courses too. I spend a lot of time thinking about the stuff. I ask questions to the professors, which are received encouragingly. Some professors have explicitly mentioned that my questions are good and it shows that I have thought about the material well. I ask questions and answer questions on Stack Exchange as well, and they are received warmly as well. I am interested in pursuing research after my undergraduate studies but no good university is going to accept me as a grad student considering my poor grades.
I am not saying that my failure is entirely the fault of others. I recognise vices in myself too.
What should I do in order to improve my situation?<issue_comment>username_1: I would say it bluntly: one thing is what you do, the other is why you do.
No, Macchiavelli never said "End justifies the Means", but it does not matter.
So if you need good grades to get to whatever goals you have, optimize your strategy to prepare for exams having that goal. During your research career you will have to eviscerate again the very basic assumption of what you know, and that just to write introduction to your thesis, so whatever you "study" during your courses, you will need to **study** it again soon.
Usually, the exams will prepare you at the bare minimum level of a certain topic. If you have additional questions, doubts, thoughts on the topic, you can preserve them for after passing the exam.
If you do not manage to get excellent grades, it may simply be you were unlucky in the talents' drawings. Nature/God/the big Turtle were not kind, in the same way that not everyone of us is a Voltaire or a James LeBron or a Lionel Messi.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Allocate time specifically to prepare for your tests
====================================================
This might seem like a waste of time, since you would rather spend it studying the course material more deeply. However, this is a trade-off you should be willing to make in pursuit of your long-term goal of entering into research. If 100% of your studying time is currently spent on learning the course material deeply, you may need to reduce that to 75–80%, and spend the rest of the time doing test preparation. I understand that test preparation can be extremely boring and feel completely pointless. But, as you've noticed yourself, you need to score a minimum amount of marks to stay afloat in the system. There is no need to judge yourself by your course marks, though; feel free to think of it as just an arbitrary number that you need to display in order to apply to graduate programs.
Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, a few failing grades will not disqualify you from applying to the graduate programs of any university. I believe you have options to take the failed courses again, or at least their final exams, so make use of that. If you plan to apply to graduate programs in India, in particular, as long as your overall grades lie above the cutoff and you perform well in the interviews, you should be fine.
Finally, your attitude towards your education is commendable, but at some point the effort involved in going through the system may end up not being worth it. Several talented classmates of mine found this to be true for themselves, and chose to take other paths. You will need to choose your path, too, and possibly very soon. But try your best to fulfil at least the bare minimum requirements before deciding that this system is not for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I strongly think that though asking the right questions is highly important, what's more important is determining whom to ask the said questions to.
Not everyone (sadly sometimes even the professors) has the capacity to understand the intent behind the question, and it is possible that they could be taking it in a negative way.
As a resort, for now, I would recommend you to look for a mentor faculty with whom you share an academic interest (and who is receptive to your questions), to enhance your research capabilities.
And I definitely agree with what @username_2 said you need to fulfill the bare minimum first.
Nonetheless, don't let such setbacks hamper your spirits.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I deal with students with alternate needs and I know it is not uncommon for students to have similar experiences about learning. Reflecting on the experiences of other students I have some observations about your story.
Firstly, other students will have a different way of learning to yourself and sometimes, just being different does not make their success a result of cheating. There may be some students who cheat perhaps, that is sure, but working in groups and discussing material can sometimes be a good way of cementing ones learning by the reflecting on the material in discussions. A student can get good feedback on what is good and what is weak this way.
Some students prefer to work alone and find that the material is difficult to understand until it has been explored in all its details and at full depth. At some point they reach the "Aha" moment when it all falls into place and makes sense; then they can move on. They often reach this point through questions; "But Why" and then again "Why". Perhaps this is what you are experiencing.
The other students may not need to ask questions as their mode of learning does not need this deeper understanding, and they find it satisfactory to **remember** the facts or explanations provided by the teacher. When it comes to an assessment they use their memory to repeat back the explanation and facts from class. This repetition will satisfy the goals of the assessment that the student absorbed material from the class. Sometimes this is what is required, but sometimes it is not and a deeper understanding is required.
Knowing when the learning mode is memory and when it is deep understanding is sometimes difficult to discover. Some teachers can give guidance on this by indicating "you need to understand what is behind this..." as opposed to "remember and use this equation each time ...".
Eventually, the students who remember and those who look deeply will find their learning converge, because the layers of remembered information piece together through the years to build the complex picture of "how it works" and the students who did not ask questions get their own "Aha" moment. However it might have taken them longer to get there.
However, if one tries to understand everything before moving on, the pace of information gathering is slower. One can really only focus on one piece of a subject at a time. This is how it can result in apparent failure as one has a great understanding of a small piece of the picture and a large void where perhaps some remembered information should be stored for later.
For example, I always found it hard to just rote remember mathematical formula, but I was excellent at deriving and proving them from first principles. When other students just "mindlessly" (in my perception) regurgitated the standard formula for solving quadratic equations in a school examination [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TQ5ck.png)
, I spent a lot of time re-deriving it. Even just now I had to Google it to save time! It made me appear slower and less able at maths, when perhaps the converse was true.
The same for physics, when often we have to suspend disbelief and accept things that we ourselves cannot prove. We may start with the theory of atoms and use the "ball and stick" explanation, but then this is just a simplification to satisfy simple minds. Later one might learn about electron clouds, and later the electron shells, later Schrodinger's Equation. Later still sub-atomic particles are used to explain things and we learn about the standard model. Even now physicists are learning that there are still things in the standard model that are beyond their learning and there is yet no answer to "Why".
Another example I use for students is driving. Do I need to understand every aspect of the operation of an internal combustion engine to be able to drive a car that uses one? It is good to know, but does not always improve driving.
My suggestion is that perhaps you should consult the learning support services of your university. In the UK most universities have a learning support service that assist students with improving their working practices and ways of study. Perhaps your does too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Your situation sounds similar to my own recent undergraduate experience, although I'm in the US. I enrolled in a top STEM school, failed three courses, and achieved poor grades in my first two years despite being a very motivated and hard working individual. However, I improved my academic performance and got into several good PhD programs.
Now you can't control if other people cheat. So if you want to get into a graduate program, the best thing you can do is focus on your work and show an improvement in your academic performance. You especially need to show improvement in course areas relevant to whatever field you want to go into.
This requires effort on your part to figure out how to academically succeed. Think about it this way: there (probably, hopefully) exists a set of (legal) academic actions that you can do to improve your academics. The problem is you don't know what they are, and you need to figure out what those things are. Here are some random things: find a supportive mentor/academic adviser who wants you to succeed (I strongly advise this), go to office hours more, plan and commit to concentrating with no distractions on a topic of study (easier said than done), find people to study and do homework with, ask friends about a professor's teaching style before you sign up for their course, etc.
Here's whats also important: Once you find what works for you, it will help to maintain a *routine* in which you balance all the things you need to do to academically succeed and also stay happy as an individual.
I myself simply knew none of these things, which are now obvious to me, when I arrived to college and so I performed very poorly. Perhaps they are not obvious to you too.
If you can improve your grades, then in your graduate applications, you can (briefly) explain why your grades were initially poor, but emphasize and draw attention to your improvement. It's important not to sound negative when you talk about your past grades or else you come off as an unreliable narrator, so be positive/objective.
Overall, I think if you are genuinely curious, motivated, and can successfully communicate these things to graduate programs, you will have a shot, especially if you can improve your academic performance. I think it's because people know that grades are not "everything." So don't give up.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/26
| 413
| 1,500
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am trying to cite, using the ACS format, <https://www.intechopen.com/books/cancer-causing-substances/heavy-metals-and-cancer>, but I don't know whether it is considered a book or ebook chapter. How am I supposed to tell them apart? The link is under "books" on the website, but seeing as it is online, wouldn't it be considered an ebook? If I cite it as a book, it'll be pretty weird for me to include a link and the date accessed, won't it?<issue_comment>username_1: A book is a written work distributed by a publisher, in physical or digital form. (Books and eBooks needn't be distinguished, they contain the same content.) Book drafts are distinguished, they are distributed by authors.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would cite this as a book section, including the DOI (because that's where you found it/how others will be able to find it) but *not* including "date accessed", because that is intended for more volatile resources like web pages. (If a reference has a DOI you can usually treat it as non-volatile.)
Sticking as precisely as you can to a reference format is important, but the most important thing is to make sure that the information is present that allows readers to (1) attribute credit appropriately and (2) re-locate the original source.
>
> (1) <NAME>.; <NAME>. Heavy Metals and Cancer. In Cancer Causing Substances; Atroshi, F., Ed.; 2018. <https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.68247>.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/26
| 358
| 1,396
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to know how the authors of a review article prepare a **table** of other articles' results. Actually I want to know the process of collecting other articles' results. Do they do this by collecting results of articles one by one or do they use software for collecting data of other articles all together?
Thanks for any suggestions.<issue_comment>username_1: A book is a written work distributed by a publisher, in physical or digital form. (Books and eBooks needn't be distinguished, they contain the same content.) Book drafts are distinguished, they are distributed by authors.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would cite this as a book section, including the DOI (because that's where you found it/how others will be able to find it) but *not* including "date accessed", because that is intended for more volatile resources like web pages. (If a reference has a DOI you can usually treat it as non-volatile.)
Sticking as precisely as you can to a reference format is important, but the most important thing is to make sure that the information is present that allows readers to (1) attribute credit appropriately and (2) re-locate the original source.
>
> (1) <NAME>.; <NAME>. Heavy Metals and Cancer. In Cancer Causing Substances; <NAME>., Ed.; 2018. <https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.68247>.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/26
| 2,468
| 10,252
|
<issue_start>username_0: Should I attend group meetings? In our group meetings, scientific issues (experiment or results) are not discussed, participants only tell their situations (I will have a paper) or material, economic issues are discussed.
I am currently a PhD student and I will complete my second year in next September. I do not want to attend group meetings in any way. There are only two PhD students.
Since the first group meeting I have felt very bad because all I could say was that I was reading articles, I had not started my experiments. Then I started my experiments, and our group leader asked me 'are you still in the lab?' It was like pinning. I don't know, maybe that's his style. But attending group meetings makes me feel bad because I am the most inexperienced member in the group.
I have no problem with my advisor, I also had good results with my work which will be published.
In one of these meetings, the group leader said that to me 'She needs tutoring', but we have never met him except for dinner. I don't think it's fair. I am doing my doctorate in Germany and as someone from Bosnia, I don't know their culture.
I cannot decide whether to attend the meetings or not.
11 people, others are professors or doctors.<issue_comment>username_1: Most commonly, PhD students are required to attend group meetings. Often, the supervisor can make whatever rules about group meetings the supervisor wants to make. Ask them.
The group meetings ought to help you become less inexperienced. If it's not working well for you, tell your supervisor about it. If that does not help, discuss it with another faculty member who is familiar with local practices. You might also get help from a counseling office or office for international students.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Group meetings are a generally a good way to learn about what is going on, get new ideas and receive feedback.
On the other hand if the meetings drag on and everyone is bored, some of the more senior members might make suggestions to improve things (eg everyone just gives a 2-3 minute update).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I had the same problem and I am German doing my PhD at a German university. I was the newest member and did not understand anything of what the others presented. So I was pretty bored at the beginning.
But I realized, I need to change something. So, I started to ask questions to the other group members, which to be honest, needs some courage ([Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkLzo_oNVho) is a video by <NAME> that explains exactly this fact). You can ask something like: "Sorry, the question must be stupid, but I wonder..." or "Sorry, I am not familiar to this topic. Can you explain to me ...". You could, for example, ask what the paper is about that one of your group members publishes.
Even if they think you might be not very clever, at least they see that you try to understand something.
A nice side effect is that after some time you understand more and more and it will get less boring. Also, you can stop asking after a certain time, as many questions will be answered more or less automatically by yourself.
A downside is fore sure that - as the topics are less relevant from a scientific point of view - it is really not important to you in your current situation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Attending group meeting is a must-do I believe in most cases.
I had zero experience at the beginning and I have/need to attend, it's a learning opportunity (but
seems not your case)
I agree with Physicist. Most important thing is you need to keep a good relationship with your advisor. He/She can easily help you in many ways. So, talking with him/her about your concerns may work, just be cautious when talking about this kind of issue
You got something publishable. This is great. You should be more confident
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Being new is always a challenge, both socially (new to the group), as professionally (new to the type of work or the field). Group meetings, however, are a transferable skill that is a requirement almost anywhere. Not just because that's what people say, but because sometimes it's just the best way to spread knowledge, news, or help each other out. While I understand your desire to avoid any such meeting, consider focusing on one or two such meetings a week to allow yourself to grow more comfortable in those environments, and develop your communication skills.
I'm Dutch, from the Netherlands, which means I have a fair understanding of German culture, and Germany in general. Yes, to many people the Germans (as well as the Dutch) come across as abrupt and rude. In most cases, however, the negativity is not meant. Additionally, you are joining an existing group of people who are used to each other, and as such they'll talk more, talk louder, and will have dropped some of the usual politeness that is generally used when talking to strangers in order to avoid confrontation and offense.
Lastly, I'd like to confirm some of the excellent advice given in the other answers. Carve out your own place by asking questions and sharing news of your own. I can guarantee you that while the others in those groups know much that you don't right now, as time goes by there are more and more things you will know that they don't.
Remember, your primary academic relationship right now is the one between yourself, your research, and your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Another reason to attend group meetings, that has been hinted at but not spelt out is that academia is as much about building relationships with people as it is about doing your own work. We often have to attend a lot of meetings that we don't think are very productive, or there are other things we need to be doing more. However, at these meetings we don't only achieve the stated aim of the meeting, but also build our relationships with the other's present.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: When I was doing my PhD, I had to attend group meetings. The start was confusing as I didn't know anyone other than my supervisor. After a few meetings I had developed a certain amount of 'historic' knowledge based on previous meetings so I could start making tenuous questions.
Don't worry - everyone starts with nothing and eventually become a familiar face.
Just remember how you feel now, for when the next new member attends, and do your damnest to be welcoming, if you can.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: ### Attend, but try to take advantage through initiative.
>
> Should I attend group meetings?
>
>
>
Yes, even if they suck. And it sounds like your group meetings do suck. (I'm not sure what you mean by economic issues - those actually sound interesting to me; but the rest of it.) If for no other reason - for upkeep of your social and formal relations to group members; and to pick up on interesting tidbits of news.
I was in a research group once which was similar: People would say almost nothing that helps anybody else, and wouldn't even ask for help or collaboration themselves. So it was a bit like prisoners going through their roll call. Plus, accomplished, senior researchers would say how they have a paper here, and a paper there, and some prestigious visit or duty elsewhere, an appointment, etc. - and I would get bummed out.
>
> There are only two PhD students.
>
>
>
That can be intimidating, since you take half the "heat"... but on the other hand, it means that it is easier for you to bring up issues in the name of your academic "class".
Which brings me my next point: Don't wait for others to ask you things at the group meeting. **Try to use it to your advantage.** Examples:
* Bring up a technical subject about which you don't know who to consult - even to the point of putting up a couple of slides or doodling on the whiteboard; at the point where you're stuck or things get hairy, ask the room for pointers. Obviously they wont give you a lecture about it on the spot, but it's quite likely you'll get references to papers, or webpages, or offers to come talk to them about it, or they might even tell you to talk to someone from another department.
* Discuss an economic issues that Ph.D. candidates face (without making it entirely personal).
* Talk about an interesting piece of relevant news - maybe something your read on HackNews; or even something that's... this is a bit delicate to phrase... somewhat political but not hard-core partisan, and relevant to academics.
* Suggest a subject (or a guest) for a colloquium or other kind of talk (not one to be held at the group meeting), see what people think, and whether someone else would be interested in helping you set this up.
* Ask someone to elaborate on something they mentioned in passing, which is potentially interesting to you.
>
> Since the first group meeting I have felt very bad because all I could say was that I was reading articles, I had not started my experiments. Then I started my experiments, and our group leader asked me 'are you still in the lab?' It was like pinning.
>
>
>
Think about what would happen if, instead of him asking you, you would have used your turn to say: "I want to ask you guys about this problem I'm stuck with in the experiments. Blah blah blah." - essentially you would be talk about the same thing but the atmosphere would be totally different, not like an interrogation.
---
>
> I am doing my doctorate in Germany and as someone from Bosnia, I don't know their culture.
>
>
>
(nods head) ah, that's a lost cause, there's German culture overall, there's regional culture, people are from different regions, personal affect channels culture differently. If you try to figure out "the culture" you'll probably just get a headache. Or, I don't know, maybe people who did their Ph.D. in Germany will tell you something else.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: You mustn't do things making you feel bad. Do you have a supervisor? Arrange a one-to-one meeting and explain what worries you and what makes you feel no desire to attend these meetings. I believe you two will reach a common ground. Maybe they will help you to get rid of your problems.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/26
| 784
| 3,235
|
<issue_start>username_0: Many things came up during my PhD program, including personal and a horrible committee chair after two of mine left for other schools. I completed all my coursework, successfully completed my comps, and had all 3 chapters written and was in process of editing my chapters when they cut me off as it had been 5 years. I had a case against the school but the time to go to court and money it would cost would be enormous. It ended up that my advisor was retiring. When I apply for other jobs, I was a PhDc. How long can that be used for. I'm not claiming i have my PhD but want to claim I was a candidate. I am now back in school for a different doctorate, so until that is completed, I want to use PhDc. Thoughts on legality of this - has anyone done this?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd guess that you need to spell it out more completely. PhDc isn't really recognized and it isn't a degree or anything like a degree.
In many institutions, you have a limited time to complete your degree unless you take some special actions. Seven years, perhaps, in the US, shorter elsewhere. After that time, you are no longer a candidate for anything. If they "cut you off" after five years, I doubt that the institution considers you a candidate and it would be dishonest to claim otherwise.
Perhaps there is some way you can get back in line for your degree. ABD is a descriptive term, not an honor. Perhaps you can use what you know to get in to a different program and complete it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You can list it under the "Experience" section of your CV. Something like this:
* Company: **University Name**
* Position: **Research Assistant**
+ Description Point 1: ...
+ Description Point 2: ...
+ Description Point 3: ...
PhDc doesn't mean anything. Don't use it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You were at one time a PhD candidate, but you currently are not one. There is nothing wrong in stating that you achieved PhD candidacy in your previous course of study and listing it on your CV as such, but it would be wrong to present yourself as a PhD candidate, since you are not one. There's no limitation on how long you can claim you *were* a PhDc, as that's going to be true at all points in the future, but you shouldn't give the impression that you *are* a current candidate for a PhD. To give a parallel scenario, if someone introduced themselves as a "candidate for mayor", I would be very surprised to learn that they had run and lost their election years prior. Just be clear about the time frame in which the title was applicable.
As for the legality, "PhD candidate" isn't a legally protected title as far as I know, so running into legal repercussions seems very unlikely. There could potentially be a case for fraud if you materially misrepresent your qualifications for your own personal gain, but this again seems like a rather unlikely scenario, as I've never seen "PhD candidacy" be a salient requirement for a job. Legal consequences for an embellished resume seem uncommon and reserved for egregious cases (like claiming a medical degree that you don't have), claiming a different level of being a student is probably not going to land you in court.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/26
| 749
| 3,415
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to do a PhD in a machine learning related topic and want to enhance my resume. I am considering looking for roles as volunteer research assistant and was wondering whether the experience would be beneficial if I do manage to find one. From what I've read online a lot of what predoctoral research assistants do involve menial tasks (cleaning up data) and wasn't sure if this would strengthen my application.
I'd hope to look for a research role in an area directly related to my interest. But an alternative I was considering was to just work at a job which may not have a direct connection to my interests but is slightly more financially beneficial.
I was hoping to get some advice on what would be better<issue_comment>username_1: In many circumstances, yes, predoctoral research experience is an asset, in particular if you can get a strong letter of support for your graduate application, and can contribute to some publications.
Financial aspects are a consideration also, but it's hard to judge given the available information in the question.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my own field (neuroscience) there can be a lot of benefit to working as a "predoctoral research assistant" if you want to go to grad school, though it's rarely called that. These are jobs available to people with a BS in academic labs; often the people that take these jobs are former students at the same school (possibly they worked in the same lab for credit or as a student employee), though sometimes people get hired from other places. It's a way to gather the research experience and perhaps publication record that is necessary these days to be competitive for grad school, especially for people who haven't had a lot of research experience as an undergraduate.
You might have better luck looking for positions in an applied research area that is looking for someone with some ML experience (hopefully you have at least some experience from coursework; every single CS student and many people from other fields have several ML/AI courses these days, if not you are way behind).
A good position will have you doing more than just menial tasks/cleaning up data, though in practice pretty much *everyone* has to do those "menial tasks", whether they hold a PhD or not. The decisions made at that stage of analysis can be just as important and even more so than decisions made at later stages, it's not something to take lightly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Perhaps you have a misunderstanding. In the US, at least, there are two primary funding opportunities for doctoral students. A TA (Teaching Assistant) aids in the teaching process, often as a grader, but occasionally as an instructor. An RA (Research Assistant) aids in research in some way. Sometimes it is to assist in the running of experiments as required by the PI, but sometimes it is just funding for the candidates own research.
But both of those require that you are admitted to a degree program (usually a doctoral program). It isn't something that you do before you make an application.
Some research labs hire lab assistants but that is a different thing. They are just employees and are unlikely to see much of the conceptual background of what is happening in the lab. There might be some value in this, as you would get to see others with more responsibility doing their "thing".
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/26
| 1,324
| 5,800
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in a bit of a situation. Basically, the research on which I was basing my PhD was carried out by a former post-doc in our group. After one year and a half not being able to replicate his results, I exploited my admin privileges on our cluster to download his codes. I discovered that the algorithms he used in his publication are different from the ones used in the experiments, as the ones he claims he is using are not really applicable and the ones he is using do not have the claimed complexity. He even went so far to provide made up (theoretical) timings to cover this up.
My supervisor knows about this issue from me and he also knows that the post-doc has stopped responding to my mails trying to replicated his work. My supervisor is very hands-off and I don't believe that he has any fault in this but his name is on the publication. Moreover, I feel he is disappointed in the post-doc and feels guilty. So, it seems to me that pressing the issue does no good for me and I have stopped mentioning the topic to my supervisor. (I am still quite angry about this issue as this has cost me about a year and a half of my PhD)
I have been able to salvage the original idea of the publication and come up with an algorithm which has the correct complexity and we are now writing the paper. To the reader these two publications might appear extremely similar and I would like to include a sentence in the introduction that the previous publication is not a working algorithm. What is a good, diplomatic way of doing this?<issue_comment>username_1: There are lots of ways to go about this.
Since your advisor is a co-author on the previous paper, this may be difficult, since they are invested in the existing paper and have some credibility at stake. Theoretically, they should be happy to retract/rewrite the older paper, but we are human. You are probably correct that they feel guilty- everyone with their name on the paper is ultimately responsible for **all** of the content.
At the same time, this can make some things easier for you. Finding an error in previously published work opens some new avenues for publication. Now, instead of a simple sentence, you can issuing a comment or a correction on a previous paper - many journals will allow you to publish a correction or remark on their previous articles, particularly if you can demonstrate a major problem or flaw.
Critically, *do not be a jerk* about this process. Simply state that there has been an oversight or error in the work by XYZ. Do not speculate as to why it went wrong or how. Even with evidence that their results do not match their data, there could be numerous reasons for it. Journals don't want to be told they did a bad job, neither does your advisor- but **everyone** would prefer you correct an error softly and with tact rather than letting someone else do it loudly and disruptively.
Edit: I am not sure your evidence is legally obtained, nor am I fully confident from this post that the evidence is conclusive that they were fraudulent. Until both of those conditions are met, I wouldn't recommend making accusations of data fabrication - publicly or privately. You will have, in all likelihood, a legal battle - for which I am not a lawyer. But you can conclusively say, as another commenter mentioned: "We were not able to reproduce the results."
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the previous paper is just sloppy, you can write something of the sort "We present an improved analysis of..." and then explain in your paper the advantages of your technique.
If there is scientific misconduct in the previous paper, ideally your supervisor would have it retracted. Also depends to a certain extent if the former postdoc is still in the same field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If your advisor knows that the paper was published with fake claims/data and is not willing to take action, I would sincerely consider working under someone else's supervision. This should be something that keeps him up at night for one or two days, but after accepting the hit that his career will take for this mistake, it is absolutely fundamental that he takes action - even if the action goes against his own reputation.
If your advisor is also an author of the paper, this matter is also interesting for another reason: It exposes how little some of the authors know what the hell is going on behind a paper with their names...
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Have a sit-down with your supervisor and speak openly and frankly about this. Prepare carefully how you are going to put this into words. Ask him how he would like to address the problem, but ultimately accept his decision, whether he bravely faces it or shrugs it off, because you have little to gain in dragging him down.
Write up a "Corrigendum" in which, with your supervisor's consent, you make references to the fact that you were unable to replicate the previous results. If your supervisor wishes, he can allege a "spreadsheet" error in the previous study, otherwise just leave it vague.
Hopefully no-one was seriously injured in the process: The time you spent attempting to replicate a fraudulent result is not entirely wasted, I'm sure. Whatever evidence you have uncovered about the fraud would not stand in a court of law. You have learned a valuable lesson: academia does have its fair share of incompetence and fraud.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Most universities should have a research integrity officer. You could contact them to ask what you should do next. We had to go through ethical research training, and the training said that you could even ask them a question "hypothetically" to explore your options without having to jump into accusations.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/26
| 884
| 3,575
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in a medical field and recently contributed statistical analysis for a paper and was not listed as a co-author despite being told I would be. I spent a few weeks fielding questions about this paper and feel as though my contribution was significant. There are many people listed who I am certain contributed nothing to this paper.
Should I say something to my PI or just let it go? I understand the authorship likely can't be added to at this point but I want to express that I am slightly hurt. However since I am not vying for academic jobs I don't want to come off as being needy or petty since it ultimately won't matter for my career.
Any advice would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: Talk to the PI who said you would be an author, or your boss, whoever you are more comfortable talking to first. Best to assume it was an honest mistake (there's really no cost to adding another author in medical sciences). There's a bit of gray area on when statistical support is included/not included in authorship in medical science.
Let them know you expected to be an author (and remind them of your previous conversation), but that you found a preprint that didn't have you listed.
A preprint is just a preprint; hopefully you can still be included on a submission of the paper to an actual journal.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Authoring practices differ a lot across scientific fields. In medicine or biology, the list of authors may include people vaguely related to the paper, to say the least (see \* footnote below). Therefore, some ranks in the author list can be considered as important: first, last, second, second-to-last, third. Those who fight for such a meaningful ranking (cough-cough) often accommodate well people in the middle who don't modify the ranking.
To complete that list, the end of the paper sometimes contains contributions: X wrote the paper, Y designed the experiment, Z did the stats...
It does not matter whether you want to pursue academic honors or not, now. And maybe later you may change your mind. This is a question of **scientific integrity**, and if you were said to be included, this is well-deserved. If you did not do enough work to be included afterward, you should be said so as well. **No surprise should reside among authors and their order**. Even if for some reason (you cannot endorse key aspects of the paper you would not be listed) your contribution should be acknowledged: in the acknowledgment section, or a footnote at least.
In case of a blatant mistake, changing the author list is doable. In my experience, we had to remove one.
Related answers:
* [Publish the paper without letting know one of authors?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/93278/38057)
* [Is it appropriate to add a co-author at the stage revise & resubmit?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/52628/38057)
* [Why do people sometimes put authors with equal contribution in non-alphabetical order?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/59030/38057)
(\*) In [bioinformatics work](https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-020-07281-8) I had been involved with/informed of, it was requested (by contract, apparently) that the bio-sequencing would have x persons set as co-authors, some who (one sometimes suspects) would even not read the paper before submission. What a contrast with mathematics, where people are usually listed in alphabetical order, being expected they all had contributed equally to the paper and endorse it totally (yet, there could be mistakes still).
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/26
| 1,973
| 8,438
|
<issue_start>username_0: Failed my PhD in Physics after 3 years in graduate school. I spent the whole first and a half year on foundation (courses and some learning projects) since I jumped in from a completely different field without any prerequisites. Then I spent another one and a half year on serious projects. I suffered in the second year due to the pressure from research and meanwhile, some personal issues which made me very very depressed. I failed a course (just could not work on anything at that period) and make unsatisfactory progress in research. And one can guess, failed qualifying exam. I left at the end of 3rd year without a terminal master, which is a large dent. If I apply immediately after quitting I will get rejected from all programs without problem. So, here is what I am thinking:
1. I still love research and would like to devote to R&D as my career.
2. I fully understand I am responsible for my failure and would like to deal with my issue.
3. I am fully recovered and actually learned a lot from this about managing emotion and deal with pressure.
4. I am planning to work in industry in related areas for a year or two or three, and during the time, keep looking for PhD openings. Taking exams, looking for research intern opportunities in my spare time. If lucky, I will go ahead and work towards a doctorate degree.
I have many concerns and therefore, need advices about this plan
1. does this sound doable in general? I've seen people doing phd in their 30s or even 40s, but I know these are not the normal cases.
2. What kind of job you would recommend if I want to go back to graduate school in near future? Or, what would be my best strategy?
3. How should I explain this part of my life to adcom when applying?
4. I enjoy doing research and would like to pursue a R&D career in industry. But, just trying to see the whole picture, **is age a problem**? If I choose to do this and succeed, I will be in my early 30s to start phd and ideally, mid 30s to start my career.
All advices are welcomed and many thanks!
P.S.
I do thought about my passion and whether it is physics after all these happened. tbh it was not a very wise decision I made 3 yrs ago. It turns out I am not very passionate about the research in this group either it was too difficult and I am not prepared, or I simply don't like it. But I do like some parts such the math tools, programming tools and HPC and I appreciate the experience I had in this group. I am considering about research in data science and healthcare/pharmaceutical domain, which would have more practical applications in industry and then more job opportunities than physics at least<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that the sooner you apply the more likely it is to get accepted. You need letters of recommendation, preferably from academics so you can't afford to lose touch with people who know and respect you.
But you have a particularly steep hill to climb so you need to be able to demonstrate that you are capable of the work and stress that is required. I assume you are a bit better prepared now than you were originally, but you might want to consider if physics is the right field for you or something that you will enjoy and has a better employment prospect.
Convincing people that your past issues no longer hold you back will be the biggest problem and if possible you want to use others to speak/write on your behalf.
But a PhD probably isn't essential for a career in industrial research. Especially one in theoretical subjects.
If you still have contacts at the place you failed to finish at, you might want to discuss this with them, provided that they know you well and might be supportive, given that your psychological issues are under control. They may have some suggestions about various career paths. There may be some others, even from your undergraduate study who can help.
But, I think, the longer you wait, the harder it will get, unless you spend the intervening time in some ideal situation. And the process of applying will give you some additional feedback on your chances and what you might need to do to be successful.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Does this sound doable in general?
>
>
>
This sounds doable to me in general (which is rare, because most of the time when failed students ask questions like this I am pretty skeptical of their plans), but probably not at the same institution. The main thing I note from your post is that your previous candidature gave you a full suite of foundation courses in the field and over a year of practice in research. Yes, you failed, but you were coming in with a low base of existing knowledge/skills, whereas now have an additional three years of work under your belt before entry.
Now, if you were to apply immediately to the same institution then it will almost certainly be a no --- they have terminated your candidature so they are saying you are not good enough for the program for now. In any case, I note from your question that you feel you are not a good fit in that research group anyway. Consequently, you are probably best off applying at another institution. Your plan to work in industry for a few years while looking out for program opportunities sounds like a good idea. It will put some temporal distance to your previous program removal and also give you some new professional skills in the field, which is more likely to make you an attractive candidate. You should also note that time in industry may allow you to develop research ideas that are useful in the field, which might open up opportunities for a good PhD candidature working on a problem that comes from industry.
>
> What kind of job you would recommend if I want to go back to graduate school in near future? Or, what would be my best strategy?
>
>
>
Obviously, a job in physics. If you can work an industry job as a physicist, or at least working on physics problems or related problems, this will give you additional experience and skills that will assist you with entry to a PhD program in physics.
As a secondary matter, you want a job that pays you a lot of money, to allow you to save up for your later time as a student. If you have any serious desire to go back to being a PhD student later then you will need to make sure you do not get used to having a high disposable income. Be frugal and save a portion of your money, so that when you go back to being a PhD student it is not too big a drop in lifestyle.
>
> How should I explain this part of my life to [the admissions committee] when applying?
>
>
>
Pretty much the same way you just explained it to us ---i.e., you previously tried a PhD program, but you went in with a low skill base and it was too much for you. You now have three additional years of work, including covering all the foundational courses in the field and getting some exposure to research work. None of that sounds too bad to me, so I can't see an admissions committee having a major problem with it.
What the admissions committee is going to want to see is that you are mature and capable, and you are able to self-reflect on past failures and diagnose the problem sensibly. They will also be impressed that you take responsibility for that failure and do not attempt to pass if off onto someone else. Your story sounds like one where a student tries a PhD program before they have the skills to be ready, and it is too much for them. The gain of this experience, plus a couple of years in industry, is likely to put you in a much stronger position.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many more doctorates produced than jobs for them afterwards. This is because grad students are cheap labor. Given that, only the cream of the crop find desirable jobs after the PhD. And many experience exploitation along the way because of the power imbalance with supervisors.
You couldn't even get through a regular PhD. Let alone distinguish yourself. Don't stick your head in that trap again. It only makes sense for a small fraction, to which you do not belong. Go get a regular job doing something else. Move on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You just answered many of your own questions. Go for it and remember Einstein also flunked out of college. You have the passion, the drive and great retrospection - age is irrelevant. If you love physics, your future will be your playground.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/26
| 333
| 1,426
|
<issue_start>username_0: For example, let's say you use a well-excepted data normalization method like z-normalization. To avoid clutter and help the flow of the paper, can you simply cite a source for z-normalization and move on, or will reviewers generally want to see everything formally defined in the paper itself? This assumes there is only one possible version of the technique being mentioned (if there were multiple, I would see why a full description would be needed).<issue_comment>username_1: There is no need to repeat well known information. A citation is enough. Not every paper is a dissertation.
Often the name alone is enough.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends entirely on the specific journal you publish in, as well as the topic of your paper. The paper is meant to be read by other experts in your field: hence if something is well known, it doesn't need to be defined. For the average reader of your paper, will they already know what z-normalization is? If so, you don't need to define it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It really depends on which journal you're submitting your manuscript to. Probably a good heuristic is to have a look at past publications on the same journal, maybe the top-cited ones.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: If you feel a reference isn't sufficient, depending on the journal, you may have room for an appendix, or a methods section.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/26
| 349
| 1,471
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just came across an Oxford University Associate Professor's personal webpage. After the sections of "publications" and "working papers", he also happened to have a section (with only one paper in it), titled "Permanent Working paper". While I do have a guess, I was hoping if someone could shed some light on the meaning of this. I imagine it is a paper that the author thought does not publish well, or that it has some interesting ideas, but it is not worth publishing. However, I may be wrong.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no need to repeat well known information. A citation is enough. Not every paper is a dissertation.
Often the name alone is enough.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends entirely on the specific journal you publish in, as well as the topic of your paper. The paper is meant to be read by other experts in your field: hence if something is well known, it doesn't need to be defined. For the average reader of your paper, will they already know what z-normalization is? If so, you don't need to define it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It really depends on which journal you're submitting your manuscript to. Probably a good heuristic is to have a look at past publications on the same journal, maybe the top-cited ones.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: If you feel a reference isn't sufficient, depending on the journal, you may have room for an appendix, or a methods section.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/27
| 953
| 3,998
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’ve been accused of cheating in a class that I passed a year ago, and since then I have proceeded to pass the next class in line after that class. This class was a first year class, I’m now in my second year and I’m unsure on what this means. Are universities allowed to revoke a class that I have passed and other that I have passed. I don’t understand why that would be going back through an assignment from a year ago. What happens to the classes that I have passed since then that relied on the class that I am accused of academic misconduct.<issue_comment>username_1: Universities have revoked degrees and titles on the basis of fraud, years or even decades after granting them. This is certainly allowed. The bar for revoking a class should be expected to be lower so this seems perfectly fine. Of course only your university can tell you the finer details of their policies.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Check if your university has an official policy and guidelines on academic integrity, as well as the possible penalties. Some universities and instructors teaching online are swamped with investigations into cheating, so long timescales are not surprising. I am not aware of any statutes of limitations, though some may exist.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: That doesn't seem conceptually wrong to me. If you rob a bank but escape without anyone recognizing, you can't expect to keep the money either: If someone later finds out that you did it, you will have to return the money (and possibly go to jail) regardless of how far after the crime the discovery comes. (There is generally a "statute of limitations", but that's a different topic.)
So, by this analogy, I see nothing wrong ethically with a university reserving the right to revoke credit for a class you passed a long time ago if in the meantime evidence has surfaced that you cheated. The fact that you passed other follow-up courses in the meantime is unrelated -- you also can't say that you shouldn't be held accountable for the bank robbery because you have managed to invest the stolen money successfully: a crime is a crime, regardless of what you have done in the meantime.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Prepare to attempt to challenge/test out of the class. As you passed something that has it as a prerequisite it shouldn't be too hard.
I can't help you beat the charge of cheating. I can offer advise on what to do if the class falls.
If it falls, you have a hole in your class prerequisite chain. With a first-semester class such a hole may be attempted to be filled by a placement exam for some classes, but for others they may not be prepared. If you can test out of the class in the testing center (every university has one for various reasons anyway), than that would provide the prerequisite. It also provides a way to claim "I didn't need to cheat", which only carries so far with a cheating charge but it's better than nothing.
Cheating charges aren't unbeatable, but this might be a low-energy solution compared to some other things that could happen.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> are universities allowed to revoke a class?
>
>
>
Yes, and much worse, for gross academic misconduct.
I don’t believe that your entire prerequisite tree will collapse, that seems excessive, but you should discuss this with your department if you are indeed at fault.
In my university lecturers can opt for an informal resolution: in order to avoid the hassle and trouble of a formal disciplinary hearing and damaging a student’s record and future prospects irrevocably. Students who actually cheated and I have proof for it take this route. You should as well if you’re given the option (and are guilty).
Another thing to consider is whether you cheated on other classes. If you got caught in one class your department might check other classes. If more cases arise the consequences will be far more severe, and you may even be expelled.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/27
| 2,215
| 9,397
|
<issue_start>username_0: Background: I am finishing up my PhD. I'm lucky to be at a good school and my PhD was funded by a competitive scholarship. I have published work from my master's in humanities as a solo author, and as a co-author, I have published a conference paper in CS. But I feel a tremendous amount of stress to have work published in my own field.
The problem I am trying to be resilient for is that my supervisor, who is very warm and friendly, has basically contributed nothing to my PhD. I ask for feedback and they say "looks good!", no matter what I've done. I plead for help from whomever else in my department has five minutes to spare, and I have gotten so much more care and feedback from these people (who are less senior, already overworked, and in objectively less in a position to help me than my supervisor is), although my supervisor is an author on my work.
I understand this hands-off approach can be a sign of confidence, but my very first submitted manuscript was recently rejected by a journal. My supervisor, who doesn't appear to know exactly what is in the manuscript, wrote me to say "don't worry, if we produce major revisions, we might still be able to publish!"
I got a lot of the constructive feedback I desperately needed from the reviewers, but I don't actually agree with the primary reason why it was rejected, which is more to do with theory/experimental philosophy. So I feel a combination of shame (it was a non-blinded review) that I made rookie errors that my supervisor didn't help me to catch, but also I bristle that my supervisor is so quick to accept the overall outcome, without having contributed or helped or potentially even knowing what the manuscript is trying to achieve. One of the kindly non-supervisors in my department who read it and gave me feedback said they disagreed with the reviewers (as regards the theoretical reasons for rejection) and that I shouldn't change it foundationally, but should work in the helpful criticism and then submit elsewhere.
So, here is where I am at. I have suffered a large blow to my confidence, I have multiple PhD chapters that I am trying to develop into manuscripts all by myself, and I feel like I am clueless and overwhelmed by the amount of work that is. I am also worried this will make finding a post-doc very difficult. Since getting my first manuscript published has been hundreds of hours of lonely labour so far, I am starting to wonder if it is silly of me to think I can also produce all these other papers on my own.
My ultimate question is, how can I stay resilient and get myself out of this situation, and find my momentum again? It feels like I started my PhD with so much optimism and and I really love research. I know I could work in industry or government, but I want to continue in this field. I just don't know if I am failing to read the writing on the wall, or whether I need to change tactics, instead of just slogging along, by myself, writing naive manuscripts that will be rejected and continue to pile up.
**Edit:** I want to update anyone reading this post that, just under one year later, I am finished the PhD and settling into my first post doc at a really good university. They hired me without publications, although I now have a couple of papers from the thesis accepted (yes, including the rejected one, which is now much improved post-peer review), with some more in the pipeline.
This doesn't make up for the unnecessary extra stress I experienced as a PhD student, and I still don't think it was okay that I was left to deal with that work by myself; however, if you find yourself in a similar situation, just try to hang in there! We can make better supervisors ourselves, one day.<issue_comment>username_1: @Lighthouse keeper made a very good point about finding a co-advisor. I strongly agree with the comment of @astronat, since the research doesn't always happen (doesn't often happen, never happens, shouldn't happen) in the closed system student-advisor. Finding a less senior but more responsive colleague to work with is a perfectly normal way to go, even at the end of the PhD.
Of course you can start with a frank discussion with your supervisor that you need more supervision/feedback/structure in your relationship. I've seen that work - PhD advisors often develop a mental image of a person that needs to be corrected: "this person will benefit from a liberty of doing whatever they like" is sometimes a great assessment, but sometimes it is a complete misreading on the advisor's part. Do note however that in such a discussion the advisor may become defensive, and even if he agrees there's no guarantee that they'll actually change their behavior. Humans are complex and so are supervisors.
In short - it's good to raise the issue with the supervisor as soon as it starts to bother you, but also not to rely solely on them changing their approach, and reaching out to other people (from fellow students to the faculty of other universities that work on the subject) to discuss your research.
But this is fairly general advice. To be a bit more specific (although you don't write, if the feedback you need is about language/experiment design/methodology/useful resources/books... so the following might not really apply) about your situation right now, I would suggest presenting your work at seminars/conferences (the pandemic at least made that easy - you don't need to travel to speak at a seminar anywhere in the world). You might get a fairly decent feedback, if you mention that you are preparing the presented work for publication (at the very least you may be able to find out who else would be interested in your research = where to submit it). Ask your colleagues and supervisor if they can set you up with their acquaintances in this way.
Lastly - but this is the main point of my answer - **don't overthink it**. I was alarmed by you writing about shame, because the reviews were non-blinded. I cannot stress enough that this is no reason for any sort of embarrassment: depending on the field it is already a win for a PhD to a) get to the review stage, b) get some constructive remarks out of the reviewers (instead of "me no like, reject"). I certainly would like to see how minuscule a percent of users here can boast that their first paper was solo and accepted outright. At this stage, for the most part, the publication proces is unfathomable and one rejection (several rejections) don't say anything about the quality of your work, needles to say - even less about your quality as a researcher. The advice "make revisions, submit elsewhere" is spot on.
Moreover, it is highly likely that the quality of your work will increase over time, and the corollary is that it won't probably be great at the beginning of your career, and therefore that should not be a reason to doubt yourself. That the people fail to acknowledge that we all learn how to conduct research/write papers/write readable papers in acceptable style and language as we go, and are not expected to start with inhuman levels of competence - is the single most common (and heartbreaking) reason people drop out too early from research. While it would be splendid to have an advisor that teaches how to be a scientist, it is so very often not the case and it's perfectly OK to write your first papers with a "how to write research articles 101" book in hand (in maths we have <NAME>'s booklet published by EMS, and I am very fond of it).
So the second piece of advice would be to consult your colleagues if your field (or any adjacent) has such a book, they often have a copy:)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I am in a very similar situation and I can feel how you feel. I finished my PhD last March and although I have published one small paper already, I have been struggling to finish the main paper of my thesis. On top of that, I am doing a post-doc and I feel like both my paper writing and my post-doc work are way below par because I cannot focus in any of them 100%. I am struggling to do both and all I get is pressure to finish the manuscript without anyone really contributing.The funny thing in my case is that my current post-doc supervisor, was the second supervisor of my PhD. He shares senior authorship with my PhD supervisor in the manuscript I am preparing, (I am actually doing reviews, got major reviews last April that practically required to almost redo the manuscript from scratch including most major analyses). But none of them are willing to help. My PhD supervisor has not even read it. My current post-doc supervisor saw the reviews and told me it is too hard for me, got better things to do, you are on your own. And at the same time they complain why I am not finishing! They do not even know, but I have made a huge amount of work and effort to be able to address the reviews and get the manuscript ready. As mentioned by others in this post, I found someone that is really interested in my work, and I will be moving to their lab next year. Hopefully my future research is not so lonely.
All the best for your future and do not give up. I am familiar with feelings of shame and incompetence (for not being able to finish my manuscript), but we should not give up! Go day by day and you will be able to finish it eventually, and I promise it will feel great :)
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/27
| 582
| 2,288
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've always wondered why professors write their emails like this:
john dot doe @ harvard dot edu
I am trying to figure out some benefit of this but I can't think of one. It is definitely not more clear. It is more work if you are actually trying to email the person. Why not just write your actual email?
I come from math so maybe this is just a math thing? I have no idea.<issue_comment>username_1: It's most likely to avoid [Email address harvesting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email-address_harvesting). There are bots that scrape webpages to pick up email addresses for spam purposes. An easy way to avoid this is write your email in a way that's harder to read for a bot that's scanning for email addresses.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As [username_1 notes](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/166862/44249), academics often scramble their email addresses *ostensibly* to prevent web crawlers from harvesting their email address and spamming them. But it still allows humans to obtain their email address.
[The effectiveness of this is debated.](https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/45041/is-using-dot-and-at-in-email-addresses-in-public-text-still-useful)
While it is true that more sophisticated web crawlers could circumvent much of this, most are not sophisticated. Thus it does help protect against generic spam (but that stuff is mostly caught by spam filters anyway).
However, most academics continue to receive plenty of academic spam. This is because academic spammers harvest email addresses from papers via repositories like arxiv, where people do not use any kind of protection. (I know this because I receive academic spam at email addresses that only are in my papers.)
At this point, I think it is more of a piece of academic culture than a well-motivated practice. At least in computer science, most people do it. This encourages others to copy the practice and so it carries on. Some people go a bit further, e.g., "firstinitial dot lastname at thisuniversity dot edu", where you must fill in the name of the university as well as their name. (I personally find these riddles annoying. I put my email in an image on my website, but with the usual riddle as alt-text for blind people.)
Upvotes: 5
|
2021/04/27
| 1,588
| 6,938
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a second-year (almost third-year) PhD student having serious trouble due to lack of scientific direction. I initially worked well with my supervisor, but when COVID hit she essentially ghosted the research group for some months and has been irregularly present ever since. Lately, I've noticed that she seems checked out when I talk to her and so I started explicitly asking for clarification as to what exactly I should be working on whenever I see her. Unfortunately, this strategy has been foiled by my supervisor changing tacks about every 2-4 weeks. For example:
-**Conversation 1**: "You should focus on x, then do y. Do not include z until those first two are set."
-**Conversation 2:** "Actually doing q is a good idea, let's work on q together (for a month)!"
-**Conversation 3:** "What you should present at the conference (in 2 weeks)? Show the data on z, that is the most interesting aspect of the project."
-**Conversation 4:** "No, you should not work on q anymore, that needs to happen in parallel to z."
-**Conversation 5** (after someone at a conference explicitly called attention to my lack of including y): "I understand you are asking to work on y but I think you should try to extend x. But I suppose you can include y."
-**Conversation 6**, only one(!) day after Conversation 5: "What do you mean about doing y, you should do your whole project without y. Also you should work on a paper with (random collaborator) on k! And actually you should also do/have done x completely differently!"
This is pretty frustrating since all the "x,y,z,q..."s I mentioned tend to be at least partially exclusive and take at least 2 months to complete, so I have sunk a lot of work into projects that are half-done. If I work on something that has lost my supervisor's interest, I don't get feedback, which makes it difficult to wrap up anything. My project is also related to two different collaborations, at least one of which seems a bit pissed off and is now proceeding to publish without our input. (The other one has shifted to emailing only me directly now, which is helpful, but I know my supervisor left the first set hanging at least once/tends to view answering emails as highly optional so I kinda get where they're coming from).
In terms of other people to talk to, our group only has one postdoc, who tends to take about a week to answer emails and is not very forthcoming in terms of mentoring PhD students. The other two PhD students in my group are close to graduation, and struggle with the same issue in the short-term (e.g. getting told to write an answer to referees disagreeing with the corrections on an article, then getting criticised for not having applied the corrections) but have already set the main academic direction of their project.
I'm not really sure how to handle this: should I confront my supervisor about the inconsistencies? Trying to set another meeting to talk long-term goals? Just do whatever I think is best and hope I don't mess up too badly without feedback? My supervisor doesn't always take criticism well, and I'm afraid that I'll just get blamed for being a bad student because I haven't produced anything publishable in a year.<issue_comment>username_1: As a phd student your job is to ultimately create your own track of successful research. An ideal advisor would suggest reasonable lines of research, help you develop your ideas, and give guidance and advice if you ever get stuck. In practice, advisors tend to fall in one of two camps. In the first camp, advisors treat their students as employees who produce results for the advisor's group. In the second camp are 'hands off' advisors who don't do much at all. It sounds to me like your advisor is the hands off type. Take initiative, decide what makes the most sense to work on, and do that. Unless your advisor has explicitly told you, "I expect you to work on X and your graduation depends on finishing X", they probably just want you to do something publishable and don't care much past that. Take the opportunity to work on whatever you feel is most interesting or most beneficial to you in the long term.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Verbal conversations are an inefficient means to set directions for a successful PhD project. Random verbal conversations even less so, let alone after a few months of absence for whatever reasons.
Define what you want to achieve for your PhD. Formulate hypotheses to validate or problems to solve. Establish the steps needed to get from where you are to where you need to be. Put the work in context to the current state of the art. State the technological or scientific relevance of the projected outcomes.
Put your plan in writing. Set a meeting and present your written plan to your advisor. Ask for directed feedback. Ask for an opportunity to present your plan to a committee of faculty who you know should have an interest in the success of your work.
In the US, this step is called drafting a dissertation proposal. Some PhD programs require that candidates pass an oral defense of their PhD proposal as the first step to be admitted (given official permission) to do the PhD research.
A dissertation proposal is not a guarantee to be given a PhD. A dissertation proposal is not an administrative recipe for all steps in the research. A dissertation proposal is a roadmap that says I am here, I want to go in this direction, I want to visit these stops along the way, I hope to get at least this far, I plan to use these modes of transportation, I expect the trip should take this long, this is why the trip is important, and these are the pictures that I should be able to show once the trip is done. A dissertation proposal is a plan to help both the dissertation advisor and the PhD candidate frame future discussions about changing plans when something in the research suddenly goes dreadfully wrong, when something only tangentially related to the research plan becomes exceptionally exciting in its own right, or when either party steps aside from the research activities for a few months (for whatever reasons).
Finally, you do not need to ask your advisor for permission to make such a plan. You are far enough along that, in my observation, you should consider taking the initiative. To this end however, you should inform your advisor of your decision. A reasonable approach in your situation is to tell your advisor that you see many directions that you might be able to go in doing your research, that you see possibilities for roadblocks or distractions along the way, and that, with all of this, you feel a strong need to focus at this point on creating a research plan for the best path forward. Use this opening as the way to establish that you will draft a dissertation proposal/plan for joint discussion and approval (with the draft to be completed in perhaps a month or so if I be so bold).
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/28
| 388
| 1,492
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I watched a YouTube video endorsed by a researcher from Microsoft Research, Cambridge, he often said the word "guinea pigs." The video title is something like "How to write a great research paper." I wonder what it does it mean. In other words, I'm asking about the definition of the guinea pig. I guess that it's a kind of advice from a person who read the manuscript. Thank you in advance for your advice.<issue_comment>username_1: The strict meaning of "guinea pig" is a certain rather cute rodent; see [*Guinea pig* at Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guinea_pig). The metaphorical meaning in the context of research is an animal or person on which or whom experiments are performed.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To add an important point to the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/166906/75368), guinea pig often means an *unknowing or unwitting* subject of some experiment, even one that has no valid research purpose.
For example, all of the residents of Texas were, in fact, guinea pigs for the theory (untested) that the electrical distribution system didn't require sufficient backup to handle weather emergencies.
This isn't always the case when the term is used, but often enough it has similar elements. Some changes to a computer operating system leave all of its users as guinea pigs in this sense. There may be unavoidable unforeseen and unintended consequences of a change.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/28
| 1,211
| 4,997
|
<issue_start>username_0: Lets say a rich person has the funds to create a US-based research institution that does not receive any form of public or private funding with the exception of said persons bank account. Will this institution be able to run experiments on human subjects without IRB approval? Nothing extreme like giving people new medicine or trying out novel surgery techniques but rather something mundane like collecting surveys or conducting psychology experiments.
At which point does it become illegal to run an experiment with no oversight within US jurisdiction?<issue_comment>username_1: I'll address the academic, rather than legal aspects of the question. All legitimate scientific journals require ethics review for published human subjects research. Any human subjects research which is has not passed ethics review must not be published. In my opinion, any such research is not part of main-stream science. So the answer is no.
It is generally accepted that these are not research, and therefore not human subjects research:
* Testing a commercial product to see if customers like it.
* Experiments whose results will be kept secret.
However, *all* activities need to be ethical, even if they are not subject to IRB requirements.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It really depends on exactly what you are doing: "surveys" and "psychological experiments" are not the same. The regulations providing for IRBs in the United States are governed by the [Common Rule](https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/revised-common-rule-regulatory-text/index.html), a policy of the Department of Health and Human Services.
The first paragraph:
>
> §46.101 To what does this policy apply?
>
>
> (a) Except as detailed in [§46.104](https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/revised-common-rule-regulatory-text/index.html#46.104), this policy applies to all research involving human subjects conducted, supported, or otherwise subject to regulation by any Federal department or agency that takes appropriate administrative action to make the policy applicable to such research. ... Institutions that are engaged in research described in this paragraph and institutional review boards (IRBs) reviewing research that is subject to this policy must comply with this policy.
>
>
>
The definition of "institution" is broad:
>
> (f) Institution means any public or private entity, or department or agency (including federal, state, and other agencies).
>
>
>
**The short answer** is these rules exist to protect regular people, so there is a broad authority to regulate research, it is not tied to federal funding. Private IRBs exist to do exactly what you are asking about. It becomes illegal when you start doing research that isn't part of the [exemptions](https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/regulations/45-cfr-46/revised-common-rule-regulatory-text/index.html#46.104), although I would strongly recommend engaging an expert to make determinations for you.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I speak, with trepidation, because of my former membership in three IRBs. I became a member in two cases because I got in trouble myself. When I was a member I pressed for scrupulous adherence to the law and institutional policy. IRB members and staff are frequently fuzzy on both. As a member I needed to have a copy of the law, the regulations, and institutional policy close at hand.
Your question requires arcane knowledge both of Federal law and of other practices. What you ask might be legally possible but might be foolish. The role of IRBs tends to be expansive. Most institutions require that all research be reviewed according to Federal standards because it makes their job easier. They also usually require that a determination that research need not be reviewed by made at least by the staff of an IRB. Many journals, by no means all, require that research be reviewed appropriately.
There are also state laws that apply. One of the more obscure ones I learned was that our state emancipated all underage women who had a baby for all legal purposes except for the ability to give consent for medical research. Go figure.
In short, your life will be easier if your institution has an IRB and has an agreement with a Federal agency to conduct its own reviews. It will also be made easier if the staff of the IRB understand the actual law, the accreditation standards for IRBs (yes, even those exist), the definition of "generalizable knowledge" (a total mystery), and shows some common sense about what is risky or not, and who is a patient or not.
So while what you ask might be legally possible under some, or even many, circumstances, if you want to participate in modern research with humans or even with animals and then publish that research in credible journals, you need the technical staff that usually support an IRB or an animal research committee.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/28
| 629
| 2,614
|
<issue_start>username_0: For a submitted review paper, I got a response from one of the reviewers: "More related references should be added". The thing is, I already have around 70 references, and as the topic is pretty specific, there are not many more references out there. I could probably find a few more after very time consuming search, but IMHO, the number of references is both sufficient and able to convey the point. Also the reviewer left literally only this one sentence on the issue and did not even make clear in which aspect the number of references are lacking.
I am still pretty fresh to the academic publishing world, and I don't really know how to answer this request. Can I simply decline the revision request? (the other two reviers did not critisize the number of references)<issue_comment>username_1: It may be more time-consuming to fight the referee than to squeeze out a few more references. You might also surprise yourself and find references you didn't know of.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You could do the following -
1. Compare other papers in the journal and see how many references they
have put.
2. Extend references by multiple references for
one instance. Example: In deep learning there is a technique called
object detection. It has 3 top notch review papers for that field
(which I know of). Instead of citing one, I would cite all three in
this case. You could do the same in your case.
3. You could do what <NAME> has mentioned in the comments.
4. Search for relevant references from your cited papers.
5. Cite the general stuff. Many a times, techniques used so widely, people don't cite them. You could cite them as well.
I think 70 is actually a lesser number cites for a review paper. They generally span between the range of 150-200 in the field I work in. Though I think it differs in every field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Can I simply decline the revision request?
>
>
>
Yes you can always decline to do what the referee asks. At the end of the day they are only suggestions and its up to the editor to take on board the *recommendation* of the referee as to whether the paper should be published.
If you do decline to add more references then you should explain why you chose not to. That said sometimes it just easier to do what the referee asks, especially with references which are easy to add/remove than to get into a fight over it.
If you can't find more citations, then look at the references/citations of the papers you did cite. That should be a good place to find a few more references.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/04/28
| 1,757
| 7,547
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a third-year bachelor of a science student. I'm shortlisted for an interview for the Integrated Ph.D. course. I'm Physics major student. It's asked by the institution for a Statement of Purpose.
>
> One-page original research write-up by the candidate (research statement of purpose).
>
>
>
I have never written a statement of purpose in my whole life and this is the first one. Now after searching for what it is. I found several posts which help me a lot and the most important one is [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/1555/133008). If I summarize the points given in the answer as
* What have you already done?
* What are you working on now?
* What might you want to work on in the future?
* How does my department fit your research goals?
Well, this is it, and for me, it's quite satisfactory.
Now the shortcomings as a bachelor's student are that we are not exposed to real research. We just get an introductory idea of different branches of physics. Now the problem is, As a bachelor student, I haven't done any research work in the past (I did an intern on Astrophysics but it was based on introductory knowledge) nor I'm currently working on any project and apart from a little glimpse, I have not a big picture of what I'm going to do in future. I know I want to be a particle physicist but I don't know what specific thing in particle physics, I want to do work in and It might possible that the interest might divert to some other path, say Astrophysics.
This eliminates the first three points. The fourth one, again, I can only say, the department itself help me decide what I need to do in future. It gives me an understanding of the subject and so on.
So It seems there Isn't much to say in the Statement of Purpose as a bachelor student. So I want advice on How should I write my statement of purpose?
Please ask any information you need about me if necessary.
---
I'm not studying in United State. I'm a student from India. And I don't understand what's common between this and
>
> How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in the US, particularly for weak or borderline students?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I am mentioning the following in terms of what you have said in the question and not in general.
1. What you have already done?
Coursework, Homework, mini project? Something that really caught your interest or you spent good amount of time working on? Schools which give importance to classes are actually really good experience. Just writing that you attended the class makes no difference. But, if you have something worth while which explored out of the class, that's great!
2. What are you working on?
This may sound foolish but start working on something if you haven't! Explore using the internet, try to finish a couple of courses! You can't immediately hit the big picture. There must be many sub-domains to astrophysics. Why not explore them? Search for a few open problems?
3. What might you want to work in the future?
Suggest the open problem you find while exploring. Or mention that a specific sub-domain interests you because of so and so reasons. They don't really expect solved work or a ground-breaking idea. **A personal experience,** I was just simply surfing YouTube and came across this certain domain. I spent a week just reading simple articles and this one good review paper and it just really interested me. I haven't been able to generate anything worth while but I'm really loving the process!
Finally, try to relate these points with personal experience if possible. An internship needn't mean you publish something or get magnificent results. You could mention that your time spent in the internship brought you to a certain problem you would like to solve! I have had 2 internships till date. The first one, just like yours covered only introductory material. But I had two sessions which dealt with this one algorithm and that's what I focus on now!
(I am an undergrad as well, please do correct me if I am wrong somewhere, I can't really put the perspective of someone who has already gone through the process.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: SOPs are a rather dreaded part of the application process for many students in the tagged geography, precisely because there is a big gap between the expectations and method of working that students are typically used to. The previous comments and answer are indeed relevant. Given your current situation, I'll add some specific things that you can think about, leaning towards pragmatism rather than the ideal.
(1) The SOP is essentially a narrative that has to sell. (Arguably so is most research, but that's another tale). You must know your audience. Don't make one boilerplate SOP for all the departments you apply to. Visit their websites, read up what they work on. Try to use social media to speak to current students. You may not know what you want to work on, but you must know with reasonable veracity what they work on. Don't start writing your SOP without doing this. The underlying benefit (arguably the real reason) is that you will me more updated about what is currently happening in the field now, and this will help you cultivate your interests more sensibly.
(2) Treat each SOP as an independent and exclusive document. Once you've identified the department & professor/group you would like to work with the most, think of everything you've heard, learnt or done that may be relevant to the topic. Oftentimes this is a research project, sometimes it is a class that really interested you and motivated you to read up further. Sometimes it is even a personal experience or anecdote that left a deep impact on you, inspiring you to move towards the respective field. You need not have done concrete research work on it, but you should be able to demonstrate some interest or passion, or even a convincing motivation.
If you are not able to find yourself motivated by a certain field, it may be a strong indication to look elsewhere - one more underlying benefit.
(3) Connect your background (educational, personal if it is relevant), your motivation/experience/interest and relevant achievements to the field of interest. Avoid irrelevant history. The badminton championship you participated in is unlikely to be helpful, unless you are using it to make a point about striving for excellence. Or being fascinated by the aerodynamics of a weighted shuttlecock. I hope you catch my drift here.
(4) Take seriously the last segments, which describe how the university could help you achieve your goals, and equally, why you are a good fit for the university. Be very specific about the first. You should be able to demonstrate that you know what the department/group is known for, what sets them apart, what sort of impact they have. Use details if possible. If you've been able to speak to some students there, mention it (show your efforts and initiative). As to why you are a good fit, describe your attributes and qualities; but ensure that they relate to the personal history/experiences/achievements that you previously mentioned. This adds continuity, keeps you honest and prevents the SOP from reading like a boilerplate job application.
Take your time with this, and remember to respect the reader. Its a big opportunity for you and an important investment for the group/department that you join. The worst thing that you could do is treat it flippantly and churn out something that doesn't show serious thought.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/28
| 673
| 2,930
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know this topic is kind of depending on which school each researcher is from, so i would like to gain more information regarding the topic.
I am a phd researcher and I have a specific task to do, a colleague of mine have similar task but using different agents. this colleague came up with an idea to compare both agents and write a paper about it, s\he performed his\her experiments and started writing the paper, s\he then approached me with the idea to compare, so I agreed, performed and analyzed my data, which took me weeks to finish, and shared it with this colleague. As I was working on another manuscript and s\he wanted to write this new manuscript by him\herself, I only contributed to read and correct writing-wise (plus of course my data and results) but the most recent version was never shared with me, last one shared was around Nov-Dec 2020, and till this moment I dont know how my contribution was written in the author statement. I got to have a fast look at paper after submission and saw that the graphs always had one part regarding my data, yet i am only a co-author and this colleague is the first author. My question here, was I supposed to have an equal contribution and supposed to be a first co-author? my other colleagues pointed this out and that s\he should have put me as a first coauthor with him\her, and I am not sure if its true or not, i dont have much experience writing manuscripts, and my (our) SV never pointed this out to me. Now its anyhow late to ask for a coauthorship, but I would like to avoid such situation in the future, so would really appreciate if someone has an experience on how to handle such situation.
Sorry for the long message and thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: Your colleague came up with the idea of combining the work of themselves and yourself into a single paper, and your co-author took the lead in writing the paper. For me, that would add up to enough distinct initiative to single out your colleague as the primary author of the paper.
You ask how "to avoid such situation in the future"; Roland's comment is spot-on in this regard: the author list and relative ordering therein should be discussed upfront, if you wish to discuss it at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Speaking as somebody who reads a lot of papers, my only desire is that it should be clear who did what on a paper, because if want to contact the authors I want to know who to contact.
In general, whoever WRITES the majority of the paper should be the first author. If some person did some critical task that was more important than writing the paper, then to my mind the way to handle that is to make them the second author but put a note in the paper describing their contribution ("Dr. Smith spent five years hand nursing over 50 ferrets to make these experiments possible... etc"). That way the reader knows who did what.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/28
| 1,136
| 4,613
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am having troubles deciding between pursuing a PhD in lab that is more bioinformatics flavored or a lab that is more computationally flavored.
>
> What are the risks associated with switch labs after starting a PhD? How difficult? How common?
>
>
>
Currently I have an advisor willing to take me into his computationally flavored lab, but their primary sub-domain is not one to which I am familiar. I would like some assurances that switching labs would be an option 6-18 months into my PhD.
The alternative is to continue taking classes as a non-degree seeking student until I decide on what lab I like. I have no intention on switching universities.
Note, with either lab I can keep the same major. In other words, the difficulty of switching domains is not what I am asking here.
This is located in the USA.
**I have read other questions such as:**
[Hiring a PhD student who left another PhD position](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60612/hiring-a-phd-student-who-left-another-phd-position)
[Switch PhD program: how to contact possible PhD advisors when already enrolled in PhD program?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17348/10220)<issue_comment>username_1: The reason it is difficult to answer this is that it can depend to a large extent on personalities. A "new" advisor might not want to take you on thinking about their relationship with the "old" advisor. The "old" advisor might feel insulted and cause problems for you. You might, after a year, have responsibilities to the current lab that will be difficult to transfer. It can be a mess, but it happens.
Rather, I'd suggest that you make a commitment to a lab and stick to it. Your doctoral studies aren't your career and it is always possible to change direction after you finish a PhD, especially if it is within the same field. Changing labs can set you back, leaving you with a "lost" year as well as bad feelings.
But, for a bachelors degree holder starting doctoral studies immediately, the first order of business is passing comprehensives, which requires coursework for most. If you don't need to make a serious commitment to the research of a lab (as is true for most) then switching is generally easy and non-disruptive.
The research leading to the dissertation is to teach you how to do it within your field and how to write scholarly papers. Once you get that, the specifics of how you spend your career are pretty malleable.
That said, don't choose something you hate or you will lose motivation. If you start in something and have an opportunity to move before you finish and it isn't too disruptive, then you have an opportunity. But no answer here will guarantee that such an opportunity will arise. A straight path may be the quick path.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Switching labs at PhD level should be quite the exception and it should only happen if nothing else works. It definitely should not be a planned move.
You'll upset your old supervisor and the new one will be wary of you. If you stay at the same institution, chances are nobody will want to touch you if you do such a switch.
Better to right away come clean to seek a solution that permits you to combine the expertise topics you seek to develop in with all relevant supervisors, upfront.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have to disagree with username_2 (lol). I just went through a lab switch, and there is a high chance your PI will not respond well (especially if you're their first switcher). BUT My new PI is a joy and went through a lab switch himself so he is very much invested personally in my success. It is the same subject/field of study and his lab is much more focused than my last lab. There was no way my PI was going to let me leave amicably, so I don't know if I would suggest trying to get your current PI on board (many ppl I know experienced similar poor responses from PIs in the midst of trying to switch) but I would definitely try to get your foot in the door at your next place first and foremost and emphasize that it is with the utmost discretion. The admin will not help you switch, so you can set yourself up for success this way by having someone already onboard. You need to decide how important your timeline is though because there are no guarantees. That being said most ppl I know that switched finished in the same time they would have if they stayed (especially if it's the same overall field/subject matter (like chemistry or biology)) [This was at Northwestern where about 50% of the entering class ended up switching for Chemistry).
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/28
| 1,004
| 4,377
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been applying to postdoc positions, but I'm concerned about my advisor's recommendation letter.
I have been a productive researcher under his supervision and had a good, but stressful PhD experience and I believe I have been one of my advisors better students. He certainly seems quite pleased with my work.
I have a job offer that my advisor would strongly prefer I take, it involves working in a group indirectly controlled by him.
For personal geographical reasons (not related to my advisor or anyone I work with) I would prefer to work elsewhere.
What troubles me is that I'm not certain my advisor will write me a recommendation letter that accurately reflects my abilities as a researcher in order to force me to accept the position more closely associated with him. He's certainly been pushing me to accept this position by refusing to expend any effort to find more funding for me until I finish my PhD. I'm graduating next month and I've been without fellowship for the past few months). The people in charge of this postdoc position are happy to start paying me as soon as I agree to work with them.
I realize this sounds somewhat paranoid, however my advisor has done something similar to one of his previous students in very similar position. This student had been extended a tentative offer for a position at very prestigious institution, which was then revoked when our advisor sent a private email to this students prospective employer implying that the student had already agreed to work with him after his graduation. This student only found out why the deal fell through later when he met personally with some people working with the prospective employer and they were sorry that he wasn't available to work with them at that time.
I don't doubt this. My advisor is certainly the kind of person who would conspire in this way. He's sort of roguishly brilliant and I'm sure he justified it to himself by thinking it was in this student's best interest. He's one of the big names in our field as well.
What do I do? I understand that omitting my advisor from the letter writers can raise some eyebrows. Is there anyway to inform prospective employers of this situation without sounding insane?<issue_comment>username_1: You don't need a recommendation from your professor.
Some professors are magnanimous. Others are not.
Talk to the key people involved in your desired postdoc and inform them that your advisor may not be enthusiastic about your leaving, and they will understand.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If your supervisor is manipulating you to take a job that benefits them, and not you, then you should end the supervisory relationship swiftly, probably by graduating and obtaining a job outside their control.
>
> Is there anyway to inform prospective employers of this situation without sounding insane?
>
>
>
I'd suggest that if you are clear with your supervisor you are leaving and are not open to changing your mind, they will probably write you a good letter because writing you a bad letter makes your supervisor look bad.
I can think of no explanation a recent PhD graduate can give for omitting their PhD supervisor's letter that looks good. Your other letter writers could give an explanation for you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is one of the rare moment where it is worthwhile to apply for the position without attaching reference letters, only providing the reference contacts, and after a week or so having a call directly with the PI or the responsible person for the new position.
What you describe here is best discussed "in person", so you have time to clarify all the details and your goals (i.e., exactly what you wrote here, but in writing they sound heavier and, counterintuitively, in writing it is less clear and there is a lot of space to misinterpret).
Maybe you do not realize it, but you are looking for a way out of an oppressive and manipulative advisor. Yes, he has been a good one[1], but better to cut your working relationship with him before discovering his bad sides. You have your PhD, you are and you must be independent from such a person (from any person, actually).
[1] when you say stressful, think about someone undergoing that stress with some personal/family/health issues. Do you think he/she would have dropped out?
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/29
| 2,037
| 8,784
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got a rejection recently on a short paper that gave a fairly short proof that a conjecture of a well-known mathematician was false. The reviewer said that “while the results are new and interesting,” “the proofs are fine, but not very difficult, and the techniques are not new.” Nonetheless, the arguments previously evaded some top people in the field who were interested in the topic. My question is, to what kinds of mathematics journals should one submit significant results whose proofs involve some clever trick rather than a revolutionary method? Also, should one not strive to find the most transparent form of a mathematical argument?<issue_comment>username_1: There's a good chance the rejection is because your results are not interesting enough for the journal. In other words, the journal is looking for not only new and interesting results, but also complicated proofs and/or new techniques.
So: submit to another, probably less prestigious journal. Alternatively, you can submit to a similarly-ranked journal and hope the peer review process results in acceptance, which is entirely possible, because this particular reject reason is a judgement call and different people will come to different recommendations.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: This sounds to me like the reviewer provided a shoddy argumentation for their judgment. How very dare you make your proof easy to read, instead of obfuscating it into a complex unreadable mess that makes it look more impressive?
If I were you, I'd resubmit to a similar-caliber journal, and hope for a more fortuitous pull of the one-armed reviewer bandit. Alternatively, you could consider corresponding about this issue with the editor of the journal from which you got this review. Surely, they would agree that making proofs difficult shouldn't be a goal in itself, so if that were the only argument for rejection you'd have a good case for being reconsidered.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: What you are discovering is that, in many cases, the proofs are more important than the theorems, especially when they bring insight or when there is a new technique in the proof that might be applied to other work.
It seems like your work is "a bit interesting" but doesn't have the potential impact to bother with publishing it. Especially when seen in competition with other papers.
For my doctoral research I worked on three problems. For one it was so easy to postulate and prove theorems (several per week) that it was abandoned as trivial. It was "cute" but, as they say, there was no "there" there.
You likely gained some insight in the work, but if the proofs were trivial, others before you likely did also, but didn't think it was worth publishing.
The comment of <NAME> to transform it into a short note is a good one, as are the comments and answers of others to just try somewhere else are also possibilities.
But another possibility is to take what insight you got from this work and use it to extend to something with more potential impact.
---
The [now current XKCD](https://xkcd.com/2456/) might apply here.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Keep submitting to other journals. If the result is indeed significant then you will eventually find a journal that will want to publish it. If on the other hand you continue to consistently get more rejections, that probably means the result is not as significant as you seem to think. Keep in mind that just because a well known mathematician conjectures something, that does not automatically make it interesting, and does not automatically mean that your counterexample “evaded top people in the field”.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: You might want to start by putting it on a preprint server.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I would suggest that you focus your thoughts less on "the proofs are [...] not very difficult" and more of your thoughts on "the techniques are not new." What happened here is that the referee doesn't think your paper is interesting enough for the journal that you submitted to because it doesn't contain important new ideas. This is a perfectly valid reason to reject a paper from a strong journal.
The first thing to think about is whether you agree with the referee here, do you think that the paper does involve substantial new ideas? If you think there are new ideas, then rewrite the introduction so that it will be clear to a referee that there are new ideas and then resubmit to another journal of the same caliber. If you agree with the referee and think there aren't new ideas, then leave the paper alone and resubmit to a less competitive journal. The referee clearly thinks that your paper would be publishable somewhere, so if you just lower your aims a little you shouldn't have trouble publishing it.
Finally two random bits of advice. First, if the paper is quite short you might consider a journal that focuses on short papers (like Proceedings of the AMS). Second, make sure that your intro explicitly says "this is an open problem posed by X in year Y." If it's only been open for a year or two and it's solvable by a standard method, then that means it just wasn't as interesting a problem as the person who posed it thought it was. But if it's been open for 10 years, then that's evidence your application of these techniques is more clever than it looks at first glance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: To complement the other answers: on one hand, yes, I have seen several instances where a proof (of a significant result) turned out to be "insufficiently impressive/interesting", and was rejected. On another hand, yes, this can mean that an interesting meta-fact was discovered, namely, that the result *turns\_out* to be (construable as!!!) so easy that it's abruptly not-so-interesting. Yes, a bit ironic.
On a third hand, there is a possibility that some state-of-the-art methods, possibly not widely known, render a question "routine", even though to the perception of many it is not obviously answerable at all. To greatly exaggerate: not all products of large integers are "known/documented", but those of us hip to the grade-school algorithm (or better) will not be interested at all in seeing any particular product explained (without some further features of interest). So the "new" feature is there, but it's insufficient...
Unsurprisingly, in the end, there is considerable context-dependence/subjectivity in referees' appraisals of submissions. And, indeed, to some degree, *editors* care about whether a given paper will enhance, versus diminish, the "reputation" of the journal. "Impressive" papers are sometimes preferred... And, again, this is context-dependent and subjective.
So, yes, sometimes a (meta?) proof that an issue is, after all, (potentially) straightforward often does not lend itself to "publishability". :)
EDIT: I added the quotes to "publishability" because, after all, putting a document on the internet is a far more powerful form ofliteral publishing than anything achieved prior to 1985 or so. Yes, I know we're talking about various forms of status-certification and gate-keeping. Yes, some quality control also, but not only...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: You could talk to the famous mathematician who made the conjecture. He could be more resourceful than you and he might know the proper journal for your contribution. Moreover, he could be one of few people who can endorse your contribution as the conjecture is in a non-peer reviewed book chapter.
Edit: if he is an editor, you can also submit the paper to him if the paper align with the journal's coverage.
He will be more than happy to read your paper and provide you feedbacks because your proof is smart and concise.
---
I've seen some scenarios similar to your case. Usually, a junior researcher find a famous conjecture published on a top journal, the junior researcher prove or disprove the conjecture. In case of disproving the conjecture, the junior researcher will usually provide an additional condition that the conjecture will hold.
Finally, the junior researcher will publish the paper either by himself or coauthoring/acknowledging the original author.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: You could perhaps emphasize the importance of your proof, therefore making your paper more about the result than the proof itself.
Sometimes, some writing judo (turning the disadvantages into advantages) can also help. Instead of "the proof is simple" and "the techniques are not new", maybe the proof is "elegant in its simplicity" and uses "well-established techniques". Being up-front with it allows you to control the narrative. Of course, this type of reframing can only take you so far...
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/29
| 499
| 2,135
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would of course use Prof. and Dr. in front of the names of committee members and other professors who I call by Prof. and Dr. in real life. But what about your “peers” who have doctorates?
For example, in the first paragraph I thank my advisor, Prof. <NAME>.... then in the next paragraph I mention specific people who helped me including Dr. Wang (a mentor at a different school) and <NAME> (who now has a PhD but worked with me as a grad student in the same lab). Then in the next paragraph I thank my friends and most of them have doctorates also but I’d just put their first names only. It kind of makes sense to me but the inconsistency bothers me. Most importantly, would it be rude to do this? Because in the same sentence I am referring to someone as a doctor and the other as not when both have doctorates purely based on my personal relationship.
On the other hand, I have read an acknowledgment that included titles in front of every single name (including Mr. and Ms.) and it bothered me a lot.
And no, I cannot just leave out the titles altogether because it’s something not culturally acceptable at my institution.
I have seen similar questions here before but none of them were directly applicable to my situation.<issue_comment>username_1: I'd suggest that if a person has a doctorate that you should give the title, even if they are your friends. It honors their achievement.
Your dissertation will be read by others, possibly many others if it is published.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: * Use their professional titles if they helped you professionally
during your dissertation.
* Use first names of friends if they supported you along the way, but did not contribute to your academic achievement.
* A helpful way to draw the division: If one of your friends was an accountant (or any other professional degree unrelated to your degree program), you would not write "CPA" after their name. For the same reason, there is no need to write a professional title for your friends (who may have titles in your field) if their role was helping you as a friend.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/29
| 362
| 1,638
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a review article and one reviewer stated "Authors should propose their solution(s) in this topic based on the analysis of different literatures."
So my question is: it is really required (or expected) to include suggestions on how to solve the research question tackled by a review article? I have read numerous reviews (in journals of good reputation) that were just a collection of findings from the reviewed references, with very little opinions from the authors added. To provide solutions would in my oponion require research that authors of review papers might not have done (yet).
So is this reviewer right to ask for this addition to the paper, or would it be ok to decline the request (and if so, with which justification)?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd suggest that if a person has a doctorate that you should give the title, even if they are your friends. It honors their achievement.
Your dissertation will be read by others, possibly many others if it is published.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: * Use their professional titles if they helped you professionally
during your dissertation.
* Use first names of friends if they supported you along the way, but did not contribute to your academic achievement.
* A helpful way to draw the division: If one of your friends was an accountant (or any other professional degree unrelated to your degree program), you would not write "CPA" after their name. For the same reason, there is no need to write a professional title for your friends (who may have titles in your field) if their role was helping you as a friend.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/04/29
| 1,092
| 4,749
|
<issue_start>username_0: Over a month ago, a group of Muslim parents protested for several days at Batley grammar school, in West Yorkshire, England, after a teacher at that school showed in a Religion Education class the 2015 caricature of the Prophet Muhammad by <NAME>. The teacher apparently showed that picture to his students, who were between 13 to 14 years old, to educate them about islamophobia. Nevertheless, even before an independent inquiry into the incident started, the head teacher's response was to issue an "unequivocal" apology for the teacher's actions and suspend the teacher. (To know more about this incident, please click [here](https://inews.co.uk/news/education/batley-grammar-school-teacher-cartoon-prophet-mohamed-fears-for-his-life-934648).)
**If a university professor/researcher in the UK showed the same image in, say, history or moral philosophy class, to stimulate an intellectual discussion between mature students, would the university tolerate it? And, has this (or at least something similar to this) ever happened in a UK university class? How did it go?**
I ask these questions because I'm planning to do my PhD in the UK, and my proposed research topic touches on the said issue.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, Universities in the UK can exercise their own judgement on how to organise their curriculum and how to deal with sensitive matters while encouraging academic debate and educated discussion. There is no single answer which is valid for each and every University in the UK, as customs and approaches differ from one place to another.
Typically, every University will have a quality assurance process for their teaching and research. Within it, they will have Ethical Panels/Officers responsible for deciding whether a proposed research / education module is ethical and safe. If you feel that your research can be controversial and/or cause ethical issues and/or make you or others feel unsafe, you need to contact the designated people and discuss with them whether and how to proceed. Normally, they will assess the risks and suggest appropriate measures to ensure that your program of research is legal, safe and ethical.
If you don't contact the designated Panels/Officers, and proceed with your potentially unsafe/unethical research, the University will not be happy. After all, they put all these systems in place for a reason and expect all academics to make use of them when necessary.
Note that all the above has very little to do with the exact reason why your research may be considered unethical/unsafe/inappropriate. The approach remains the same, whether the potential issues are caused by use of human biological materials, by research requiring access to children, by research involving toxic materials, or by research on social/religious issues. Anything that is potentially unsafe or problematic should be discussed with appropriate people first, before the activity starts. As long as you agree to that, you will likely have no issues doing your research in the UK.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to @DimitrySavostyanov's excellent answer, I'll just add my thoughts on what is likely would be considered reasonable and what not at places I have worked.
Firstly, is showing these images strictly necessary? If your aim is to "stimulate discussion" are there other ways to do so that would upset fewer people? Remember that an upset person is unlikely to be able to contribute at their highest intellectual level. If you wish to have a discussion of censorship and religious sensitivities, it seems to me that mature scholars should be able to have the discussion without having to be provoked by the image. We can all have a discussion about whether pedophilia is a moral failing or a mental illness without having to be shown pornographic images for example.
But sometimes it is necessary to see material to be able to have a discussion, be that disturbing images or first hand accounts of upsetting incidents. The material is there because there is no other way of understanding the content.
The distinction between these is a fine line and one must proceed with care and humility, and remember that your purpose is always to work in the interests of a student's education. A distressed student will not be learning, even if you believe that they shouldn't be distressed. There is no point in trying to teach in a particular way because you believe it is how students *should* learn, there is only how students *do* learn.
Finally, there is a big difference between what your research is and what your teaching will be, and the two are unlikely to be as related as perhaps your post suggests you think they might be.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/29
| 1,731
| 7,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: You speak and present your thesis without a slide presentation, probably with a pen to explain something on the board. This question came to mind when I was wondering "why do we need a slide presentation?" and "have all thesis defenses in the world been done using a slide presentation?" and "will you be penalized if you defend your thesis without a slide presentation?".<issue_comment>username_1: I have seen people doing the work on the chalk board or in some countries they sit down together and go over the pages of your draft. Then again, in a formal setting where you have to present your work with a time constraint you might not be able to cover everything you did without slides.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Of course, slide presentations are a very recent development. Even the humble overhead projector didn't exist when I defended. We wrote with chalk on a slate like material.
Yes, you can do a presentation without slides. In some ways you can make a better presentation unless you are very skilled with slide creation. Most slide presentations are incredibly boring. They have been described, somewhat accurately, as the private notes that a speaker would normally keep to themself rather than making them visible. I know a couple of people who can do a good job, but it is, in my view a poor technology in general.
However, the expectations of your audience should be taken into account. If they expect slides, then you should probably do it that way. If you distribute the slides, printed perhaps, before the presentation then the audience has a place to take "notes in context". So, the "penalized" question is an entirely local one. Make sure you understand the local expectations. username_5, don't be boring.
---
At one university where I studied, the chalk boards were actually slate and there was a chalk tray at the bottom. The classrooms were very seldom cleaned and after several weeks a small cone of chalk dust would be growing on the floor just below the end of the tray.
Since the boards were seldom washed, just dry wiped, it sometimes occurred that the writing on the board would start to slide down the board on the "lubrication" of the still remaining dust from earlier uses. It would get distorted as it slid, of course.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the field. If you have a lot of data to show, will be hard without slides. The question could also be asked for lectures.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been the independent chair of a successful PhD thesis defence (within the past few years) where the only visual aids were a couple of pieces of paper. However, that's just one, compared to a lot that did use slides.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: My PhD advisor demands a presentation without slides even though we are in a field that works with a lot of images, for example from electron microscopy. We only have a blackboard/whiteboard. There was only one exception where an industry partner wanted a powerpoint presentation. This was continued even during the pandemic, so that we have to draw on a tablet or something similar instead of showing prepared slides. My advisor's reason for doing so is that without images, the defendant has to focus more on the ideas and abstract concepts of his work instead of showing one sample after the other.
So I agree with the other answers, that this is very much a cultural thing, and not even necessarily determined be the field. Speak to your advisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In the UK it is very rare to have slides in what we call a Viva, which serves the same purpose as a defense. In general, a viva last 2-3 hours, and for the first 10 minutes, the candidate will describe their "thesis" - i.e. what it is they are claiming we know now, that we didn't know before they started. The rest of the 2 hours 50 minutes is the examiners (panel members) challenging them, and asking questions about their work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, it is certainly possible. One of the good things about starting a viva with a brief talk is not to transfer useful information (we have already read the thesis *very* carefully) but to give the candidate a chance to get "warmed up" and deal with any nerves they may have. So I would be happy with whatever form of presentation suited the candidate, it is largely for their benefit. It is perfectly reasonable to have some nerves\* and few people are ready to answer difficult questions right from the start. For similar reasons, I often make sure that early in the viva I have prepared a question that has an easy but non-trivial answer.
I also advise my students to pre-prepare some slides containing any diagrams etc. that they think they may need during the viva even if they are not intending to use them in the initial presentation.
\* just occasionally\*\* there has been a candidate for which I wasn't completely nerveless myself ;o)
\*\* they usually end up being the best vivas ;o)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: A little bit of a different perspective here - public speaking in general vs. a thesis presentation. But I believe the same things that work in one type of speech work in another. Obviously the expectations of your particular field, your university/department and your advisor are most critical. But assuming that you are either expected or encouraged to have a slide presentation, here are a few things that I have learned from [Toastmasters](https://www.toastmasters.org/) over the past few years. If you have not tried Toastmasters, I highly recommend it. Nearly all clubs are virtual (Zoom, etc.) right now and most encourage guests.
* Keep the number of slides to a minimum. I'd suggest no more than one per minute, and that is for a short (5 - 15 minute) speech. For a longer speech, such as a thesis, you might have a handful going over key points and then spend most of the time explaining your thesis with perhaps a slide every 5 - 10 minutes.
* Keep the slides simple. 1 - 3 images and/or 5 - 10 lines of text. Sometimes even just 1 picture and 1 line of text is enough. This helps accentuate key points and also keep people from spending their time trying to read everything when they *should be listening to you speak*.
* Do NOT hand out the slides (paper or email) in advance, unless you are required to do so. Hand them out (or email them or send a link to download them) at the end of the presentation. Otherwise, 1/2 the people will be distracted by the slides in their hands (reviewing old slides or jumping ahead to the next one) instead of *listening to you speak*.
* Pick a simple theme and stick to it. Colored border, simple graphic background, etc. Otherwise the background and other irrelevant stuff (unless your thesis is about graphic design) gets in the way of *listening to you speak*.
* Practice, practice, practice! It is too easy (been there, done that) to use the slides as a crutch. Don't let that happen, especially on something as important as your thesis. In fact, practice it at least a few times *without* the slides. That will (a) help make sure you really know the speech well and (b) take care of the unlikely, but possible, situation of technical failure with the presentation (e.g., projector dies just as you get started).
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/29
| 1,005
| 4,106
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wanted to bring up an issue I faced recently and figure out how much my graduate school application will be affected by this.
For some background, I am a sophomore math major at a good public school. In the first semester of my second year(i.e Fall 2020), I faced many problems that led to a case of terrible depression. I ended up getting an F in an art history class and two Bs in Probability Theory and another math grad class. There were many other internet access issues piled onto the existing problems as well. It would be an exaggeration to say that I even participated in the class. I only submitted about half the assignments and got an average score on the final exams.
I had a 3.91 GPA in my first year taking the major upper-div math courses(Abstract Algebra, Linear Algebra, Real Analysis) and a graduate class in commutative algebra. I got all As in my math classes with one or two A-s in some unrelated classes.
In my second semester of my second year, I am trying my best to fix this issue. I will likely get 5 As this semester including 3 key math graduate classes. I think I'll maintain this streak in my third year as well. At this point, my GPA is around 3.5 . By the time I apply to graduate school, I can hope to get it to around 3.7-3.82. My math GPA will be higher than that. I am currently aiming to get into a good PhD program(say a top 20 program, very roughly). I already have some pretty good connections with some faculty who are quite renowned in their fields and may end up getting good letters. I may also have some research opportunities lined up within the next year. I also took the math subject GRE and did well on it.
Will I be penalized for the drop in grades that semester when it comes to graduate school applications? Many of the other factors(GRE, recommendation letters) look decent enough on paper for now except for my GPA. Most of the people I know who got into a math PhD program have a near-perfect GPA. It seems almost like a minimum requirement at this point.
I'd be especially glad to receive a response from someone very familiar with the math PhD admission process or another student who faced similar circumstances.<issue_comment>username_1: It is unlikely that a single bad semester will be decisive, given everything else, especially good letters. You aren't alone in stalling for the final semester, of course. If it is burn-out, then you need to deal with that explicitly as the overhang can be pretty bad as you start a new program. You need to start with a fresh and eager perspective.
But "top 20" is an incredibly narrow range of schools to apply to. I'd suggest, instead that you cover yourself by taking a broader attack against the full range of research (R1) institutions. There is a lot of competition as you note yourself.
And, other than the small effect on your GPA a failing grade in art history is unlikely to be a block for a mathematician. You do have to fulfill all graduation requirements, of course.
---
From your description, I've assumed this is the US.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Many applicants are in the same boat as you (I, as a potential applicant, faced a similar situation in freshman first semester as well as during my "junior year"; ended up staying an extra semester to finish a double major). Nobody is gonna care about failing art history if you're gonna apply to math PhD programs. Even for the two B's you got, I doubt that those would be held so much against you; a B is still a respectable grade nonetheless.
Instead, focus on other parts of your application (esp your rec letters, research interests/SOP, and getting more research experience if possible). Remember that GPA/GRE are only **one** portion of your application. Nobody got into any PhD program simply because they had a perfect or near perfect GPA; PhD is about research and your potential to be a researcher is just as important, if not more important, for getting into a good PhD program. People have gotten into PhD programs with a 3.0-3.5 GPA, so no need to worry so much about GPA.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/04/30
| 692
| 3,100
|
<issue_start>username_0: I realize that I have some difficulty giving feedback to students when they have expected to have a good grade and/or they have invested a lot of time. My impression is that there is a trade-off between clearly pointing out the weaknesses of the students' paper and, on the other hand, motivating them to continue and making it clear that such feedback is part of the normal learning process. How can oral feedback be structured to ensure that both are possible?<issue_comment>username_1: From my perspective as a PHD student (the other side of the spectrum) I feel that there are some crucial aspects to giving helpful and encouraging feedback:
1. Give the student constructive criticism. Give them the feeling that you are supportive of what they did (regardless of quality) and that you are giving feedback to improve their work in the future. Make them feel safe. Speak about what could be done better **in the future** and not about what went wrong or what they "should have done".
2. Emphasize both the good and the suboptimal parts of their work. It is important to balance both positive and negative feedback.
3. Avoid words like "however" and "but". It is almost always discouraging to hear positive feedback followed by a "however". It (in my opinion) completely devalues what was said beforehand.
4. Check in if they understood your criticisms correctly to avoid misunderstandings.
I hope my answer is at least somewhat helpful to you, if not, you now have the possibility to practice and give me your feedback! :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Giving feedback only after the mark is closing the stable doors after the horse has bolted.
I focus instead on the unsaid part of this question:
Make a point of giving the students feedback long *before* the mark, and as early as possible. Adjust their expectation early and the relation between their effort, performance and what they can expect at the end. Show them how to adjust their efforts as to approach their expectations.
In many cases, the efforts will then be reflected in the outcome, and students won't be surprised when it is not good. In some happy cases, their expectations may even be exceeded.
Sadly, there is the case of high effort and still disappointing results; these are comparatively rare, but the most difficult to deal with and it's probably these that your question ultimately needs to focus on. Here the question is: did they make progress at all? If they did, I channel here the other response; encourage them to continue along this path and push further. Clearly things take longer for them, but have an effect.
If they didn't make progress at all, then there may be many reasons for that, temporary or long-term personal or health problems, or simply lacking of aptness for the topic. However, dealing with this is outside of your remit. The best you can do is giving them general advice for improvement in an empathetic way, or suggest whether there is some way they can continue their study without being held back by their deficits in the particular topic.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/30
| 649
| 2,907
|
<issue_start>username_0: In pure mathematics (please only answer for this field, as other areas are different), what is the ratio of PhD students finding a project on their own, versus working closely with their supervisor to find a project versus the supervisor giving their student a project?<issue_comment>username_1: From my perspective as a PHD student (the other side of the spectrum) I feel that there are some crucial aspects to giving helpful and encouraging feedback:
1. Give the student constructive criticism. Give them the feeling that you are supportive of what they did (regardless of quality) and that you are giving feedback to improve their work in the future. Make them feel safe. Speak about what could be done better **in the future** and not about what went wrong or what they "should have done".
2. Emphasize both the good and the suboptimal parts of their work. It is important to balance both positive and negative feedback.
3. Avoid words like "however" and "but". It is almost always discouraging to hear positive feedback followed by a "however". It (in my opinion) completely devalues what was said beforehand.
4. Check in if they understood your criticisms correctly to avoid misunderstandings.
I hope my answer is at least somewhat helpful to you, if not, you now have the possibility to practice and give me your feedback! :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Giving feedback only after the mark is closing the stable doors after the horse has bolted.
I focus instead on the unsaid part of this question:
Make a point of giving the students feedback long *before* the mark, and as early as possible. Adjust their expectation early and the relation between their effort, performance and what they can expect at the end. Show them how to adjust their efforts as to approach their expectations.
In many cases, the efforts will then be reflected in the outcome, and students won't be surprised when it is not good. In some happy cases, their expectations may even be exceeded.
Sadly, there is the case of high effort and still disappointing results; these are comparatively rare, but the most difficult to deal with and it's probably these that your question ultimately needs to focus on. Here the question is: did they make progress at all? If they did, I channel here the other response; encourage them to continue along this path and push further. Clearly things take longer for them, but have an effect.
If they didn't make progress at all, then there may be many reasons for that, temporary or long-term personal or health problems, or simply lacking of aptness for the topic. However, dealing with this is outside of your remit. The best you can do is giving them general advice for improvement in an empathetic way, or suggest whether there is some way they can continue their study without being held back by their deficits in the particular topic.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/04/30
| 5,348
| 21,034
|
<issue_start>username_0: In online classes, I've seen academic integrity cases skyrocket, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. It got me wondering if it is possible to create a grading scheme based around reward instead of punishment.
I acknowledge that ending cheating is probably unlikely, but I am not interested in that. I'm interested in reducing the temptation to cheat, or at least providing an incentive to not cheat. My idea is:
If I **fail to detect cheating** on tests and assignments, then the assessment's denominator is reduced by 5% or so. For instance, if my exam is worth 50 marks, and no cheating is detected, then the exam is marked out of 47 or something but still has 50 marks possible. This would apply to the whole class, and one detection of cheating would nullify it.
I have one major question: Is it ethical to peg the entire class's bonus on the potential bad actions of one person? (a sub question might be: do you imagine this would work?)
Note, I am obligated by department policy to hold a midterm and a final.
**Update**: I think "back to the drawing board" is appropriate here :p Thanks everyone!<issue_comment>username_1: Your suggestion has a bit of merit, but not as is. It makes it less likely that cheating would be reported. It makes it more likely that cheaters will have an incentive to get more creative.
In general, rewarding students for their good work is a good idea, but make sure that you think about all of the ramifications of a policy change.
As I said in a comment here, the problem is really that the world has changed rather dramatically and small changes at the margins are unlikely to provide proper adaptations. Rather the entire concept of *evaluation and assessment* should be reconsidered by the entire academic community. Assessment that either provides direct observation or doesn't depend on it at all is what is needed. We are on the cusp. Think deeper.
---
I worry that any scheme that makes the grade of one person dependent on the actions of another will have issues that need to be considered. Some would be unethical, others not. But some of the issues are subtle. Many of us use paired and group work to assess students. We realize that problems can then occur and need to be addressed in the overall policy.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The problem with your proposal is that, despite you framing it as a reward rather than a punishment, it is trivially easy to reframe it as a punishment instead of a reward:
*"The exam is graded out of 47 points with three bonus points, unless someone tries to cheat."*
is just as valid as:
*"The exam is graded out of 50 points but will only be graded out of 47 with three bonus points if no one cheats."*
And I am entirely certain that many disappointed students who aren't the ones involved in cheating will reframe it as negatively as possible. And no one likes collective punishment, because it isn't fair.
I've certainly noticed an uptick in cheating, as has my department. I've tried to be proactive, and it seems to have helped. Rather than just putting my academic integrity policy in the syllabus and talking about it on day 1, I involve it more directly. For example, my first homework always comes with a quiz on my classroom management portal, that they get full credit for just for completing. It asks questions in a way that I designed to make it more personal. Things like:
"One of my friends is struggling due to real-life reasons, and can't keep up with their work. Out of a desire to help, I share my work with them, and they copy it. What will happen?"
I've only completed one class with these sorts of warnings, and my sample size was small, but that class did better than my previous class.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This is nice thinking, but you may be overlooking some aspects. I'd like to first address the 'will it work' bit more than the ethical consideration, because unfortunately, I think it won't.
A cheating student is an individual actor, and the incentive is for a group. The group cannot prevail upon the individual not to cheat any more than you can; they have the same constraints as you. That eliminates them from the picture. (If it's a percentile grading system, the incentive is even lesser for the group). Now consider the individual cheater. Faced between the possibility of getting more marks by cheating and by availing your incentive, which one are they likely to choose? The incentive will be chosen only if it is significantly larger than the additional marks got by cheating. It's unlikely that you can offer such a large bonus. So there's little incentive for the offender as well.
Finally, for the ethics, the Blackstone formulation (better let ten guilty escape than one innocent suffer) would suggest that it's not advisable.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> I have one major question: Is it ethical to peg the entire class's bonus on the potential bad actions of one person? (a sub question might be: do you imagine this would work?)
>
>
>
It is exactly as ethical as allowing a student’s grade to be influenced by [the price of tea in China](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/price_of_tea_in_China).
Which is to say, obviously not.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: From a game theory standpoint, it makes little sense. If the cheater gets caught, they get 0 anyways. If they do not, they get a (presumably) better grade from cheating, plus potentially the "no cheater" bonus. The only incentive not to cheat is peer pressure, but it is not likely that other students will know who cheated, so this incentive is not very strong.
In addition, the incentive may be meaningless if the class is graded on a curve.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: *It got me wondering if it is possible to create a grading scheme based around reward instead of punishment.*
Yes. The way to do that is to stop grades being seen as the goal of education, and teach that the purpose of education is to *learn new skills*, not to get good grades. Tests are diagnostic only - getting a low score on a test only indicates a learning problem that gets you more attention and tuition to correct it, not adverse consequences. Getting a high score only lets you pass on to new material faster, learning more. The reward for honesty is to receive a better education tailored to your individual learning needs. The punishment for dishonesty is to be left in ignorance.
If you want honesty and accuracy, then you must reward *accurate* scores, not *high* scores.
The general phenomenon of cheating in tests, thus degrading student educational outcomes by motivating them to *hide* their difficulties rather than seek help, is an easily predictable consequence of Strathern's generalisation of [Goodhart's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law): *'When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure'*. And also, similarly, [Campbell's law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campbell%27s_law): *'The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.'* Or as Campbell put it in an educational context: *'Achievement tests may well be valuable indicators of general school achievement under conditions of normal teaching aimed at general competence. But when test scores become the goal of the teaching process, they both lose their value as indicators of educational status and distort the educational process in undesirable ways.'*. It's wired in to the system. That setting targets on grades on learning assignments does this has thus been known since the 1970s, and today there ought to be no excuse for academics involved in pedagogy not to know it. As such, ethically the collective blame and punishment for the predictable consequences should rather fall on the people who designed the system rather than the students.
It never does though.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: The concept doesn't work because it's not enough to build the peer pressure you want. If you failed everyone, it could work, but that's obviously not ok.
The theory is that everyone will accept the syllabus as a given frame and act influence their peers to provide benefits for themselves. However, cheating is a bigger and easier benefit using the same incentive. This creates a feeling of unfairness that can turn against you.
You are trying to create an *everyone vs the cheaters* mentality, but risking an *everyone vs the instructor* result. Gaming social dynamics isn't easy and prone to fail.
Consider alternatively something like removing the final exam out of 3 exams if no cheater has been caught in the first two exams. This hurts more while at the same time not creating unfair grading. You would need to have three exams in the past of course so that it doesn't sound like a punishment-exam. That's subject to the above problems, but still *feels* better somehow.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I am astonished that you would think this might be a good idea. But I am totally gobsmacked by the failure of the commenters (except one, so far) to condemn this in unequivocal terms. You can't punish me for what my classmate might have done! It doesn't matter whether your stupid idea is effective or not, what matters is that it is completely unfair.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Please do not do that.
When I was in school, I had several instructors devise schemes where students were incentivized to keep each-other in line.
The general idea was that if at least one student stole from a cookie jar, then all students in the class would be punished. Thus, the students would pressure each-other to not steal cookies.
The reality is that a student does not recognize the authority of another student.
Also, students have no incentive to allow other students to push them around.
Suppose that someone named Sarah and I are both students.
The teacher has decided that if Sarah does ***not*** do her homework, then I will receive a failing grade too!
Problem, there is nothing I can do to incentivize Sarah to work.
Sarah has decided she is not going to do the homework.
Sarah does not care about her grade.
If Sarah does not care about her own grade, then she really does not care about my grade.
Students who cheat on exams and/or don't do their share of the work on a group project tend to be selfish. That is, they care about their own grade, more than other people's grades (relatively speaking).
If Sarah is willing to get an F as her own grade, then she really does not care if I get an F on the assignment.
What on earth could I do to persuade Sarah to do her homework? The teacher has decided that I will get an F if Sarah does not turn in her homework?
About the worst I could do is yell at her; in which case, she would simply yell back.
Most students are not made of money. They cannot pay the other student $100 to do their homework.
Schemes in which teachers reward/punish student A based on student B's behavior always result in the same thing: students lie about their peers performance in order to save their own a$$.
For example, when I was in college, I took a course in software engineering. There was a group project. Our group was supposed to pretend that we were government contractors. For example, maybe the government wanted us to design and build a new cafeteria for soldiers, the project management plan states all kinds of things, like:
* how much money building the new cafeteria will require
* how much time building the new cafeteria will require
* how many soldiers can sit in the cafeteria simultaneously (maybe their is seating for 200 soldiers)
* a requirement that vegan options must be available
* expected throughput (soldiers served per minute)
* amount of refrigerator space required
* number of kitchen knives required. Initial number + number of new knives per year.
* amount of concrete required, amount of lumber required, etc...
* estimated air-conditioning bill for the cafeteria in the summertime.
* estimated heating costs for the cafeteria in the wintertime.
* etc....
Okay... so the project management plan was long document we had to turn in. One Chinese girl did nothing until less than 3 days before the due date. Our group had months, almost the entire semester, to work on the project.
I gave her a list of industry vocabulary words and asked if she could google each industry term and add a dictionary of terms to the project management plan. She did make one (sort of). I included definitions of the first 2 or 3 industry terms I sent to her. I did this to make it easy (reminiscent of seeing something like "the first row of the table is done for you. Please complete the rest of the table"). Her dictionary of specialized terms was less than 2 pages long when complete. She failed to conceive of any vocabulary words beyond those I had thought of off the top of my head and sent to her.
My college professor told us that each group in the class would be failed for this project if there was someone who did not do their fair share of the work. As such, we all decided Ms. do-nothing "was a very helpful person, and we were glad to have her on our team."
When you punish student **A**\* for student ***B***'s negligence, then student A suddenly has an incentive to "carry" student B.
As such, the amount cheating done by students goes up.
Normally, I have no incentive to do Sarah's homework for her. However, if my teacher tells me that I will receive an F if Sarah does badly on the homework, then I end up doing Sarah's homework. It's not difficult for me to solve the same problem many different ways. I can easily make "her" work look radically different than mine. My forgeries are undetectable.
Suppose I take the high road and refuse to do Sarah's work for her.
If Sarah is not inclined to do anything, then how would I persuade her work?
There is nothing I am allowed to do. I am given no leverage.
* I can't tweak her grades.
* I can't pay her money.
* I am not going to creepily follow her home at night while carrying in a baseball bat in a menacing way.
Students have no power over other students. I have no capacity to reward or punish her.
Suppose the government told me that I would go to prison if my neighbor cheated on their income taxes. Well... What authority do I have over my neighbor? Does the government let me impose fines? No. Does the government let me create tax incentives? No.
Am I allowed to arrest a person, like a police officer? No.
The only thing I really could do is do my neighbor's taxes for them.
Student A has nothing they can use to reward or punish student B if student B does not want to do their homework.
If student A's grades are based on student B's performance, then student B will usually fudge the results rather than go down with the sinking ship.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: No.
Grades are about the extent to which individual students have demonstrated attainment of the learning outcomes.
If student X's grade is dependent on whether students Y and Z colluded or cheated on their work, then you are not following that principle.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: This is a form of **collective punishment**.
All forms of collective punishment are deeply unethical. In fact, they've made it into a class of behaviours so unethical that they are banned by international treaty, and while the Geneva Convention does not apply to your classroom it should surely be a guide to you that your idea is massively awful and you should not do it.
I realise that you are framing this is a collective reward, but that is mere sophistry: the fact is that students that did not cheat are getting a lower mark because other students did. That is collective punishment.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_12: >
> got me wondering if it is possible to create a grading scheme based around reward instead of punishment.
>
>
>
IMNSHO, grades are overrated. Why not just consider a Pass/Fail scheme, or a Pass/Fail/Excellent scheme?
Also, this behavioristic approach is unbecoming; and as a former student I'd tell you it's kind of demeaning, even ignoring the morally problematic collective-punishment aspect of your specific scheme.
I doubt that, with the attitude you're describing - again, even without your collective punishment scheme - you are fostering an atmosphere conducive to learning for its own sake (or for the sake of utilizing the acquired knowledge and skills), as oppose to grade-chasing.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: **Beware unintended consequences.**
For simplicity, let us start out assuming a class size N = 100, with an even grade distribution from 1% to 100%, so each student gets a different likely test score. An unusual class, but we'll cover a more normal distribution later.
Let's also assume a passing grade G = 50%, and a penalty P of 10% for the whole class if anyone is caught cheating.
In our N students, M will cheat, and of those, C will be caught, so we can say:
```
100 = N >= M >= C >= 0
```
The M "dishonest" students are those who feel that their grade is likely to be below 50% unless they cheat. There is no loss to them if they cheat: they will fail either if they don't cheat, or if they are caught cheating. They will pass only if they cheat successfully.
So, around M = 50 students in a no-penalty setup will cheat. The chances of M = 0 are small enough that everyone must assume there is cheating going on.
Nobody who cheats believes they will be caught, so no M expects to be in C, even though, false-positives aside, all C are members of M. However, they all believe *other* cheaters are dumb enough to get caught, so none will have faith in C = 0. So students will have to plan assuming that the P = 10% penalty is applied.
But if you add in the P = 10% penalty, students now need to score G+P = 50+10 = 60%, which means M = 60 students will cheat.
**A class-wide cheating penalty means more students *must* cheat.**
This doesn't apply only to those close to the passing grade: it applies to *anyone* who feels there is a specific "boundary grade" they need to hit, but do not feel confident they can hit without cheating. So those at the top of the class, used to getting A- at worst, may fear getting a B+ with the penalty, and might find that unacceptable, and will cheat to avoid it.
It also applies to anyone who has a friend near a such boundary-grade, that they are willing to help out: helpers are considered cheaters just as copiers are.
---
There are less game-theory reasons this is likely to be true, too.
1. By punishing them for something they didn't do, you'll make them ask "if I'm being punished for the crime, why don't I *do* the crime?"
2. By drawing attention to it, and the fact that people in their class are doing it, you normalize it, making it seem "socially okay" and accepted, even expected.
3. You're giving students power over the well-being of other students. But if 2020 taught us anything, it's that some people just want to see the world burn. They want to screw other people over. It only takes one student to *deliberately* be caught cheating, to screw the whole class over. Why would you give the class troll that much power? Or that jilted ex who knows how much their ex really needed this grade to keep their scholarship. Or the kid who extorts money or favors from other students to *not* obviously cheat.
4. For the worst student, 1%-10% is still 0%, but the top score just dropped from 100% to 90%. Mr "bottom 1% of the class" just moved up to "bottom 10% of the class", and from 99% away from the best grade, to 90% away. His percentage may have got worse, but the position of his grade on the curve has improved.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: I think nobody has said this so far, so here it is:
**I find it astonishing that you find it necessary to reward the *minima moralia.***4
Before anything can be learned by the students, any assessment can be made, any grades handed out, this is the minimal, first and indispensable requirement: That the students, honestly, perform the work themselves that will determine pass or failure.1
Everything else comes after that.
This cannot be discussed, it is not open to debate and negotiation.2 It is the rock on which we stand.3
---
1 Of course, this work can take on arbitrary shapes including group work, internet research, street art or impromptu performances.
2 This does not imply that cheating students should in every case be harshly punished or expelled etc. Being caught cheating is another opportunity to learn in an educational setting. But it cannot be *tolerated.*
3 Part of the [scientific trouble](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis) we find ourselves in seems caused by an erosion of this foundation.
4 It actually gives me the creeps.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/30
| 1,405
| 5,866
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm pursuing my PhD (fourth year). My institute has the following rule:
>
> At least Two SCI papers is mandatory for awarding
> doctorate degree.
>
>
>
I tried for publishing an SCI paper recently and got rejection. Two reviewers provided comments, given below in concise manner, for rejection
>
> 1. Language is not good;
> 2. Proposed method is just a composition of couple of existing methods;
>
>
>
I am undergoing panic since I am in pre-final year of my doctorate degree.
But, I keep on asking colleagues and other friends in my academic network how to handle the situation and I categorized their suggestions in to two categories:
1. Majority of the people are saying that it is totally or mostly up to the *mindset of the reviewer(s)*. The selection of journal is wrong according to them. They are saying that I need to search for the new journal, accepting such papers, by improving the language alone. If I keep on trying like that, one day I will get acceptance.
2. One person is saying that since the core of the proposed method cannot be improved and the language alone can be improved. It is better to drop the idea of sending to multiple journals and need to try for totally new technique or method and developing a new paper and then sending it for review.
None of the the people giving advice has published in an SCI journal. They are just giving me a guidance.
Is it true that reviewer's mindset play a role? Is the guidance to resubmit the same paper (with improved language) to a different journal a good idea?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is it true that reviewer's mindset play a role?
>
>
>
I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "reviewer's mindset." The reviewer is just trying to decide whether your article is more worthy of being published than other articles that have been submitted. It is true that the process is a bit random; submitting the same paper to an equivalent journal might yield nicer reviewers who make a different decision. But this is unlikely: if a paper is rejected from one journal, it usually means that the paper either needs to be improved, or it needs to be submitted to a less selective journal (or both).
>
> Is the guidance to resubmit the same paper (with improved language) to a different journal a good idea?
>
>
>
Impossible to say without reading the paper, but resubmitting the same paper to a less selective or more relevant journal could indeed change the decision. But you should also consider whether it's possible to improve the paper.
>
> Language is not good
>
>
>
This is a very common problem. As a reviewer, I am shocked by the quality of the writing that established groups submit to reputable publishers. These problems range from basic English mechanics (understandable for non-native speakers, but still needs to be fixed) to basic manuscript construction problems (poor organization, haphazard presentation of background and method, ambiguous results with unclear figures, etc.)
Many students really learn how to write by iterating with their advisors 30+ times. This is a crucial skill; if your advisor is not helping you write up your results so that they are publishable, you may need to consider finding other sources for this guidance, and be prepared to completely rework the paper.
>
> Proposed method is just a composition of couple of existing methods
>
>
>
If this is true, it means that your paper is not very exciting; you combined some existing methods and got some unsurprising results. There is nothing wrong with this *per se*, but you will indeed need to select a less selective journal; top journals will prioritize more novel approaches with more exciting results.
Another possibility is that your paper is exciting, but it's written so poorly that the interesting bit is buried and your reviewers didn't understand the key point. If this is the case, revising the paper could address this objection.
>
> I am not getting a constructive guidance from mentor. And I am in an environment that none of the persons around me has an SCI journal till now including my mentor.
>
>
>
I think this is the real problem. Normally I would say that your advisor knows what to do, you just need to communicate better with them. But you say your advisor is themselves unable to publish in these journals (which is all the more confusing; how can your university expect their PhD students to achieve what their faculty cannot)? I'm afraid I do not have the solution, but I am concerned for you. Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I recognize the panic. Especially when pursuing your PhD. It may feel that too much depends on getting your work published.
I have had similar experiences and still got my work published. You will have to try again, and again. There are constructive editors and reviewers out there but it takes some time and effort to find them.
Publishing is to some extent a lottery and subject to many biases. I hate to say it but you may want to consider asking an established professor or researcher to join you as co-author (and improve your paper). A mentor who does not publish and does not have a reputation is not helpful.
Also get assistance with your language. I had reviewers who called work ‘sloppy’ because of 2 typo’s in 10.000 words. This was just nasty.
Look for SCI journals with lower rankings. MDPI does not have the best reputation but they are known to be less picky and more inclusive.
And do not panic. Writing publications is a skill to be learned and needs perseverance. Put yourself together and continue. This is what a PhD is about and most of us had similar experiences. We just do not talk about it openly because it feels like a personal failure. There is shame in talking about work being rejected. You are for sure not alone in this.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/04/30
| 1,098
| 4,575
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just completed my Ph.D. and have recently been offered a lecturer position in a university. The first day of classes is on August 23rd, and I am getting married abroad in Europe on August 21st. The university is not aware of this, and I am not exactly sure about what to do.
I am considering catching a flight the day after my wedding (Aug 22nd) and then going to work on the 23rd, although this is risky and very stressful. Perhaps I will be expected to be present the week before I begin working, which is out of the question for me.
Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to handle this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: The best way to handle a situation like this is to get in touch with your Head of Department / Director of Teaching in advance (perhaps, after you receive a formal offer) and discuss your situation. Make them aware of your wedding date (congratulations, btw!) and explain that you can arrive to your post right in time for your first class, but you would be grateful if your first lecture can be rescheduled to give you a bit more time. In many Universities it is customary for colleagues to step in for each other in case of sick leave or important family events (like wedding). It is much better to arrange a replacement / rescheduling in advance, rather than risk not showing (or showing not prepared) for your first class.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations on finishing your PhD, getting married, and getting hired as a lecturer, all at once!
Can you record the first lecture online? We've all been pretty used to online lately, so maybe you could start the class off this way. Apologize to the students, explain you're out of the country but everything will be normal for week two. You would probably need to clear this with your department first, but this seems like the best option if they'll allow it.
Barring that, has your school opened up the fall classes for student enrollment yet? If not, maybe you can shift the weekly schedule to get another day or two. I see August 23rd is a Monday - does that mean you teach M-W? If so, maybe you can switch the class to T-Th, for example.
Or if neither of those, are you teaching one section of a larger course, with other professors also teaching the same sections with standard curriculum? This often happens for early required classes that many students take every year. If that were the case, *maybe* you could ask one of your fellow instructors to cover your first class, because they will have prepared the exact same material already anyway. It's a little awkward since you're asking favors of people who don't know you, but it seems reasonable.
If none of those alternatives work, unfortunately, I think being back on the 22nd is your only option. A teaching schedule isn't flexible - students sign up well in advance in order to coordinate their schedules, and the semester itself starts on a university-wide schedule that everyone knows well in advance. You want to make a good, professional, first impression with the department and your students, and not taking responsibility for being there on the first day of class would be quite the opposite.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: ### Cancel your wedding and hold it locally instead.
In this time of global pandemic, international travel for trivial reasons should be avoided wherever possible, and weddings would be included in that. Travelling internationally to hold a wedding is simply selfish and irresponsible. As such, I would recommend that you simply cancel your European wedding and instead hold your wedding locally. If you have relatives in Europe who would be unable to come to a local wedding, stream it to them over the internet.
From an academic standpoint, this also means that you won't be stuck in quarantine for the first two weeks of term, and you'll actually be able to perform the full breadth of your duties during those two weeks.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> been offered a lecturer position
>
>
>
>
> how to handle this situation?
>
>
>
Do not sign the contract until you have an agreement that is satisfactory to your future spouse, yourself, and the person who supervises your teaching. Get the agreement in writing.
Signing the contract and then asking for changes would be extremely rude if this is the sort of situation where you have been hired to meet teaching needs.
Keep in mind that travel during a pandemic that is not essential is irresponsible, and will hurt your reputation.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/04/30
| 711
| 3,028
|
<issue_start>username_0: With advances in AI, it is becoming clear that students are using paraphrasing software/sites (spinbot, quillbot, rephraser, etc.). I wonder if there are any free tools that can detect semantic similarity for all submitted assignments? I tried several of the available websites and they failed to detect the paraphrased text.<issue_comment>username_1: You can try using Sentence-Bert, original paper here: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.10084>
Github link here: <https://github.com/UKPLab/sentence-transformers>
It is very easy to use since I had used that before and it took me just several minutes learning how to use it.
The usage is fairly simple, you generate embedding for each assignment, and compare the cosine similarity between each pair of assignments embeddings.
Then you can manually look at the ones that have very high cosine similarity.
The Github repository descriptions said: This framework provides an easy method to compute dense vector representations for sentences, paragraphs, and images. The models are based on transformer networks like BERT / RoBERTa / XLM-RoBERTa etc. and achieve state-of-the-art performance in various task. Text is embedding in vector space such that similar text is close and can efficiently be found using cosine similarity.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Although there may be free tools to try to "detect" essays that were written with the help of AI, I would not fully trust them and waste my time trying to find something that helps. Because, eventually, there will be another software that will be able to "fool" your software. This means you will have to find yet another software that can outperform the software that "fooled" your previous software.
AI products can be much better at a specific task than humans. There are so many examples where AI beats people at a task the people are the best at. For example, Google's AI beat the best Go (one of the most complicated board game) player in the world ([click here to watch the video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HCWBS6k8j0)).
Eventually most AI models are built in a way that they learn from humans. Initially they perform pretty poorly. They start to slowly get better and better until they reach a point where they can easily outperform humans.
The question is, how can we detect a robot that does (or will do soon) something as well as humans do (or potentially much better than humans)? Therefore, I think the problem should be solved in a different way (not involving another software that does the opposite). Because finding another software may only work temporarily, but not in the long run.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: [Paper Rater](https://www.paperrater.com/free_paper_grader) has a robust Artificial Intelligent Plagiarism Detection tool. **Please Note**: The free tool is suboptimal.
More on Paper Raters Artificial Intelligent Plagiarism Detection [here](https://www.paperrater.com/pricing) - you can see an example report.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/01
| 5,025
| 21,186
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently an Indian undergrad in physics in my final year. My area of interest has very strong groups at two institutes in my country, and I have both the options before me. But the story does not end here.
I have a friend who is a graduate student at an Ivy college in the US who has recently suggested that it would be *much* better to get into a PhD program in the US, because according to them
>
> even if the knowledge and research skill set developed could easily be the same between X,Y institutes and a top school in the US, to apply for academic positions in India, a PhD from the US has more *value*.
>
>
>
But many people I have talked to have told me that a PhD is not really about QS rankings or a country. It is about the quality of the work that you have done as well as how strong the corresponding research community is at your institute.
These two views are opposites of each other, and I am not sure how to proceed from here. I personally prefer to stay in my own country due to a number of reasons.
Any help is appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: While I was an Indian undergrad in mathematics, I was told similar things by my friends who were doing, or planning to do, their graduation at universities abroad. Specifically, they told me that:
* The top universities abroad are better than the top universities in India for graduate education.
* Even if I were to be admitted to a good university abroad whose graduate program is comparable to that of an Indian university, the university abroad will be more beneficial for two reasons.
1. Experiencing a different culture will broaden my perspective significantly, and help in my growth by opening my eyes to more possibilities.
2. I can build a larger pool of contacts at a university abroad than at an Indian university, and doing so is very important to gain further opportunities in academia.
3. Somewhat connected to the above points, one can expect more invited talks (and also given by more top researchers) at universities abroad than at Indian universities, and it not only stimulates ones growth by being exposed to diverse topics through such talks, but also gives more opportunities to build contacts with top researchers.
Of course, there is an underlying assumption in all of the above that it is meaningful to speak of the characteristics of "the average Indian university" and "the average university abroad". I preferred to read their advice as saying, "If you compare the opportunities at a university abroad versus an Indian university, assuming that you want to get into those universities and are fairly confident of being able to do so, then it's more likely than not that the university abroad offers the above advantages over the Indian university." Read like this, I think my friends offered a fair assessment of the advantages.
I still chose to pursue my graduate education in India, for the following reasons:
* I anticipated that my graduate education would be a difficult time for me, and I would need the support of my family to help me through it. If I were to be abroad, I would have a much more difficult time coping with the stress than if I were in India itself. There seemed to be little point in trading my mental health for more contacts and comparatively better future opportunities; after all, it's not like a graduate education in India dooms my future in academia.
And indeed, my graduate education started off on quite a rocky note, and the support I have received from my family has truly been invaluable.
* I anticipated that choosing a guide would not be an easy task. Not everyone who is a good researcher is also a good guide. Not everyone who can be a good guide is specifically a good fit for me. In short, I felt that gambling on my chances of finding the right fit for me at a university abroad is riskier than doing the same at an Indian university: the stakes are lower, the sunk cost (in case I fail to find a good match for me) is also lower, and hence my ability to try again at another institute (in case of failure at one institute) is also higher.
As it happens, I nearly failed my qualifying exams after I secured admission at an Indian university, and nearly signed up with a guide with whom I had spectacular incompatibility issues. Things have sorted themselves out now and I am happy to say that my work is progressing well, at last.
Furthermore, among my friends who pursued their graduate education abroad, some did struggle with their mental health and returned to India to get support from their family, some did fail to find a suitable guide and were forced to return home and start over in India, and some who pursued their graduate education in India also failed and started over in India. There are also those who succeeded, of course, but I just want to emphasise that it's not such a rare event to face these kind of difficulties that they can be easily neglected from the equation.
In your case, the final decision lies with you, of course. You need to decide how much weight you give to each relevant aspect. For me, the balance weighed in favour of staying back in India. For my friends who were more ambitious and also mentally stronger, the balance fell the other way. Neither path is absolutely right or wrong: you need to measure what is right for you, as best as you can perceive. Good luck!
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm going to preface this answer by noting that I am of Indian heritage myself, before the accusations of racism start.
Yes, a PhD from an American university is much more valuable. Even putting aside the issue of university rankings, the fact is that the United States is the world's only superpower and has been largely responsible for most of the world's scientific and technological advancements over the past century. This is not true of India, which is widely perceived as a "third-world country" and does not have the same academic reputation internationally. You might argue that this is offensive, or unfair to to the many excellent Indian researchers, but it's the way it is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You are missing an important angle. Where do you want to go after your PhD?
In German there is the word "Stallgeruch" which roughly translates to "the smell of the own stable". Don't underestimate this. If you decide that you want to have a job or academic future at place X, doing your PhD at or near X provides you with a network near X (greater probability of knowing someone who knows someone at X), knowledge of local quirks at X and so on. People at X will be able to judge better how good your tutor, department, etc was.
Overall, there are many advantages of simply focussing on the place you want to spend the years after your PhD. Professional and personal advantages.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I have an engineering degree from one of the top 20 colleges in India and my observation has been that my Professors were usually those who got Phd from IITs (most elite colleges in India). So when you say "more academic value", it depends on what you mean exactly. If it is teaching job, then what matters is also which college in India grants you that PhD. Not being a PhD myself, I can read and digest some well known academic papers produced by USA researchers in my area of work, but writings from some of my own professors were rather cryptic and I doubt whether anyone read them.
But your question is largely hypothetical - if you are assuming that the research skill gained in India will be the "same". I am not prejudiced and also admit that I am talking based on limited sample set which I have, but I do not have very high opinion based on my *personal experience* , but I doubt whether you gain the same skills just like that.
Also the value of PhD in India is somewhat tarnished by the cottage industry which is writing thesis for money etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: **About me:** I'm a member of the hiring public. I've worked 35 years in a multination company with a significant presence in India, and a heavy dependence on technology.
**What is *Value*?** If "value" is measured in terms of what doors it opens, then you may open more doors worldwide with a US degree, provided it is from a more recognized university. This is merely a matter of people taking mental shortcuts, to rely on more known commodities (MIT vs. unfamiliar school X), and has nothing to do with actual education quality. However, within India, the value of a degree from a well-reputed university or college may well be of comparable value, simply because that recognition bias is less of a factor.
**Worth to Employer.** In my company, we have many outstanding native Indian engineers working in our Indian arm, most of whom I believe earned degrees within India. They are bright, driven, professional, and can talk tech with the best of us. Often, they deliver some of the best technical insights and process developments in our company. This trend became particularly noticeable somewhere around 2000, give or take a few years, and has been building since.
**Pride.** If your essential question is about self-respect, then hold your head high, and focus on your work. Once in a career, the quality of your work and shared insights are all anyone every cares about. My degree was from a state university with only modest name recognition, yet I have thrived and my technical contributions have earned wide respect, simply because I asked good questions, worked hard, collaborated well with others, and made the business goal my personal goal. No one cares who issued my degree.
**Foot in the Door.** An important caveat here is the word *now*: "No one cares who issued my degree, *now*." *Before* I was hired, they needed to filter applicants somehow, and at that stage, yes, for lack of any better sorting information, they *did* consider my college. But they looked about equally at other characteristics that they felt made an important fit to the job and to their corporate culture (things like work experience while in school, as a measure of how self-driven one is), and of course how well you interact in an interview. For every entry-level job with every company, there is a corporate culture that impacts their hiring preferences. These are impossible to predict as an applicant. So, just present yourself honestly (& positively), and realize that if they pass on you, you may well have passed on them too, if you fully knew them.
**Paying Your Dues.** It seems common today for new adults to expect to rise meteorically to the top, as if the world were a table set for them *alone* to come dine, and everyone else is just supporting cast. At least in the US, and perhaps the West in general. Such unrealistic expectations put undue pressure on ourselves. One beauty in accepting "paying our dues," is that it sharply reduces the relevance of one's school. When my company hires a mid-career engineer or scientist, we look mostly at their work experience, and at most only in passing at their school.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: A good rule of thumb is for you to:
1. Find people who are where you would want to be in X years.
2. See what they did to get there (which includes where they got their Ph.D.).
When I decided that I want a career in academic research, I saw that nearly every prominent academic researcher in my country either got their Ph.D. in the U.S., or did a post-doc or other type of research position in the U.S. after their PhD. Because of that (along with other reasons) I chose to get a PhD program in the US. The same might be true for you, or it might not.
In any case, what is sure is that QS ratings don't matter at all for graduate education. Having a well-known advisor, though, might matter. The two are correlated but not the same (sometimes famous researchers work in relatively little-known institutions). Having a well-known advisor is beneficial not necessarily because of recognition, but also because famous researchers can usually connect you with other opportunities. That being said, always chose an advisor that is a good fit for you (personally) over an advisor who is better known but not compatible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Like the others, I have an Indian background and hope my answer doesn't come across as being racist towards people with my own ethnicity.
In my area of research (quantum chemistry) there is ***one*** professor working in India who is [a member of the most prestigious academy in our field](https://www.iaqms.org/members.php) and that is [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debashis_Mukherjee). There's over over 300 people that have been elected into this academy, and this includes pretty much all the most famous people in the field, perhaps the earliest born being the famous [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie) who you'll know from high school science class for the concept of wave-particle duality. There's a few dozen USA professors in that list, and if you do your PhD in USA you're more likely to be supervised by one of them or someone that has worked very closely with them or has been trained under one of them. **If you do your PhD in India, your chances of being trained by one of the top people in this field during your PhD is essentially 0.**
In India you'll also unlikely get sufficient funds to attend the most valuable conferences in the research field, as despite the population being over 1 billion, I can't recall ever seeing a grad student from India attend a conference that I went to except for perhaps one in Singapore in 2014 but I can barely remember him (he wasn't invited to give a talk, and it wasn't a big conference anyway). During my PhD, apart from domestic conferences I went to at least one conference involving an international flight, in each academic year except for the first one, and the price was no issue at all since the financial stipend was far greater than the cost of flying around the world and paying the hefty conference fees. **I have barely even seen professors from Indian institutions attending conferences outside of India, but from the US I see people at all levels, which makes sense since grad students in USA will often have a higher salary than than even the top-level professors in India.**
Back to what you said in your question:
>
> "even if the knowledge and research skill set developed could easily be the same"
>
>
>
Attending major conferences in my research field (which means spending a lot of money, by Indian standards, because it requires traveling to other countries and living in those more-expensive countries for about a week) ***is an extremely important part of my education in the field.*** Not only did I learn far more from conferences than I could at my own institution (despite my PhD being from Oxford, which is not in USA but everything I'm saying essentially applies to UK too), and not only did it give me perspective about how much ***other people really care*** or don't care about certain research areas I might have considered to explore, but I ***met the people all over the world who later helped me get jobs*** and the people with whom I later ***collaborated on publications*** during which I learned more from other experts than I could at my own institution.
I am speaking from experience in my field as a quantum chemist (but have also worked extensively in quantum computing, spectroscopy, mathematics, computational biology and other fields too), but I can say that it's extremely rare for you to be able to get the ***same knowledge and research skill*** at an institute in India compared to USA, because the most knowledgeable and research-wise professors tend to be in countries like USA where the salaries are far higher and the finances needed to travel to conferences, purchase equipment needed to conduct world-class research, and to hire the best students, is far more plentiful than in India. Apart from the quality of your mentors (professors), the experience of attending conferences needs to be considered too. It is unlikely that you'll get the same quality of knowledge and research experience in India, even if your supervisor is one of the best in the world, if you can't attend international conferences.
In the rare case, in which you do get the same "quality" of education, the degree from USA from an equally prestigious institution still does get taken more seriously by many people, as unfortunate as this may be.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm sure a famous university offers more opportunities during your PhD, a better-valued degree and maybe a better network. But if you consider a career in the academic field, you may consider publications first (sorry if you already did or if it's too obvious for you).
If you get in a lab or team that used to publish a lot, have the students participate in publications and then let them lead their own publications, you might get a very competitive edge over other PhD students who are expected to work and publish without the support of their advisors and teams. Take a look on the publication record of the last PhD students in the team you expect to join, it could be a reasonable indicator of how many (good) publications you can expect to author during your PhD.
Some teams with a good publication record in the field tend to be more proficient, more likely to get a competitive edge over the other teams, and considered more seriously than younger / rising teams in the same field when submitting their publications. Your publications will be co-authored and strongly reviewed by other members of your host team, so that really matters.
For me it is a better criterion than a team chosen for the prestige of the University it belongs to. I've seen people with degrees in top-notch Universities but almost no publications in journals; they can't expect academic positions AFAIK. Depending on their other achievements (patents, etc), it can be an impediment even for a technical job.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: To answer your question - industries where there are many resources from India are better going to appreciate your Indian education.
Otherwise - it's more important that you're able to demonstrate that you're really strong in the skillset you already have.
If you know that you are interested in nuclear physics or particle physics there might be unforeseen security clearance issues.
What do you want to do?
1. If you'd like to stay in India and participate in nuclear engineering or weapons system engineering - getting a Phd or Masters in India is the way to go.
2. If you'd like to use your Physics degree as a stepping stone to a career path outside of Physics. You will have a milestone goal when you graduate. You don't need a Phd or Masters in Physics. You need a supplemental credential.
3. If you have the finances to study on your own, and if you love something - say Mathematica or repairing equipment, or if there was something in chemistry that appealed to you take some time off and master what it is you love. That's what Einstein did. Not that you'll end up like he did. But single subject matter experts have a way of getting noticed. You'd be surprised the deals you can get on old lab equipment.
As to the average American. The average American can't name three Indian cites - and hasn't a clue as to what having a degree in Physics from an Indian university means.
At best they think this guy can converse about atomic physics, optics and E&M.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: A point I don't think has been made yet - value, perceived or otherwise, is not always allowed to be considered when hiring, depending on where you wish to use that PhD qualification. I can give a UK academic hiring perspective.
As part of equality, diversity and inclusion measures hirers are required not to subjectively judge the value of a qualification, but to treat qualifications equally, irrespective of accrediting institution or nation.
The hiring university may check the institution is able to accredit a particular qualification, and may decide what a qualification is equivalent to if from a different academic system, and request transcripts or similar to judge this.
When it comes to PhDs and higher academic posts though, the hiring will consider relevant experience and academic output as well as qualifications. These may be more readily available through globally higher ranked institutions and they may be more subjectively judged. That said, hirers are encourage to consider the benefits and limitations a particular candidate had that might affect these. Just because a candidate has not had the financial means to undertake unpaid internships to gain experience does not mean they cannot excel if given the opportunity.
That's the theory at least. I suspect you may still have an easier time if hirers didn't have to make these considerations, and having the network contacts can help. It's something I am glad to see being challenged more now in any case.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/01
| 4,833
| 20,417
|
<issue_start>username_0: My research is in mathematics.
I have developed an interesting quantity X. Combined with other quantity Y, I can solve a certain problem.
However,
1. I don't know if the problem itself is important or not.
2. It needs to combined with other tools to work.
Can I still publish my idea?<issue_comment>username_1: While I was an Indian undergrad in mathematics, I was told similar things by my friends who were doing, or planning to do, their graduation at universities abroad. Specifically, they told me that:
* The top universities abroad are better than the top universities in India for graduate education.
* Even if I were to be admitted to a good university abroad whose graduate program is comparable to that of an Indian university, the university abroad will be more beneficial for two reasons.
1. Experiencing a different culture will broaden my perspective significantly, and help in my growth by opening my eyes to more possibilities.
2. I can build a larger pool of contacts at a university abroad than at an Indian university, and doing so is very important to gain further opportunities in academia.
3. Somewhat connected to the above points, one can expect more invited talks (and also given by more top researchers) at universities abroad than at Indian universities, and it not only stimulates ones growth by being exposed to diverse topics through such talks, but also gives more opportunities to build contacts with top researchers.
Of course, there is an underlying assumption in all of the above that it is meaningful to speak of the characteristics of "the average Indian university" and "the average university abroad". I preferred to read their advice as saying, "If you compare the opportunities at a university abroad versus an Indian university, assuming that you want to get into those universities and are fairly confident of being able to do so, then it's more likely than not that the university abroad offers the above advantages over the Indian university." Read like this, I think my friends offered a fair assessment of the advantages.
I still chose to pursue my graduate education in India, for the following reasons:
* I anticipated that my graduate education would be a difficult time for me, and I would need the support of my family to help me through it. If I were to be abroad, I would have a much more difficult time coping with the stress than if I were in India itself. There seemed to be little point in trading my mental health for more contacts and comparatively better future opportunities; after all, it's not like a graduate education in India dooms my future in academia.
And indeed, my graduate education started off on quite a rocky note, and the support I have received from my family has truly been invaluable.
* I anticipated that choosing a guide would not be an easy task. Not everyone who is a good researcher is also a good guide. Not everyone who can be a good guide is specifically a good fit for me. In short, I felt that gambling on my chances of finding the right fit for me at a university abroad is riskier than doing the same at an Indian university: the stakes are lower, the sunk cost (in case I fail to find a good match for me) is also lower, and hence my ability to try again at another institute (in case of failure at one institute) is also higher.
As it happens, I nearly failed my qualifying exams after I secured admission at an Indian university, and nearly signed up with a guide with whom I had spectacular incompatibility issues. Things have sorted themselves out now and I am happy to say that my work is progressing well, at last.
Furthermore, among my friends who pursued their graduate education abroad, some did struggle with their mental health and returned to India to get support from their family, some did fail to find a suitable guide and were forced to return home and start over in India, and some who pursued their graduate education in India also failed and started over in India. There are also those who succeeded, of course, but I just want to emphasise that it's not such a rare event to face these kind of difficulties that they can be easily neglected from the equation.
In your case, the final decision lies with you, of course. You need to decide how much weight you give to each relevant aspect. For me, the balance weighed in favour of staying back in India. For my friends who were more ambitious and also mentally stronger, the balance fell the other way. Neither path is absolutely right or wrong: you need to measure what is right for you, as best as you can perceive. Good luck!
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm going to preface this answer by noting that I am of Indian heritage myself, before the accusations of racism start.
Yes, a PhD from an American university is much more valuable. Even putting aside the issue of university rankings, the fact is that the United States is the world's only superpower and has been largely responsible for most of the world's scientific and technological advancements over the past century. This is not true of India, which is widely perceived as a "third-world country" and does not have the same academic reputation internationally. You might argue that this is offensive, or unfair to to the many excellent Indian researchers, but it's the way it is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You are missing an important angle. Where do you want to go after your PhD?
In German there is the word "Stallgeruch" which roughly translates to "the smell of the own stable". Don't underestimate this. If you decide that you want to have a job or academic future at place X, doing your PhD at or near X provides you with a network near X (greater probability of knowing someone who knows someone at X), knowledge of local quirks at X and so on. People at X will be able to judge better how good your tutor, department, etc was.
Overall, there are many advantages of simply focussing on the place you want to spend the years after your PhD. Professional and personal advantages.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I have an engineering degree from one of the top 20 colleges in India and my observation has been that my Professors were usually those who got Phd from IITs (most elite colleges in India). So when you say "more academic value", it depends on what you mean exactly. If it is teaching job, then what matters is also which college in India grants you that PhD. Not being a PhD myself, I can read and digest some well known academic papers produced by USA researchers in my area of work, but writings from some of my own professors were rather cryptic and I doubt whether anyone read them.
But your question is largely hypothetical - if you are assuming that the research skill gained in India will be the "same". I am not prejudiced and also admit that I am talking based on limited sample set which I have, but I do not have very high opinion based on my *personal experience* , but I doubt whether you gain the same skills just like that.
Also the value of PhD in India is somewhat tarnished by the cottage industry which is writing thesis for money etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: **About me:** I'm a member of the hiring public. I've worked 35 years in a multination company with a significant presence in India, and a heavy dependence on technology.
**What is *Value*?** If "value" is measured in terms of what doors it opens, then you may open more doors worldwide with a US degree, provided it is from a more recognized university. This is merely a matter of people taking mental shortcuts, to rely on more known commodities (MIT vs. unfamiliar school X), and has nothing to do with actual education quality. However, within India, the value of a degree from a well-reputed university or college may well be of comparable value, simply because that recognition bias is less of a factor.
**Worth to Employer.** In my company, we have many outstanding native Indian engineers working in our Indian arm, most of whom I believe earned degrees within India. They are bright, driven, professional, and can talk tech with the best of us. Often, they deliver some of the best technical insights and process developments in our company. This trend became particularly noticeable somewhere around 2000, give or take a few years, and has been building since.
**Pride.** If your essential question is about self-respect, then hold your head high, and focus on your work. Once in a career, the quality of your work and shared insights are all anyone every cares about. My degree was from a state university with only modest name recognition, yet I have thrived and my technical contributions have earned wide respect, simply because I asked good questions, worked hard, collaborated well with others, and made the business goal my personal goal. No one cares who issued my degree.
**Foot in the Door.** An important caveat here is the word *now*: "No one cares who issued my degree, *now*." *Before* I was hired, they needed to filter applicants somehow, and at that stage, yes, for lack of any better sorting information, they *did* consider my college. But they looked about equally at other characteristics that they felt made an important fit to the job and to their corporate culture (things like work experience while in school, as a measure of how self-driven one is), and of course how well you interact in an interview. For every entry-level job with every company, there is a corporate culture that impacts their hiring preferences. These are impossible to predict as an applicant. So, just present yourself honestly (& positively), and realize that if they pass on you, you may well have passed on them too, if you fully knew them.
**Paying Your Dues.** It seems common today for new adults to expect to rise meteorically to the top, as if the world were a table set for them *alone* to come dine, and everyone else is just supporting cast. At least in the US, and perhaps the West in general. Such unrealistic expectations put undue pressure on ourselves. One beauty in accepting "paying our dues," is that it sharply reduces the relevance of one's school. When my company hires a mid-career engineer or scientist, we look mostly at their work experience, and at most only in passing at their school.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: A good rule of thumb is for you to:
1. Find people who are where you would want to be in X years.
2. See what they did to get there (which includes where they got their Ph.D.).
When I decided that I want a career in academic research, I saw that nearly every prominent academic researcher in my country either got their Ph.D. in the U.S., or did a post-doc or other type of research position in the U.S. after their PhD. Because of that (along with other reasons) I chose to get a PhD program in the US. The same might be true for you, or it might not.
In any case, what is sure is that QS ratings don't matter at all for graduate education. Having a well-known advisor, though, might matter. The two are correlated but not the same (sometimes famous researchers work in relatively little-known institutions). Having a well-known advisor is beneficial not necessarily because of recognition, but also because famous researchers can usually connect you with other opportunities. That being said, always chose an advisor that is a good fit for you (personally) over an advisor who is better known but not compatible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Like the others, I have an Indian background and hope my answer doesn't come across as being racist towards people with my own ethnicity.
In my area of research (quantum chemistry) there is ***one*** professor working in India who is [a member of the most prestigious academy in our field](https://www.iaqms.org/members.php) and that is [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debashis_Mukherjee). There's over over 300 people that have been elected into this academy, and this includes pretty much all the most famous people in the field, perhaps the earliest born being the famous [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_de_Broglie) who you'll know from high school science class for the concept of wave-particle duality. There's a few dozen USA professors in that list, and if you do your PhD in USA you're more likely to be supervised by one of them or someone that has worked very closely with them or has been trained under one of them. **If you do your PhD in India, your chances of being trained by one of the top people in this field during your PhD is essentially 0.**
In India you'll also unlikely get sufficient funds to attend the most valuable conferences in the research field, as despite the population being over 1 billion, I can't recall ever seeing a grad student from India attend a conference that I went to except for perhaps one in Singapore in 2014 but I can barely remember him (he wasn't invited to give a talk, and it wasn't a big conference anyway). During my PhD, apart from domestic conferences I went to at least one conference involving an international flight, in each academic year except for the first one, and the price was no issue at all since the financial stipend was far greater than the cost of flying around the world and paying the hefty conference fees. **I have barely even seen professors from Indian institutions attending conferences outside of India, but from the US I see people at all levels, which makes sense since grad students in USA will often have a higher salary than than even the top-level professors in India.**
Back to what you said in your question:
>
> "even if the knowledge and research skill set developed could easily be the same"
>
>
>
Attending major conferences in my research field (which means spending a lot of money, by Indian standards, because it requires traveling to other countries and living in those more-expensive countries for about a week) ***is an extremely important part of my education in the field.*** Not only did I learn far more from conferences than I could at my own institution (despite my PhD being from Oxford, which is not in USA but everything I'm saying essentially applies to UK too), and not only did it give me perspective about how much ***other people really care*** or don't care about certain research areas I might have considered to explore, but I ***met the people all over the world who later helped me get jobs*** and the people with whom I later ***collaborated on publications*** during which I learned more from other experts than I could at my own institution.
I am speaking from experience in my field as a quantum chemist (but have also worked extensively in quantum computing, spectroscopy, mathematics, computational biology and other fields too), but I can say that it's extremely rare for you to be able to get the ***same knowledge and research skill*** at an institute in India compared to USA, because the most knowledgeable and research-wise professors tend to be in countries like USA where the salaries are far higher and the finances needed to travel to conferences, purchase equipment needed to conduct world-class research, and to hire the best students, is far more plentiful than in India. Apart from the quality of your mentors (professors), the experience of attending conferences needs to be considered too. It is unlikely that you'll get the same quality of knowledge and research experience in India, even if your supervisor is one of the best in the world, if you can't attend international conferences.
In the rare case, in which you do get the same "quality" of education, the degree from USA from an equally prestigious institution still does get taken more seriously by many people, as unfortunate as this may be.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm sure a famous university offers more opportunities during your PhD, a better-valued degree and maybe a better network. But if you consider a career in the academic field, you may consider publications first (sorry if you already did or if it's too obvious for you).
If you get in a lab or team that used to publish a lot, have the students participate in publications and then let them lead their own publications, you might get a very competitive edge over other PhD students who are expected to work and publish without the support of their advisors and teams. Take a look on the publication record of the last PhD students in the team you expect to join, it could be a reasonable indicator of how many (good) publications you can expect to author during your PhD.
Some teams with a good publication record in the field tend to be more proficient, more likely to get a competitive edge over the other teams, and considered more seriously than younger / rising teams in the same field when submitting their publications. Your publications will be co-authored and strongly reviewed by other members of your host team, so that really matters.
For me it is a better criterion than a team chosen for the prestige of the University it belongs to. I've seen people with degrees in top-notch Universities but almost no publications in journals; they can't expect academic positions AFAIK. Depending on their other achievements (patents, etc), it can be an impediment even for a technical job.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: To answer your question - industries where there are many resources from India are better going to appreciate your Indian education.
Otherwise - it's more important that you're able to demonstrate that you're really strong in the skillset you already have.
If you know that you are interested in nuclear physics or particle physics there might be unforeseen security clearance issues.
What do you want to do?
1. If you'd like to stay in India and participate in nuclear engineering or weapons system engineering - getting a Phd or Masters in India is the way to go.
2. If you'd like to use your Physics degree as a stepping stone to a career path outside of Physics. You will have a milestone goal when you graduate. You don't need a Phd or Masters in Physics. You need a supplemental credential.
3. If you have the finances to study on your own, and if you love something - say Mathematica or repairing equipment, or if there was something in chemistry that appealed to you take some time off and master what it is you love. That's what Einstein did. Not that you'll end up like he did. But single subject matter experts have a way of getting noticed. You'd be surprised the deals you can get on old lab equipment.
As to the average American. The average American can't name three Indian cites - and hasn't a clue as to what having a degree in Physics from an Indian university means.
At best they think this guy can converse about atomic physics, optics and E&M.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: A point I don't think has been made yet - value, perceived or otherwise, is not always allowed to be considered when hiring, depending on where you wish to use that PhD qualification. I can give a UK academic hiring perspective.
As part of equality, diversity and inclusion measures hirers are required not to subjectively judge the value of a qualification, but to treat qualifications equally, irrespective of accrediting institution or nation.
The hiring university may check the institution is able to accredit a particular qualification, and may decide what a qualification is equivalent to if from a different academic system, and request transcripts or similar to judge this.
When it comes to PhDs and higher academic posts though, the hiring will consider relevant experience and academic output as well as qualifications. These may be more readily available through globally higher ranked institutions and they may be more subjectively judged. That said, hirers are encourage to consider the benefits and limitations a particular candidate had that might affect these. Just because a candidate has not had the financial means to undertake unpaid internships to gain experience does not mean they cannot excel if given the opportunity.
That's the theory at least. I suspect you may still have an easier time if hirers didn't have to make these considerations, and having the network contacts can help. It's something I am glad to see being challenged more now in any case.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/01
| 5,268
| 22,347
|
<issue_start>username_0: Per definition, grading by a curve usually means that the students are assigned grades based on the statistical distribution of the test/exam results. No matter what, say 20% of students will always fail, and only say 10% will get a perfect mark.
I see a number of serious problems with this, and I fail to see anything in favor. In my view, for a fair system, the following are necessary; and neither are fulfilled by grading by curve:
1. A test/exam should have clear and absolute rules and requirements. **Here, the students do not know what are the exact requirements to get the result they desire**, as the point limits are, obviously, only known after the test/exam.
2. The grade of the test should directly correspond to how much of the course material did the student learn and understand. The fact that the same ratio of comprehended material can give an A in one year, then a C in the next year, tells that **the requirements of the course itself are also very unclear**.
3. Similarly, the grade should directly and absolutely reflect the knowledge of the student. An A+ should worth the same every time in the same test. But here, the grade only reflects the student's knowledge relative to class members. **It can't be correlated to the amount of learned knowledge.**
4. The grade should only be influenced by factors under the direct influence of the student. Here, the mark depends on factors like how "bright" are the other students, how much effort they put into preparation, and even on whether they cheated. Hence, **the student's mark is influenced by circumstances completely outside of his control, and unrelated to his knowledge.**
5. No matter the collective results, a given number of students will always inevitably fail. If almost everyone is a genius, there will be the same number of failures as if everyone did poorly. Good students may fail, and bad students may pass. In a similar way as the point before, a **student shouldn't be faced with the negative, possibly serious, consequences of failing, just because by chance there were a lot of very bright students in the class.**
6. Also, **it creates and encourages an unhealthy and harmful class dynamic**. Ideally, the students help each other in preparation. If an otherwise smart student doesn't understand some part and is roadblocked, others would explain. If a student missed a class due to valid reasons, classmates help to give and explain the missed material. But learning by curve creates an artificial race situation, where the students are actively harming themselves by helping others. Decimating the collective amount of obtained knowledge, this goes against the very spirit of education.
All these problems, and I'm struggling to come up with *any* argument in favor of grading by curve. In fact, I see only two cases where it may be used, and both of them are a fault of administration:
1. The department expects an exact number of students to pass the course. This is against the spirit of education IMO. If a student is good enough, he should pass. If not, he shouldn't. Regardless of others.
2. The responsible teacher failed to set exact, absolute, and clear requirements, and/or is lazy or unable to do so. Because of his fault, the students are exposed to an unfair grading system.
Am I missing something here? **Are there any objective arguments in favour of grading by curve, and what are these? If not, or they are weak, what are the reasons it's still used, apparently widely?**<issue_comment>username_1: Check out the four publicly available Physics GRE practice exams.
* [8677](https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/ugs/livesite/greStuff/exam_GR8677.pdf)
* [9277](https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/ugs/livesite/greStuff/exam_GR9277.pdf)
* [9677](https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/ugs/livesite/greStuff/exam_GR9677.pdf)
* [0177](https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/physics/ugs/livesite/greStuff/exam_GR0177.pdf)
ETS have provided the % of students who get individual questions right. If you examine that statistic, it should be clear that two of the four tests are relatively hard because there were more questions which few students got right, and one of the four is noticeably harder still.
ETS got around the different difficulties by grading on a curve. To score 990 (the maximum score) in these exams, you need to get 84/100, 76/100, 67/100, and 85/100 respectively.
If you don't grade on a curve, how do you propose to accommodate the varying test difficulty? You could tell the students beforehand "to get 990 in these exams you need to score 85/100", and then 0% of the students in three of the four years will score 990. That makes the exam useless as a standardized test.
Some responses to your arguments as well:
* The exact requirements are clear: answer as many questions correctly as you can. This is the case regardless of how the exam is graded.
* The grade *can* be correlated to the amount of learned damage. If you know more you get a higher grade (for that class). Comparing students between different classes doesn't work, but then it doesn't work without curved grading either, as you can see from the Physics GRE practice exams. You can't easily compare students who took different exams.
* Curved grading usually sets the top grade; it doesn't say "10% of students get A's and 10% of students get F's". Hence curved grading does not *a priori* cause students to fail if there are lots of bright students in the class. For the same reason it doesn't *a priori* cause student vs. student competition.
* Curved grading eliminates grade inflation. It handles both "exam too easy, everyone getting A" and "exam too difficult, everyone failing" situations. This maintains value for the grade, since you can reasonably e.g. say someone who fails did not understand the material as opposed to simply had a very difficult exam.
**Edit**: here's a link to [an article](https://blog.nus.edu.sg/provost/2012/01/20/the-bell-curve/) explaining how curved grading is implemented in practice. It also explains why curved grading is used. Relevant part of the article is:
>
> Setting such an exam [for a large group of students] is, by no means, easy. Pitch it tough, most students will fail. Set it too easy, and many will score very high grades, and the resulting scores are hardly differentiated.
>
>
> Differentiation is necessary for CAP purposes, and for Honours classification, and these are here to stay for the foreseeable future. Most if not all major universities have variants of degree classes or GPA scores. And because of the need for differentiation, many institutions from North America to Asia, use the bell curve as a mechanism to moderate marks.
>
>
> Module requirements may encompass different modes of assessment such as tutorial presentations, laboratory reports, projects, essays, as well as mid-term and final examinations. Grading may be based on absolute performance, relative performance, or a combination of the two. Higher-level modules with small enrolments typically grade a student based on his absolute performance; larger lower-level modules take into account a student’s performance vis-à-vis the other students in the same module. Where necessary, the final grade which a student receives for a module may be subject to moderation.
>
>
> One important reason for grade moderation is that examiners come from diverse academic backgrounds and may be accustomed to different marking regimes. While we do make every effort to make sure modules are designed with clear learning outcomes, and professors are responsible to ensure their exams are pitched at the right level, grade moderation will prevent grade inflation or deflation, and helps to achieve consistency in assessment grading across modules.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with you for two types of courses:
* Very small classes with fewer than, say, ten students. It is very possible that these students all deserve As or Fs and we should not try to impose a bell curve where there is none.
* Very large classes like calculus I and physics I, particularly when there are multiple sections of each class. These classes are taught so often that it is very possible to design a sensible, static "absolute" grading scheme. Such a scheme will also give highest grades to the students who know the most, without regard to their instructors' competence or peers' ability (among the other advantages you list).
**But for classes that do not fall in either of these categories, I submit that "curving" and setting "absolute" standards are just two ways of framing the same practice (and "curving" is more honest).** It is a statistical reality that most medium-sized and large courses have students that master, partially master, and fail to master the material, and the instructor naturally wants the grade distribution to reflect this. So "absolute grades" in this case are somewhat disingenuous -- if everyone is failing or getting an A at midterm, for example, the instructor is likely to make some changes (e.g., making the final exam easier or harder than anticipated) in order to force the desired histogram. In this regard, explicitly curving is much more transparent; we are simply admitting that we will make changes as needed to ensure the desired curve. Further, even "curving" does leave some discretion to the instructor: if I feel that I have a great group of students that has learned a lot and is working hard, I might curve such that the average is a B+ rather than a B. Similarly, I would always consider the tails of the distribution manually.
**Given that they are equivalent, I agree that "absolute" grading gives a healthier class dynamic.** As a student, I recognized that both grading schemes were effectively the same thing, and always find purportedly "absolute" grades to be somewhat disingenuous (unless the professor had actually taught the course often enough to be able to say that the exams were already written and nothing would change under any circumstances). But as a teacher, I learned quickly that most students do not realize this, and that they tend to respond better to the purportedly absolute system. In the same way, a very hard test with a massive curve is mathematically equivalent to an easy test with an unforgiving curve, but students respond much better to the latter. Irrational, but there you are.
**Personally, I used both.** When I was teaching a course for the first time, it was difficult to predict what grade distributions would look like so I would curve. But, I would also make adjustments to the curve based on my observations. When I was on surer footing, I would say things like "900 points is a guaranteed A, but I might give As for fewer points, we'll see how it goes"; I found that this was both honest and led to a healthy class dynamic.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: My firm belief and policy is that a student's grade should depend on their own efforts and nothing else. In that case, curving the class is actually just wrong.
But my grading policy is pretty different from most. First, I use (used, actually, as I'm retired) cumulative grading. Every student task was assigned a point value and those added to, say, 1000. If you did a 100 point task, you might get 90 points based on assessments of quality. The breaks between grades were defined, say 900 to earn an A.
Second, I permitted rework if a student earned less than they expected to earn, but rework only got you back part of the lost marks. Therefore, I didn't get complaints about strict grading. "If you want more points on this, do a better job of it". This also allowed me to encourage students to do better work and rethink poor assumptions.
Third, I assumed that I wasn't perfect and that I occasionally was overly strict, so a student never missed a final grade by what I considered an infinitesimal amount. 899 points didn't mean a B.
When I came time to assign final grades, I'd look at the earned distribution and make a decision whether that represented what I thought they had actually learned and I might adjust all grades upwards (only upwards) a few points if I thought that, at that point I'd been too strict along the way.
I had the reputation of being very demanding, and I was, both in the quantity and difficult of work. But I was just a bit less strict than my reputation. Students after the last class were never disappointed when they saw their final grade. They were able to compute it along the way, and they might learn that they did a bit better than their expectations.
---
No student should suffer in a class simply because, just by chance, there are a number of genius level other students.
Curving, is, I think, an admission of failure of the admissions system itself, which tries to predict that admitted students will be successful. If the system is set up so that some are guaranteed to fail then something is extremely wrong.
Expecting that the distribution from one year to another should be the same in an individual course is also foolish. The students aren't randomly selected from a known distribution in large enough numbers (for a single class) that statistical assumptions have any validity. Some years the students just work harder than in others. Some years they have to deal with things (pandemics, say) that make their work much more difficult.
Grade individuals, based on their performance. Make it possible that the performance can be good or can improve. Don't assume that the students in your class don't really *need* to be there. Be a teacher, not a grader.
---
Also see [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/116460/75368) and my answer there.
---
Note: To make rework possible and not overly burdensome on the grader, students turned in work on paper. For rework they also turned in (in a folder) all of the previous versions that had been commented by the grader. They also highlighted, in the new work, changes to the most recent version. It was easy and quick to see if additional points should be awarded and easy to mark up the latest document with suggestions, etc.
This may not scale beyond 30 students per grader, I realize. I know that at 40, scale starts to be an issue.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't agree with grading on the curve in most cases and I agree with most of the criticisms highlighted in the original post, but that doesn't mean that there aren't *any* arguments in its favor. Generally these arguments can be summarized as "No human is perfect and students/employers\* shouldn't suffer because its impossible for a professor to be perfect".
(\* delete as your biases see fit)
No exam can test every single thing on a syllabus, so no two exams are likely to test exactly the same selection of material. Further, no two questions on the same material are of exactly the same difficult. Its not just that the setter failed to generate two questions of identical difficult, but that having two questions of the same difficulty is impossible.
So we must conclude that no testing systems fit all the criteria you set out above once you get above trivial knowledge-recall or mechanical-process application based tasks, which shouldn't be what university level education is about. For example, two of the Learning Outcomes on the genomic module I teach are:
>
> "Be able to construct a convincing argument using evidence from high-throughput/genome-wide/genomic experiments"
>
>
>
>
> "Create reasonable, testable hypotheses from genomic science research questions and design realistic experiments to test them"
>
>
>
There is no fully objective test of these with a precisely defined difficulty. For the first one there will always be a judgement on whether an argument is "convincing", but also some judgement of the extent of which an argument uses high-dimensional data. While for the second one can imagine an answer that does or does not make the criteria (although actaully designing one is much harder than you'd imagine), its impossible to come up with two questions of precisely matched difficulty.
So all systems of assessment are compromises between different priorities. What compromise you will settle on will depend on where your priorities lie. The design of valid and fair assessment is an entire academic discipline of its own.
To decide on the proper priorities for assesment design, this we must consider what the purpose of assessment is. I can think of three possibilities:
1. Guide the student as to where their strengths and weaknesses are, help them focus their efforts
2. Ensure to a "consumer" (e.g. an employer) of the student that they meet a certain minimum standard on some task
3. Measure the "ability" of students, either for this particular subject or just in general.
So at one end of the spectrum you have things like a driving test, where a person must demonstrate they are capable of performing a predetermined list of skills - its not about whether you are a better driver than your friend, just whether you meet the basic safety standards. And on the other end, NASA wants to recruit the best candidates for the space program. It will spend years training them, so what they actually do now is not as relevant as just selecting the "best" people.
I, and I like to think most educationalists, don't particularly care for reason 3. But many employers do, and because the employer does, students do.
Curve grading prioritizes measuring "how good" a student is, over whether they can perform a predetermined set of tasks. It means, for example, if the teacher is ill one day and performs the lecture poorly, the students from that class will not loose out to students from a different class when they come to apply for a job. Or students that take hard classes will not see their grades suffer for that choice.
It relies on the assumptions that your sample size is large enough that a change in mean test score is a more likely explanation than a change in average student ability. Thus, it was originally implement in massive, standardized tests, like the GRE in the US, or the nationwide GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education - a set of exams taken by all 16 year olds in the UK). These exams are taken by 100s of thousands of students at a time, are generally marked by more than one person, and are used to decide which subset of students gets access to some limited resource. They may well be appropriate in these circumstances.
To come back to the actaul question - how is it fair?
It is fair under two possible conditions:
* If the aim of the exam is to sort/filter students. In particular if the student wishes to be compared to students from other classes/universities when applying for a job.
* You believe that variation in test difficulty is greater than the variation in average student ability year-to-year.
* You believe that the variation in teaching effectiveness varies from year to year more than the ability of students.
Note that the final two reasons are the *fault* of the instructor. But this immaterial. Given that instructors will be imperfect, what is the best way of negating the effects of this for students.
All that said, I am not particularly convinced of the arguments for curve grading in university class type situations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: One example where a curve could not only be warranted, but also beneficial is in cases where the course/exam is purposefully designed to be extremely difficult or 'discriminatory' towards 'worse' students.
In my graduate school experience we had exams that were designed to be extremely difficult. So much so that almost all the students would score an F. But then these were placed on a curve. One of the underlying purposes of the course was for the professors to figure who the strongest students were in order to offer them acceptance into the PhD program. At the end of each semester the professor basically ensured everyone passed the course and got a degree. But he also was able to discern who the brightest students in the class were.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Suppose that students can choose to take either course A or course B. After the exams have been sat, the results for course A are significantly higher than course B. Now there are two possible reasons for this (and, of course, they could both apply):
1. The exam for course A was (unintentionally) easier than the exam for course B.
2. The students who chose course A were generally stronger than those who chose course B.
Now if you adjust the grades ("grade on a curve") and 2 applies, you unfairly penalise students who happened to choose the same course as most of the stronger students. However, if you don't adjust the grades and 1 applies, you unfairly penalise students who happened to choose the course where the instructor set the harder exam.
So it sounds like the arguments for and against more-or-less balance out, with maybe a reason for preferring the status quo (that you shouldn't intervene unless you are confident your intervention is an improvement). However, there are a few reasons why I don't agree with this.
* Actually, 1 is more likely to happen than 2, simply because it only depends on the actions of one person and not a group of people (and getting the difficulty level precisely right is *hard*).
* If you *do*, by prior arrangement, adjust the grades, then 2 becomes even less likely, since you remove the incentive for weak students to choose "easy" courses.
* You can get an approximate idea of to what extent 2 applies, based on previous grades for the students, and take that into account. When I was examining in an institution that required adjustment of grades, each course was given (in automated fashion) a target average score based on the predicted strength of students enrolled on that course. If the actual average result was significantly higher (or lower) than this, that suggested the exam was too easy (or hard).
* Adjusting grades is important if you want to be able to compare courses from very different fields, even if the average marks in those courses are comparable. This is because STEM subjects naturally produce a much wider spread of marks than humanities subjects.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/01
| 6,294
| 27,991
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my field (experimental physics) the supervision of PhD students works roughly like that: freshmen come to the lab, they are given tasks, then they do experiments, discuss the results with their supervisors, do more experiments, discuss more, and then at some point they start writing papers about their results. There, of course, both PhD students and their supervisors are co-authors on papers, often together with other internal and/or external collaborators.
I've been working in a few countries, and the system was always more or less like that. I do understand why it is functioning this way: in a relatively complicated field of knowledge, a new PhD student is absolutely incapable of writing a paper which would stand up to the standards of the respective scientific community. So the student gets supervision as to which experiments are interesting to do and which not, how to do the experiments, how to analyze results, how to present them, etc. In return, the supervisor, at the very minimum, publishes a paper and gets the work done (and published), as it was described in the funding proposal from which this PhD student is paid. I mean, it is not usually referred to as a deal between a student and a supervisor, but if everything goes well it's a win-win for sure, and it's all pretty obvious, so I am not even sure whether I should have written it in so much detail.
However, surfing through Academia SE, I found a number of questions from PhD students about whether they should publish papers without their supervisors, and, surprisingly, a significant number of answers encouraging them to do so, in the spirit of: “It’s your PhD, how are you supposed to work independently if you can’t publish a paper on your own”. From this I conclude that there are at least some places where this is indeed how the system works, so PhD students publish papers without their supervisors as co-authors. And so, I wonder: How is this system supposed to work long-term? What would be the motivation for supervisors to actually accept and supervise students, if they don't even get a publication from this student's work? Supervision, if done properly, takes quite some time, so as a research scientist, I'd rather spend this time on my own work which will be published under my name, rather then help other people publish their papers.
I can foresee an answer that goes like, it is a sort of moral obligation of a scientist to "raise" PhD students, and he or she should not expect anything "in return", not even a publication. Although some people might indeed share this belief, it would be very naive to build the entire system on moral grounds, so I am sure there is something else.
**Update.** I would like to quote @AlexanderWoo: "Mathematics is weird is that standards for authorship usually differs in an advisor-student context than outside of one. There are definitely contributions that would merit coauthorship if one were not the advisor of the other author but does not if one is the advisor." Sounds bizarre but again, what do I know.<issue_comment>username_1: This is not meant as a complete answer, but as one of several observations. I may end up submitting several different answers to this question.
There is a big difference between math and physics in the way people become leaders in the field (though perhaps physics is gradually becoming more math-like in this). In physics, it seems to me that everyone agrees what the big important problems are, and one becomes a leader by solving (or making substantial progress) one of these problems. In math, there are some big problems one can become famous for solving, but most leading mathematicians get their status by convincing the community that the problems they can solve are important, not by solving problems that were considered important beforehand.
As a first approximation, every research mathematician is by default interested in their own problems and no one else's, and every time you convince someone else to be interested in your problem, you 'win'. Your advisees, if they become successful research mathematicians, are naturally people who will have some interest in your problems.
My general research area of algebraic combinatorics is a good example. Forty years ago it was a niche area in which only a handful of mathematicians worked. Now there is an algebraic combinatorialist in almost every sizable math department. Part of the reason for its growth is that mathematicians (for example <NAME>) in other areas of mathematics respected this area and appreciated its contributions towards understanding (non-combinatorial) problems they were interested in, but in large part the growth has been because of <NAME> having had 60 successful PhD students, many of whom went on to have PhD students of their own. As a result, Professor Stanley is famous (for a mathematician) and has been invited to speak everywhere. (He is now retired and travels a lot less.)
For me, I can certainly say I would get a lot more credit, both from my university and from my research community, for having a student who went on to a research-oriented postdoc(\*) and a tenure-track position with research as significant component than I would for another several papers.
(\*) My small department graduates about two PhDs per year, with about one in some area of theoretical mathematics (as opposed to applied mathematics), and, in the memory of the faculty, has never had a PhD who went on to a research-oriented postdoc in theoretical mathematics.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I published two single-author journal articles during my PhD in a field where a PhD student publishing without their supervisor is uncommon. So uncommon, in fact, that I can't think of any other examples in my subfield.
My case is probably unusual in that by a few years into my project, I was far more of an expert in the subject than my supervisor. My former supervisor is a bit of a generalist, so this is not unusual for them. At a certain point during my PhD I started disagreeing strongly with my supervisor about what to do, which is when I started working more independently.
I actually would have been offended if I were required to put my supervisor's name on either paper, as they had negligible intellectual contributions to the papers and were even harmful to them in my opinion. My supervisor made it quite clear that the work was my own, and even stated so during my defense. (They already had tenure so I don't think they needed their name on the papers, though this could be a factor in other cases.)
From my own experience I can say there are advantages and disadvantages to publishing without one's supervisor as a PhD student.
Some researchers will have greater respect for a student who has published independently. I've been pleasantly surprised to be treated as an authority on certain subjects during my PhD. I admit that those people might just be nice all around, but I didn't see most students getting that sort of treatment.
Unfortunately there are people who are suspicious of more independent students. One reviewer brought up the fact that I was a PhD student publishing without my supervisor in their review, as if such a thing were something to be suspicious of. They did not elaborate about what they found suspicious, but in my response I wrote that they are welcome to ask the editor to contact my supervisor if they believe I had not credited others sufficiently. I've also been warned to emphasize successful collaborative work on my CV and cover letters when applying to jobs, as some people will assume that I'm hard to get along with if I work independently too much.
I personally prefer to work more independently. I think the current research environment incentivizes collaboration far too much. I see a lot of [groupthink](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink)/[lowest commmon denominator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowest_common_denominator#Colloquial_usage) type thinking in much of heavily collaborative work. Good ideas are avoided too often simply because they are unfamiliar to most people whose approval is needed. Good research often comes from unfamiliarity.
That's not to say that collaboration is *often* bad, just that it's *too often* bad. I fully agree that certain projects are impossible without collaboration. But given the choice, I'd bias my own work towards what an individual can handle, which I think is more than most believe.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I think you have fallen victim to a false dichotomy:
I published one single-author paper during my PhD and one afterwards on a project that already started during my PhD, both in a field where this is unusual (though not an experimental one).
However before doing so, I also published five papers with my PhD advisor, three as a first author.
These papers went exactly as you describe:
The research was outlined by the principal investigators of my research project (including my PhD supervisor), thoroughly supervised, and they contributed strongly to the writing process.
That’s how I learnt how to perform and publish research of my own.
My single-author papers differed from the collaborative papers as they originated from my own ideas (both times recognising a lack of methods).
My supervisor supported me working on these projects, and these contributed to the overarching research project that paid my salary.
My supervisor wasn’t an author of these papers as he couldn’t contribute to them – most of them was executing the original idea.
Also, thanks to my previous collaborative publishing experience, I could handle the writing process on my own as well.
(Of course, I made use of internal peer review both by my supervisor and other colleagues.)
Performing and publishing a small research project¹ this way is something that I think every PhD student **on the verge of graduation** should be able to do.
After all, that’s what a PhD ideally certifies: the ability to independently perform research.
However, this doesn’t mean that all graduating PhD students should work like this all of the time or even most of the time.
It does not suffice that the PhD student is capable of publishing a single-author paper, but you they also need to have an idea that works, can be realised within a sufficiently short time, does not require extra resources and does not digress too much from what they are paid for.
Still, we probably see fewer such papers than we should on account of supervisors forcing themselves on papers, students prematurely adding them to avoid conflict or not knowing any better.
Finally, mind that there are also differences between fields of what makes for (ethical) authorship.
To quote a [comment by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/167031/phd-students-publish-without-supervisors-how-does-it-work#comment449669_167031):
>
> An advisor might say "try this method" or "maybe this paper I've only looked at the abstract of might be relevant" or "what you suggest can't work because of this result in this paper which you should read", none of which quite counts as working with the student on the problem but is more than "here is your problem".
>
>
>
Depending on the field, these kind of contributions (posing the problem, choosing and refuting methods) are the main creative work, whereas the execution is mere legwork.
By contrast, in some subfields of mathematics, only performing a proof and similar seems to be considered worthy of authorship.
Something similar applies to the writing process:
For example, in most fields context embedding, motivation, arguing for relevance are crucial parts of a paper and properly writing those requires some skill that can arguably be only learnt on the job, i.e., in collaboration with the supervisor.
By contrast, there are subfields of mathematics where papers are almost completely devoid of these parts, but consist almost exclusively of definitions, theorems, and proofs.
---
¹ Mind that this already excludes fields, in which small research projects are not a thing and every project requires several people.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Experimental sciences are the exception. Research in them usually requires funding for materials and lab equipment, which limits the intellectual freedom a student can have.
I did my PhD somewhere between theoretical computer science and bioinformatics. Research was usually done in small informal groups, because there were no significant expenses apart from salaries and travel. Students were seen as junior colleagues. PhD students and their supervisors naturally published many papers together, as they were discussing their research daily. Later in their PhDs, students often had other collaborations that did not involve the supervisor.
One key feature of theoretical computer science is that the papers are "small". If you have a side project that yields promising results, you can often turn that into a single-author paper with a reasonable effort. I had two such papers during my PhD, which was uncommon but not that rare.
Now I work in bioinformatics, where the focus is on "bigger" papers that require more effort. Students still have plenty of intellectual freedom, but even the side projects are so big that coauthors keep accumulating and eventually the supervisor gets involved too.
Many of my friends in social sciences and humanities were independent researchers from day 1 of their PhD. They did not have as much supervisors as mentors, who were much less involved in their research than what is common in STEM fields. I guess that's the nature of the fields. While STEM students spend most of their undergraduate and master's degrees studying an established body of knowledge, students in social sciences and humanities spend more time learning how to do research.
Research involving extensive field work probably has other mechanisms in play, but I'm not familiar with such fields.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: If I understand correctly, the OP's question is mainly:
**"Why would a researcher support PhD students without the benefit of writing papers with them?"**
(Where "support" can mean a number of things, such as hiring and supervising students in the first place, "allowing" them to publish on their own, encouraging them to publish on their own, and so on.)
*Disclaimer:* As mentioned in a comment, I am not completely sure whether I interpret the focus of the OP's question correctly, so let me specify that this answer refers to the presumed question that I marked in bold above.
A lot of important things have already been mentioned in other answers and comments (in particular, the dependency on the field), but I think in order to specifically answer the question, it is important to point out the following observation:
**The question is based on the premise that the only primary goal of a researcher is to maximize their paper output** (where "paper output" is probably a - somewhat individual - function of both qualitiy and quanitity, and in some fields also of the position within the list of authors).
However, this premise is incorrect.
The actions of human beings (rumour has it that even some scientists are human beings...) depend on various intrensic and extrinsic motivations and - most importantly - on the very complex mixture and interplay between the both.
Here is a non-comprehensive lists of goals that, say, a professor at a research university might (or sometimes might not) seek to achieve (in arbitrary order):
* Make for a living, i.e., earn sufficient (what ever this means) money and/or retain a high amount of job security.
* Gain and retain social esteem (including self-esteem, esteem by their family and friends, by colleagues and collaborators, their students, their university, their wider scientific community, sometimes even by complete strangers, and so on).
* Enhance scientific progress in their specific subfield(s).
* Promote their subfield(s) and, in particular, those parts/theories within their subfield(s) that they are particularly fond of (for instance, because they think a theory is particularly important, or because they consider it "their" theory, "their baby", "their legacy", or whatever.)
* Make a contribution to solving problems that human societies are facing.
* Have fun during their work.
* Develop and study exciting ideas.
* Collaborate with other people (most humans like social interactions, at least to a certain extent, on collaborations are one kind of social interaction).
* Retain sufficient spare time to spend with their family, their hobbies, etc.
* Behave what they consider ethical.
Co-authoring papers is not an end on itself; instead, it can be seen as one of several means that are instrumental to pursue some of the goals listed above (and probably also further goals). In fact, they are certainly a rather important mean, but there are also other things that can - and should - be done in order to achieve goals such as the ones listed above.
One of these further means is supervising PhD students, even if the supervision does not result in additional papers on the supervisors CV.
**So to actually answer the question, let me discuss by a few examples how supervising students can help to achieve the goals mentioned above:**
(The order is, again, irrelevant; I enumerate the points merely to facilitate later reference in case that some users wish to comment.)
* (1) An important part of "making for a living" is to get a permanent position first (for instance, in the US this is what it typically means to "get tenure").
In order to get such a position, co-authoring many papers is certainly helpful (at least at the paper's quality does not significantly suffer from their numbers), but hiring committees, tenure committees, etc., will also expect other things, for instance, experience in the supervision of PhD students. So supervising PhD students can mean a considerable benefit for the superviser, even of the latter does not co-author any (or not many) papers of the students.
For people who already have permanent positions, the pressure is probably a bit less; but still it is in many cases considered as part of their job to supervise PhD students. If they don't do this, this might (or might not, depending on the circumstances) cause them considerable problems with their employer (i.e., their university).
* (2) Supervising PhD students will often earn people social esteem from several sources: for instance, from the PhD students themselves (at least if the supervisor does a decent job), from their department, from other colleagues. Depending on the culture of the scientific field, the country, the university and even the department, the amount of esteem that a supervisor earns might even be considerably higher of their PhD students are perceived as working quite independently.
On the other end of the spectrum, if you often claim co-authorship for contributions which are usually not considered sufficient for co-authorship within your field, precisely the opposite thing is likely to happen: You might earn contempt instead of esteem.
* (3) An excellent PhD student will obviously be an asset for scientific progress, so if the supervisor has an execellent PhD student, they can befinit scientific progress by supporting this student. Giving excellent students the opportunity to work independently can benefit these students in various ways (and might hurt them in others, of course - it certainly depends on the situation and the people involved).
* (4) If a PhD student specialises in the same (or a closely related) theory as their supervisor, then it will likely help to promote this theory if the student successfully pursues an academic career after their PhD. In many (though not all) cases, such a career will be supported if the student has evidence of their ability to work indepently - and papers authored by the student alone are sometimes (often?) considered as such evidence. Similary, papers that the student wrote with other collaborators, but not with their supervisor as a co-author, have a good to chance to be interpreted in the sense that "the student's ability to do research is not ultimately tied to their supervisor", which can also benefit their career opportunities.
* (5) In order to help solving society's problems by means of scientific research, it is a reasonable course of action to choose those PhD candidates who are most likely to do an excellent job and make good contributions, rather than to choose those who are most likely to co-author papers with you.
Also, leaving people a good amount of freedom and giving them the opportunity to work more independently, will often increase the probability for good new ideas and innovation.
* (6) People are more likely to like their work if there's a good climate at their lab. Professors who prevent students from publishing papers on their own even if the students were perfectly up to it, are not likely to have a positive impact that climate. Professors who force their name onto articles to which they haven't contributed at all, are also unlikely to have a positive impact on that climate (at least be this particular action; of course, they might still impact the climate positively by other things they do).
So if a professor is does such things too often, there's a non-negligible chance that this turns (or at least takes part in turning) their own lab into a place where they wouldn't like to work and where their students wouldn't like to work, either. The first of those consequence clearly has a direct negative impact on the professor's well being, while the second can have negative impacts on some others of the proefessor's possible goals discussed here (for instance, to enhance scientific knowledge, since dissatisfied students are less likely to do good work).
* (7) Developing exciting ideas is more likely if you work with people who are able to think and work independently. But there is certainly a positive correlation between people's ability to think and work indepedently and their desire to actually do think and work indepdently. So I you like to work with students in order to develop exciting ideas, you're often better off if you supervise students you are able to think and work independently - but this will sometimes (often?) have the consequence, that those students will also expect the possibility to work independently to a certain extent.
* (8) If you like collaborating with other people, then you do, of course, have an incentive to... well, collaborate with other people. This particular incentive is independent of the question whether this collaboration also yields an additional paper on your CV. (But surely, in many cases the prospect to get an additional paper on your CV might be *another* and *additional* incentive for a collaboration.)
Whether a collaboration will probably result in a paper with you as co-author, depends, of course, on many things. If you supervise a PhD student, then your contribution might sometimes (though certainly not always) be of a kind which does not automatically warrant you co-authorship in some (!) scientific fields.
* (9) If you have a lot of things to do (as professors typically have), and would still like to reserve non-zero spare time, then it is reasonable to delegate a certain amount of work. For instance, if you feel that a PhD student is up to doing a certain project mostly on their own, and that they will probably benefit from doing so, then you might choose to indeed let them do it mostly on their own.
This will (again, often, though probably not always) reduce you're committment in terms of working hours you put into the project, since giving guidance and feedback is less time consuming than making more detailed contributions to the project. On the other hand, this might result in a paper for which you don't have a good claim to be a co-author.
* (10) Many (not all, obviously) people prefer to keep a clean conscience - so they try not to engage in actions which they consider unethical. Some people (their percentage is certainly field dependent) do consider it unethical to write their name on a paper they contributed (almost) nothing to.
Please note that this is just a sample list (which is light years from being comprehensive); I wrote it in order to demonstrate two things:
* Researcher do have many incentives to supervise students, even if this doesn't always yield a new paper for the supervisor.
* In some situations, insisting on co-authorship might even be counterproductive to some (or many) of the professor's goals.
**Final remarks.**
* Please also keep in mind that, while many people have a considerable interest in performing very well on their jobs and many people put a very large amount of work into achieving this, most of them have little interest in *over-optimising* their performance at the upper end ot the scale.
For instance, assume you are an accomplished researcher and tenured professor, with a lot of experience and many achievements; you write many high-quality papers, are liked by your scientific community, do really enjoy your job, and like to work with your students. Then there is only very little incentive to insist on yet one more paper on your CV.
Say, you're in such a situation and you're facing a "borderline case" of a project by one of your students, where one could well argue for or against your co-authorship, and both decisions would be unlikely to have any considerable negative impacts on anyone: in such a situation, why would you really care whether you're going to have this paper on your CV or not?
* One more word on field dependence: What has, as far as I can see, not been emphasised in this discussion so so far, is that fields do also have different conventions on how to order the authors of a paper. For instance, in pure math, authors are almost exclusively ordered alphabetically. In more applied fields, on the other hand, authors are typically ordered to indicate how much they contributed to the paper.
In a field where authors are ordered by contributions, there's a natural option to include authors who contributed significantly less to the paper than other authors. In a field where authors are ordered alphabetically, though, the minimal contribution in order to be recognised as a co-author will naturally be higher.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I published several papers as a PhD student.
* some were together with 500 other authors, this should ring a bell to you if you are in particle physics. I value these papers the least (note that this is a personal approach: people who work in high energy physics often do not have other ways to publish as they are part of a collaboration and it is not that easy to build an accelerator and detector in your barn)
* some were together with a smaller team, where everyone contributed something. A great way to learn how to collaborate across diverse teams.
* some were with my advisor because we discussed topics together and his input was valuable
* some were by myself. Out of these, I wanted to publish two that were from "me and my supervisor" but my supervisor told me *"your idea is too valuable to be diluted with me as a co-author. I have all the publications I need, you do not"*. He was truly a role model for me (in other aspects of Academia as well)
So every kind is possible.
Now, academia being what it is (or was, 20+ years ago) - I know some people who could not publish by themselves because their supervisor insisted on being added to each publication. They were not competitive enough to send the publication anyway (and get into a conflict), so some of the publications were by "author, author and leeches". You must take that political aspect into your publication strategy (very, very much unfortunately)
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/01
| 818
| 3,490
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am considering the pros and cons of two types of postdoc positions I have come cross:
1. The most common is 1-3 years of work on an established project for which a supervisor PI typically won a grant.
2. Some departments ask for a 'research plan' and the postdoc who wins the position works alone or with a local supervisor on the project he/she proposed.
The pros of 1 are clear:
* In my field, these jobs are usually offered in stronger departments (though not always).
* Likely more publishing output with a team and/or invested supervisor.
* Contacts.
I was wondering about the pros of 2 and how it is perceived because the independent work is attractive to me.<issue_comment>username_1: Your second option many not even have a "supervisor" as such. It might just be an opportunity for an aspiring academic to work with a small research group on questions of mutual interest. This might be especially true in mathematics, for example. It is a way to get some experience, possibly even including teaching a bit.
I've been in a department where a post doc was hired specifically to work with a junior faculty member to boost their mutual CVs and experience.
Another situation involved a person who had an interesting (to some of the other faculty) research program so they hired him to work with the others, bringing new ideas into a research group. It was mutually beneficial as was my other example. In this case the long term intention was to offer the postdoc a permanent position later if possible.
There are hardly any disadvantages as long as the postdoc works well with others as a colleague and both gives and accepts help.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a few pros of the option 2, which could include:
* This could be viewed as a "transition" position that is more difficult, given that you'll be PI on your own project vs. working under someone else. When applying for faculty or other independent investigator positions, you may be able to describe how you've already had "independent" research experience with this position.
* You would have the opportunity for more solo-authored papers, or even first-authored papers, given that since you proposed the project you would get the first pass at writing up the data.
* You could select your own collaborators vs. with option 1 you might not have a choice of collaborators.
* Lastly, a major pro is that you would be able to select the topics that are important to you/relevant to your line of research. This could prevent drift in your efforts compared to option 1, which may require you to work on projects not relevant to your line of research.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it depends entirely on the funding source. Some projects, based on external funding, may have a postdoc written into them from the beginning and will advertise for them like a regular job. In other cases a department may have several annual, full-time postdoc positions that are funded by endowments that are open for applications during a window during the year and last for a fixed time like a junior faculty position. You might search your dream departments and postdoc and see what comes back. They may also call these a “fellowship” rather than a postdoc, so you should search for both. For example, this one <https://oden.utexas.edu/research/programs-and-awards/odonnell-jr-postdoc-fellowship/>, is endowed and pretty prestigious if you study applied mathematics.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/02
| 470
| 1,864
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing PhD in AI field mainly in NLP
my supervisor told that I have to contribute something new to the field.
OK, I started doing some trails in improving one case in the field of NLP AI
I found a way that can improve that case in 80% of the times.
I don't want to go into the details of the method that I found, as it is mainly technical.
Anyway, I told my supervisor about what I found and he wasn't impressed.
The things he mentioned that this method is not provable, which means it is proved only by trying the cases without mathimatical prove.
is this enough for PhD or shall I prove it mathematically?<issue_comment>username_1: Your thesis committee, and your supervisor in particular, are the ones who decide if your research is sufficiently novel.
Make sure they are happy and seek their guidance if they are not. It seems your supervisor isn't happy, so work with them to find what you can add or what other direction you can take. You could provide a StackExchange answer with dozens of upvotes saying your work is a novel contribution and it won't get you closer to graduating.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me add to the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167060/75368).
First, a technique that is an "improvement 80% of the time" might be extremely dangerous to apply in practice. Even proving that the quoted phrase is true may not be enough.
What you would need to do, in my view, is determine the parameters that lead to its assured success vs its failure. That analysis is probably worth more than a proof, per se. Why is it sometimes better and why is it sometimes worse.
And of course I'm assuming that you have a good definition of "improvement".
Note that some AI/NLP practices have led to race-biased outcomes among other difficulties.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/02
| 529
| 2,236
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a college junior and looking to apply to grad school for CS in the fall. I'm currently choosing a thesis advisor for next year but would love some advice.
One of my options is a HCI professor who I've been working with since freshman year, but she'll be on sabbatical next year. She said she'd be willing to advise me, but I don't want to give her extra work while she's taking time off.
Another option is a professor who I haven't worked with before w/ a different research area (more systems focused), but I've heard really great things about her from other students. She also said she'd be happy to work with me, and I'm pretty interested in branching out/trying new things.
In terms of applying for grad school, will it strengthen my application to have worked with the same professor all throughout undergrad? Or is it good to show some variety of experiences? I'm having trouble because I'm also not sure which area of CS I want to pursue in the future, but it'll probably be something at the intersection of HCI and AI like Human-AI interaction or intelligence augmentation.
Any general tips/advice on how to handle this situation would be much appreciated. Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should decide between these (both good) options on the merits of the experience - the technical aspects and the mentoring possibilities. The fact that you have worked with one of the professors (a plus) but that she will be on sabbatical leave (perhaps a disadvantage) may be one factor in your decision.
I don't think you need consider any possible small effect on your eventual grad school application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is hardly any basis here for a distinction. Both are good. Both are willing to work with you. Both will provide a valuable experience.
You could just "flip a coin", actually, and reach a good outcome.
But once you decide, make a firm commitment and stick with it. Don't break contact with the other prof, however. Both can be valuable as letter writers.
Having worked, closely with more than one prof is probably more advantageous than working with only one, but it is, I think, a marginal effect.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/02
| 1,221
| 4,703
|
<issue_start>username_0: Does anyone know how I could go about finding a career counselor that can help an "ex-academic" in some way to find a job in "real world"? Essentially, I am looking for type of counseling service that is similar to <NAME>'s "Professor Is In," but with expertise in and inside knowledge of biotech/life science. I know this forum cannot recommend individuals directly, but maybe you can tell me where/how to look. I would love to hear other people stories: if anyone used a career coach/help in "Life Sciences", how did you find that person and how did you know that you are getting sensible guidance?
I am a former "life scientist" (molecular biologist). I am aware of "Cheeky Scientist's Association", but I would never-ever approach an company that employs such a predatory marketing strategy.
I would like to provide an excerpt from someone else's blog post to explain my problem:
>
> I was desperate to find jobs in industry and somehow got hold of the
> CEO of a mid-sized pharmaceutical firm for an interview. I didn’t get
> the job because he couldn’t see where to fit me in his organization.
> Take for example, as he ran through the choices:
>
>
> * I can’t put you in sales or marketing because you’ve never sold a product
> * I can’t give you a manufacturing or production role since they require different expertise such as GMP, GLP, etc unrelated to yours
> * I can’t assign you a role in quality control/regulatory since you’re
> not aware of the compliance and regulatory issues related to the
> pharmaceutical industry
> * We like so many pharma companies are into
> generics and there is no R&D arm; so I’m not sure where to have you
> within us”
>
>
> None of this was done in a condescending way. It’s the reality. And
> then I understood this: Really world values different set of skills
> (life skills) over academic smartness.
>
>
>
Unfortunately, this was precisely my experience as well during a really intense job search a few years ago.
As far as pharma/biotech is concerned, they look for either people with 10 to 15 years of industry experience, knowledge of industry-specific regulations, credentials etc. Alternatively, they need B.Sc. or, at most, M.Sc. to work as technicians in control or on a production line.
I feel that I have exhausted my creativity and completely lost now. I had extremely damaging experience in "academia" (from a bad Ph.D to a horrible postdoc). I do not believe that I have any competitive edge, to be honest. I feel like I do need an external council, but with a professional who knows the field.
**P.S.** To make it really clear: I have no chances for successful "academic" career and I do not want to waste time and effort chasing it. I desperately need a non-academic career. However, I cannot find anywhere the guidance/career coaching that I need.
**P.P.S.** I was a "wet-lab" scientist. People refuse to understand that there is a HUGE difference in employ-ability between bio-statisticians, bioinformaticians and people of this ilk and "Wet-lab scientists".
It took me ~ 12 months to find a job of a project manager on "soft money" at a small University. I have applied like crazy all across Canada. Now things start to collapse due to politics and ever-absent/super-busy PI of the project. I simply do not have administrative power to hold people to account and make things work.
I am out of ideas now. Seriously. I am sick and tired of academic BS.
I have no imagination left. No ideas. Zero. I do not do drugs. I am out of any ideas. I need a career coach, a creative writer, a fairy-tale writer, I do not know whom to get some fresh ideas. I cannot live like this anymore.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should decide between these (both good) options on the merits of the experience - the technical aspects and the mentoring possibilities. The fact that you have worked with one of the professors (a plus) but that she will be on sabbatical leave (perhaps a disadvantage) may be one factor in your decision.
I don't think you need consider any possible small effect on your eventual grad school application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is hardly any basis here for a distinction. Both are good. Both are willing to work with you. Both will provide a valuable experience.
You could just "flip a coin", actually, and reach a good outcome.
But once you decide, make a firm commitment and stick with it. Don't break contact with the other prof, however. Both can be valuable as letter writers.
Having worked, closely with more than one prof is probably more advantageous than working with only one, but it is, I think, a marginal effect.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/02
| 744
| 3,113
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in a computer science faculty (top ten [here](https://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2020/computer-science-information-systems)). I first worked with my advisor as a exchange student: got very good grades in his classes and did some projects (both academic and paid). This projects didn't go very far. I didn't have much help either. Some time after this, I did another exchange year in other computer science faculty (top fifty in same page). The work included some of the things I did with my advisor. Yet the focus was new, I got a lot of help and I published my results.
Don't ask me why I ended up in the top ten school enrolled in a PhD program with my former advisor. He didn't propose a PhD topic and only suggested that it should be related to a project for which he got money on. At the end, he assigned me some tasks which are not "research level" but merely consist in fixing his system.
The whole process was "educational". I got from the experience of "using" a system to the process of "building" a system. I also have a training in mathematics and have been willing to do something theoretical not directly related with a system. I studied a lot of topics on my own: categories, logic, complexity, computability, but without guidance is hard to find a feasible topic that can contribute to advance my career.
Also, not having a fixed topic for my PhD makes me fear I will finish my PhD days fixing bugs in my advisor system, unless I switch advisor (which seems to be hard given that I am already a PhD student in my professor lab) or (more feasible) change faculties (again without a clue of whether the grass will be greener elsewhere.
How could I turn my work into a more theoretical one? Without anyone advising me on interesting problems in theory? Do I need to look for a new advisor? Maybe enroll in a master degree? Should I be worried of not having a fixed topic?
Thanks for the advice.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, my advice would be to speak about this with your advisor and to directly address your concerns as transparent as humanly possible. Ideally, he/she should be able to help you in this situation and give you instructions on how your work can get more theoretical or how it might be directed towards a more specific goal.
Searching for a new advisor should (in my eyes) be the last resort, if he/she cannot help you or is not willing to do so.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You have to either sit down with your advisor -- or sit your advisor down.
It's their job to guide you to a suitable topic, but it often won't happen without some active pushing from the student. It's your job to push and to prepare for the meeting, at least with a list of possible options and some issues that you pursued.
The goal is to have a work plan that leads into a somewhat fixed and operational direction with clear milestones at which you drop options from the menue that haven't turned out interesting or feasible.
If this doesn't happen, look for a new advisor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/02
| 975
| 3,116
|
<issue_start>username_0: How should I cite the [Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2020](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2020)?
*If possible in BibTeX format.*
---
This question was [originally asked in meta Stack Exchange](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/315057/how-to-cite-stack-overflow-surveys), but it was closed for being considered off-topic.
Emphasis is mine:
>
> DO NOT USE this tag unless your question's about the Developer Survey's integration with sites other than Stack Overflow. **Most questions about the annual Stack Overflow Developer Survey should be asked on Meta Stack Overflow**, not here.
> <https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/survey>
>
>
>
This question was also asked in [Meta Stack Overflow](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/407220/how-to-cite-stack-overflow-surveys).<issue_comment>username_1: You can either:
1. Include this as a footnote.
2. Use [this website](https://www.bibme.org/bibtex/website-citation) to generate website citations for the BibTeX generic citations.
The following is I generated for the Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2020.
```
@misc{stack overflow,
title={Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2020},
url={https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2020},
journal={Stack Overflow}
}
```
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe you can
* add a bit more details, following e.g. <https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/3587/34551>,
* that the author should be "Stack Overflow" (cf. the readme in [the downloadable database](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dfGerWeWkcyQ9GX9x20rdSGj7WtEpzBB/view), where attribution needs to be given to "Stack Overflow"),
* that Stack Overflow should be ["protected"](https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/10775/34551) from losing its upper-case, (cf. also [this discussion on institutions as authors](https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/162659/34551)),
* that you can infer the publication date from [the announcement](https://stackoverflow.blog/2020/05/27/2020-stack-overflow-developer-survey-results/),
* and that you can use `urldate` to refer to the date you last accessed the survey.
This gives:
```
@misc{stackoverflow_survey_2020,
author={<NAME>},
title = {Stack {O}verflow Developer Survey 2020},
url = {https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2020/},
abstract = {Nearly 65,000 took this comprehensive, annual survey of people who code. Demographics. Most loved, dreaded and wanted technologies. Salary and careers.},
urldate = {2021-08-18},
date = {2020-05-27}
}
```
Or, if you are using [biblatex](https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/5091/34551), you can use the `online` entry type:
```
@online{stackoverflow_survey_2020,
author={<NAME>},
title = {Stack {O}verflow Developer Survey 2020},
url = {https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2020/},
abstract = {Nearly 65,000 took this comprehensive, annual survey of people who code. Demographics. Most loved, dreaded and wanted technologies. Salary and careers.},
urldate = {2021-08-18},
date = {2020-05-27}
}
```
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/02
| 2,184
| 9,484
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a question that does not quite fit the bill on any particular SE forum but Academia SE comes the closest in my opinion. I will use non-binary they/them pronouns to retain some amount of anonymity.
Some background will be important: I have lived with my current roommate -- a grad student at my university in the US -- for two years, in this time I have come to know them in a way I really wish I hadn't. This person is extremely manipulative, a compulsive liar and used me and my friend for an embarrassingly long amount of time before we realized what was going on. This has not been limited to personal favors but also professional ones where this person would get editing feedback on their extremely long papers with nothing in return, not do the reading and then ask for summaries that they would then use during class discussion without attribution. This is a person who openly flouts page limits, writes in a needlessly convoluted sentences and has shown repeated patterns of not respecting other people's time. Professionally, I think this person is a total hack who uses trauma of marginalized groups to progress their own academic agenda.
Now, I suspect that this person likely has narcissistic personality disorder but I am in no way an expert. They are usually very polite and cordial to other people they do not know very well and generally have a good image in the department -- except that they often do not respect other people's time but people think it as a quirk.
My concern is that this person will soon be assuming a position wherein they will be teaching and advising students (in a different program than mine). I do not know where they draw a line regarding abuse so it's hard for me to judge whether this is something that they might do to their students. Still, is there a way for me to warn someone about this individual?
I am also afraid that if I do make complaint I will be ostracized. I have, with my own eyes observed departments side with abusers because everyone knows them to be "good guys" and I wonder if I should just let things play out and hope other people catch on eventually.
**Update:** Seeing your abuser succeed in their professional lives without suffering any consequence while your work suffers because of the trauma, that just doesn't seem fair. I maintain that this person is unfit to teach by their history of disregard for rules -- including syllabi, contracts and so forth. In any case, it is perhaps time I sought helped and moved on with my life.<issue_comment>username_1: In the US, stepping in to the hiring process would likely be illegal due to privacy laws. You would be open to slander/defamation charges. What you propose isn't whistleblowing under the law since you aren't reporting governmental misconduct. So, your claims have no protection.
If you were asked by this person to comment officially, then you can be honest, of course.
But, imagine a situation in which someone just wanted to carry out a vendetta against another person, making similar claims. You would expect a thorough examination of the claims and the motivations of the person making them.
I suspect that the behavior of this person isn't invisible to the faculty. If they see it and ignore it then it is an issue for them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Complaining about your roommate to the roommate's employer is unprofessional behavior. Do not do it.
If you are experiencing domestic abuse, talk to the police or a local victim's advocacy organization.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Nothing you said makes this person categorically unqualified to teach students. Your descriptions also fail to demonstrate that this person is untrustworthy.
>
> This is a person who openly flouts page limits, writes in a needlessly
> convoluted sentences and has shown repeated patterns of not respecting
> other people's time.
>
>
>
The above does not justify the conclusions you have reached about this person. Plenty of people are chronically late with their morals intact. As for flouting page limits or writing long sentences, last time I checked poor writing style is not a mortal sin. Now, you have two years of experience with them as a roommate and sometimes our beliefs about another person are difficult to articulate, yet by no means less justified. So I believe you when you call them extremely manipulative. Unfortunately, your personal experience with this person in informal contexts does not meet the burden of proof for professional disqualification or even reprimand. I predict that if you were to raise an issue, you would be stonewalled with skepticism and assigned a reputation as a gossipmonger.
Warn your friends and favorite colleagues in private and let this person fail on their own. Your own career is more important than this battle.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This sounds like a really difficult situation and I think you are right to be concerned for the welfare of this person's students. With emotional abuse, personal and professional lines can be blurry.
I have limited experience here, but I did once become personally involved with a colleague and through this discovered they were emotionally abusive (I suspect also narcissistic personality disorder). I was concerned that their behaviour was affecting other colleagues and decided to speak to HR - but the person was able to talk their way out of the situation with no consequence, even though they had received complaints from others before. I didn't want to escalate to a formal complaint, since the situation was blurred and not purely work related. I was right to be concerned though - as I spoke to more people, I discovered this person was generally considered unprofessional and a drain on their team. I can relate to your concern.
I was unsure from your post what your professional overlap with this person is. It could be difficult for you to have any impact on the situation, which could end up being upsetting for you if the university doesn't have the wisdom to take the situation seriously, particularly since this person is manipulative.
From my personal perspective - and this may differ from the judgement of others posting here - if you have any kind of relationship with e.g. a trusted individual in HR or colleague I would consider letting them know your concerns informally, make it clear that you are only doing this out of concern. Keep your examples limited to the ones that you feel comfortable discussing and are a little more black and white. I imagine what you decide to say might depend on how strong you feel.
Good luck and I hope you find a solution. I would also say it's likely you are not alone, it might help to reach out to people who you suspect could have also been affected by this person.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The other answers all offer wise recommendations and cautions and raise good questions. Here's another perspective; "I feel your pain." :-)
>
> This is a question that does not quite fit the bill on any particular SE forum...
>
>
>
So this is more of an [Interpersonal Skills SE](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/)-like answer to your Academia SE question and is meant to complement and add to the other very good answers already posted here.
I'm old(ish) and have seen a few cases of what I have armchair(=without qualifications) labeled as "narcissistic personality disordered" or even "psychopathic" academic individuals. Watching over years to a decade what happened is exactly what's mentioned in articles about those pathologies, a trail of trauma and collateral damage to those charmed, convinced or otherwise unprepared for what was happening.
What I'm saying is that what you fear *certainly **might be** right.*
However...
Whatever you do poses substantial risk to you, and the (probably) socially skilled/clever person would receive at most a temporary setback. If what you suspect is true, they will simply learn from the situation and adapt, and possibly seek out the cause (you) and take retribution for fun.
Imagine being on a long flight and an aggravating, troublesome passenger walks past your aisle seat. Should you stick out your leg and trip them to interfere with their behavior? Will this quick action produce a net-improvement for all the passengers during the remainder of the long flight? Will it for you?
If you want to use your (perceived) newly gained ability to recognize and perhaps understand manipulative behavior to improve your life and those of others, use it long term:
1. Be more alert in your own interpersonal interactions.
2. Be *very carefully* helpful to friends by asking neutral questions that may help them recognize their own situation on their own terms.
3. It is *good and noble to want to intervene*, but the how's and why's of how we choose to do it is what separates wise from foolish actions.
4. Be aware of subconsciously trying to right some wrong in your own experience by intervening on behalf of someone else. Helping others in these kinds of situations requires skill and wisdom to decide if and how it is really possible. Be cautious not to subconsciously conflate helping others with righting some wrong you've experienced yourself.
Remember that each person's reality is usually pretty different than anyone else's. What feels like an "objective" perception at the time may never translate to other people's "objective" perception.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/03
| 1,096
| 4,541
|
<issue_start>username_0: Why is the pay for tenure-track faculty at business schools in developed countries other than the US substantially lower than (and often only a fraction of) their US counterpart (with the exceptions of Hong Kong and Singapore, and then perhaps a handful of other schools in the rest of the world)?
Shouldn't the proportion of people who want to pursue business degrees and are able to pay business school tuition largely comparable across developed countries? Then should non-US business schools also be able to make money from tuition to hire top business researchers/professors and pay them as well as US business schools? What makes the economics of running a business school and paying faculty different in other developed countries?<issue_comment>username_1: Unions.
When faculty are represented by a powerful union, then faculty in different disciplines are all paid the same. This results in lower pay for the highest paying disciplines. The US lacks powerful unions.
Supply and demand are probably also a factor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Many universities are not funded by tuition by students. Funding from the government is not rare.
2. Did you remember to take into account such issues as whether the society offers reasonable healthcare for everyone, kindergarten and school for children, reasonable holidays, unemployment benefits, rights for employees, etc.? Adjusting for these might not always be in favour of USA. This also makes it very difficult to compare wages across countries.
3. That said, USA is a very rich country with some very rich universities that can afford to pay well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think this is not an issue limited to buisiness school salaries, but to a lot of other professions in the US as well. In many instances, people will earn double or triple the salary in the US than compared to lets say countries in the European Union.
BUT: these countries have universal (or free) healthcare, free or reasonable priced childcare, free or very cheap, and nevertheless high quality education (even on a university and college level). And not to forget: people at the lower end of the income spectrum generally have all these perks as well, with an addition of functioning disability, unemployment and maternity leave payments. And they have 30 days of paid vacation a year.
In short, all the money that you did not get paid compared to the US goes into an improved quality of life (IMHO) not only for yourself but also for the whole society you are living in. Worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is sort of a more detailed version of @AnonymousPhysicist's answer, specifically for the UK.
In the UK all academics (with the exception of Imperial College London) are paid on the same 54 point national pay spine. The salary at each point is negotiated by the unions and a organization that represents employers each year. I'd not say that the unions are "powerful" as they have lost this negotiation every year for the last 10 years, and pay increases have been zero or below inflation.
Each university can divide those points up into "grades" however they like, but most are more or less similar in practice. At my uni we have 9 grades. What grade you are is determined by your job description, not your subject area. So grade 8 is described as "having principle responsibility for delivering one or more areas of teaching and leading a program of research, either of which may involve management of junior colleagues". The complete job descriptions for each grade are available publicly on the internet. Grade 8 starts at point 37, which in 2019 was £41,526 GBP ($57,667 USD). All academics taking up an entry level faculty position will be grade 8, the vast majority grade 8.1 (sometimes people negotiate to start at 8.2 or 8.3), irrespective of their discipline.
This is useful for universities on some level - tuition fees at the undergraduate level are capped at £9,500 for home students by law, but some degrees (principally experimental science and engineering courses) cost way more than this to teach. Degrees that are either cheaper to teach (like humanities) or can attract significant overseas students (like engineer) cross subsidies expensive subjects that can do neither. MBAs are both cheap to teach and attract many high-fee paying overseas students, and so provide a large amount of cross-subsidies to, say Biology, which costs twice the fee cap to teach, but attracts few overseas students.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/03
| 1,209
| 5,007
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted an application for a research assistant position in field of psychology and neuroscience in the USA. The person to whom I submitted my application seems to be the lab manager (not quite sure though). Let's call this person A. But I also find the job posted under another lab member (let's call this person B). It has been 20 days since I submitted my application.
1. Should I send a follow up to person A?
2. What if I still do not hear back from person A after sending a follow up?
Or
3. Should I send an email to person B referencing that I have submitted my application on … to person A?
4. What is an appropriate amount of time to wait before send email to the PI of the lab inquiring about any opening her/his lab?
Note, my qualification does fit the job requirements. Also the job posting dated at the beginning of this year so there is a possibility that the job has been filled. In this case, can still express my interest in this job and ask to be considered for future opening?
**Edit:** please assume that the job has not been filled. Also there is no deadline for this job. They have something along these lines "Job will be closed when the right candidate is selected."<issue_comment>username_1: Unions.
When faculty are represented by a powerful union, then faculty in different disciplines are all paid the same. This results in lower pay for the highest paying disciplines. The US lacks powerful unions.
Supply and demand are probably also a factor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: 1. Many universities are not funded by tuition by students. Funding from the government is not rare.
2. Did you remember to take into account such issues as whether the society offers reasonable healthcare for everyone, kindergarten and school for children, reasonable holidays, unemployment benefits, rights for employees, etc.? Adjusting for these might not always be in favour of USA. This also makes it very difficult to compare wages across countries.
3. That said, USA is a very rich country with some very rich universities that can afford to pay well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think this is not an issue limited to buisiness school salaries, but to a lot of other professions in the US as well. In many instances, people will earn double or triple the salary in the US than compared to lets say countries in the European Union.
BUT: these countries have universal (or free) healthcare, free or reasonable priced childcare, free or very cheap, and nevertheless high quality education (even on a university and college level). And not to forget: people at the lower end of the income spectrum generally have all these perks as well, with an addition of functioning disability, unemployment and maternity leave payments. And they have 30 days of paid vacation a year.
In short, all the money that you did not get paid compared to the US goes into an improved quality of life (IMHO) not only for yourself but also for the whole society you are living in. Worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is sort of a more detailed version of @AnonymousPhysicist's answer, specifically for the UK.
In the UK all academics (with the exception of Imperial College London) are paid on the same 54 point national pay spine. The salary at each point is negotiated by the unions and a organization that represents employers each year. I'd not say that the unions are "powerful" as they have lost this negotiation every year for the last 10 years, and pay increases have been zero or below inflation.
Each university can divide those points up into "grades" however they like, but most are more or less similar in practice. At my uni we have 9 grades. What grade you are is determined by your job description, not your subject area. So grade 8 is described as "having principle responsibility for delivering one or more areas of teaching and leading a program of research, either of which may involve management of junior colleagues". The complete job descriptions for each grade are available publicly on the internet. Grade 8 starts at point 37, which in 2019 was £41,526 GBP ($57,667 USD). All academics taking up an entry level faculty position will be grade 8, the vast majority grade 8.1 (sometimes people negotiate to start at 8.2 or 8.3), irrespective of their discipline.
This is useful for universities on some level - tuition fees at the undergraduate level are capped at £9,500 for home students by law, but some degrees (principally experimental science and engineering courses) cost way more than this to teach. Degrees that are either cheaper to teach (like humanities) or can attract significant overseas students (like engineer) cross subsidies expensive subjects that can do neither. MBAs are both cheap to teach and attract many high-fee paying overseas students, and so provide a large amount of cross-subsidies to, say Biology, which costs twice the fee cap to teach, but attracts few overseas students.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/03
| 450
| 1,901
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a review to a manuscript I wrote one of the reviewers claimed in strong words that two important references were omitted. In fact, both references were cited in the text. I suspect the reviewer is among the authors of these references, since I recommended one of them as a reviewer during submission. The manuscript was rejected and I do not plan to resubmit, still I am contemplating if I should respond to this presumptive mistake by the reviewer. The reason is that the perceived omission likely affects the reviewers opinion of me as an author in a negative way. I think that there is a non-negligible chance that the same reviewer may also review future work. Should I accept this and move on or should I ask the editor to forward to the reviewer a statement that the references were not omitted?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> The manuscript was rejected and I do not plan to resubmit
>
>
>
Then do not respond.
>
> Should I accept this and move on
>
>
>
Yes. Reviewers make mistakes. That's normal.
Most people who think they know who the reviewer was are wrong.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The editor rejected your paper, not the reviewer. You can quickly write to the editor that the reviewer may have overlooked your work, as seen in the not capturing/fully reading the citations you gave.
However, it is unlikely that the absence of them was **so** relevant to the decision.
"the perceived omission likely affects the reviewers opinion of me as an author in a negative way": it is not the opinion about you, it is about your work. If you take things so personally you are bound to a lot of insatisfaction in your life (academic and not). This apply to how you perceive yourself, as well as you perceive the others: stop assuming or guessing a reviewer identity and the "hidden" motives behind the request to cite certain works.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/03
| 485
| 2,104
|
<issue_start>username_0: In undergraduate or graduate courses, marks and remaining measures are awarded or attributed solely based on the work done by a student.
Even in team works, marks can be varied by checking the contribution of individual students.
But, coming to research, there are no rules or an enforcing body, which checks the individual contributions of all the authors mentioned in the paper. Why is it coming under ethics, but not enforcing?
Is it because of the reason that it is difficult to implement or infeasible to implement?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually the "enforcement mechanism" is the entire academic community. Papers, for the most part are written by specialists, often for other specialists. Every reader can make a judgement about both ethical concerns and contributions. Every reader can criticize any paper that they read.
One problem with a "centralized" scheme is that the expertise is so varied that it would take a gigantic organization to do so. That "gigantic organization" is the entire scholarly community.
Moreover, as to contributions by individuals in joint papers, that is probably best left to the authors themselves. Most journals insist on some form of agreement among authors in this by asking them all to "sign off" on the paper.
And your judgement about what is a "minor" contribution vs a "major" one might well differ from mine. But this is because there is so much variation in the kinds of contributions: time spent, "effort", key ideas, writing, organization, creation of the enabling lab, ...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1's answer is pretty spot on, but I think there is also the following question: *Why would we care about who did what?* We care about this for class projects because at some point, individual grades have to be assigned. But I see no particularly good reason why we need to decide once and for all that for a given paper, authors X, Y, and Z contributed 60, 30, and 10% of the work.
There is no reason to build a substantial administration for obtaining information nobody cares about.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/05/03
| 735
| 3,122
|
<issue_start>username_0: First time caller, long time listener :)
I'm an assistant professor in a research group. The professor leading our group (and my long time mentor) told me, roughly one month ago, that he got involved into creating a legal entity together with an old pal of him (not in academia). They plan to be commercially active in our field of study.
I don't find this problematic in itself, but I'm worried about conflicts of interest: he does not plan to make his involvement in this entity public any time soon, and surely not before it is commercially active (they are setting up things right now). Moreover, He already mentioned to me that he plans to use interviews carried out within the scope of our research group activities (which, of course, we carry out on confidentiality premises) to the benefit of this company.
As I was uncomfortable with all of this, I shared my concerns with him. He told me that he doesn't see it as I do, that he'll make his involvement transparent *'when the time is right'*, and that it's common for people in his position to have their side-business (which is true, but I guess there are specific procedures?).
Finally, he told me that if I show enthusiasm and support for this idea he sees me in a shareholder role in the future. I am of course intrigued but at the same time disturbed by the offer in response to me expressing concerns.
Am I overreacting? What should I do? I confess I feel lost and destabilised. So any advice is welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: At least in the United States, universities retain the intellectual property that results from research activity by university faculty. But, most universities also have procedures for commercializing this research through spin-off companies in which the university has a stake.
I don't know what country you are in, but if the legal situation is similar to the one in the United States, then using research results in a side business infringes on the university's intellectual property unless the university's IP office has agreed to its use.
What *you* should do about this is unclear to me. On the one hand, you have a personal relationship with your mentor, and you have no reason to believe for certain that what he's doing is illegal. At the same time, you are *suspecting* that not all might be by the rules, and so you may have knowledge of a crime against your university. The suggestion that you might hold equity in the company if you just play along could also be interpreted as "buying your silence" (which, if you happen to work for a public university, could also be "attempted bribery of a public official"). I agree that the situation is certainly awkward.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You should read your university's conflict of interest policy and outside employment policy. Follow the policy as long as you work for the university.
We don't know the policies, and cannot give more detailed advice.
If the policy is unclear or does not exist, get university leaders to fix it.
Keep in mind that the majority of startup companies are never profitable.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/03
| 449
| 1,941
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was asked to referee a paper. The topic is within my field but not in my exact area of research. The paper seems all good and fine, but I struggle to judge the originality or whether they miss relevant work. I have a friend/colleague in my department who works in the same area. Would there be any problem with asking for their input on refereeing the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: I would assume that it is a fairly common practice as long as no conflicts of interest arise. But, to be sure, this is really a question to address to the editor. You might have to say a few words about the colleague.
Some situations, of course, require confidentiality. Most do not as long as the normal rules and expectations apply.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Because even when a paper is technically in your field, you might not necessarily be an expert in the specific topic, there is always the possibility to reject an invitation to review a paper. If you did not accept the invitation yet, I would honestly rather suggest you politely decline the request, stating your abovementioned reasons. If you have already accepted, than I would inform the editor(s) that your colleague (without any conflict of interest) is joining in the review.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you need to ask for help (and know who to ask) when refereeing a paper, don't review it. Instead, decline the invitation and suggest the editor ask the other person.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I know more than one journal which (at the stage of review submission) explicitly asks reviewers whether they prepared the review alone or discussed the manuscript with other researchers (and if yes, ask for their name too). So this is totally fine (except obvious situations when you ask help from one of the co-authors of the manuscript, of course), just don't forget to mention it to the editor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/03
| 383
| 1,717
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have this opportunity in a company as an intern which i am interested in. As a Ph.D. student is it recommended to go for industry ?
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: At this point in your career do one thing and do it well. You’re developing mental discipline and perseverance along with your intelligence and knowledge of a field. If you have the capacity and talent and resilience needed, a summer internship might be useful to you. What does your advisor think about it?
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is possible based on your evaluation by your advisor. If he agrees to it, all you've to keep in perspective is to be able to coop with a shift of environments after you return back to your Ph.D work. However, if you're working on the same field in your professional internship as your Ph.D (which is obvious, mostly). An internship will surely help you in expanding your network of connections who share the same interest as you which is also a boost for both your research prospects and your career in general. However, you should also understand that Ph.D shouldn't be considered just like any other course. It is a process of gaining expertise, professional experience, understanding the values of ethics, deadlines, guidance, mentorship etc. It is also a process of realizing your own potential and abilities to challenge yourself based on the problem in perspective at various points in time. It's about sticking to the same thing even after failing uncountable times, thereby enhancing your thinking capabilities and in turn giving rise to new possibilities, and amazing research results which therefore provide some/great value to a field.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/03
| 816
| 3,500
|
<issue_start>username_0: On the one hand, it seems like "no" - hence some universities like Caltech choose to remain small, while others like Boston University & MIT don't merge into a single super-university in spite of having campuses that are side-by-side.
On the other hand, I don't see why it wouldn't apply. There should be an advantage to pooling resources, e.g. with library subscriptions, campus transport, and so on. At the academic level, more students/faculty would also allow the university to teach more specialized subjects.
Does economy of scale apply to universities? If yes, why are Caltech, Boston University/MIT etc (and [Imperial/UCL](https://www.theguardian.com/education/2002/nov/18/highereducation.universitymergers) for that matter) making the decisions they do? If not, why not?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, economy of scale does apply to universities. Having more students reduces the operating cost per student.
The universities you have listed are research universities. They prioritise spending on research, and not students. They do not care about revenue as they have plenty of money and do not exist for the purpose of gaining more money.
For institutions that have little money and get most of their money from students, I've sometimes heard it said that 300 students is "enough" to achieve economy of scale.
Some universities achieve economy of scale using purchasing consortia. In these constoria, several universities work together to negotiate a favorable contract from a vendor. This is quite common for public universities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Universities are not for-profit organizations.
In fact, they are mostly purposely money-losing organizations. The tuition they charge usually does not nearly cover their costs.
It is true that, if they were bigger, their losses would be smaller *per student* because of efficiency of scale. However, their total losses would be bigger.
Universities cover their losses through investment income from past donations that are invested. (This is called an endowment.) If a university were to expand, their endowment would no longer cover their total losses.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Gibbs (2006, "Why assessment is changing", in Bryan and Klegg (eds.), *Innovative Assessment in Higher Education*, Routledge) points out that, while substantial economies of scale do exist in some aspects of higher education (knowledge-transmission lectures, library provision, ...), there are not corresponding economies of scale available in either formative or summative assessment of student work; and that as a result, when universities attempt to realize the economies of scale that do exist by increasing student-staff ratios, this leads to a decline both in the quality of formative assessment and the construct validity of summative assessment experienced by students, simultaneous with an increase in the fraction of their time that academics must spend on assessment.
I hypothesize that refereeing of research papers is sufficiently analogous to summative assessment of student work that the equivalent process is likely to happen: when universities attempt to realize economies of scale by increasing (e.g. through big collaborations with division of labour by process) the rate of production of papers per academic, this leads to a decline in the quality of refereeing, simultaneous with an increase in the fraction of their time that academics must spend on refereeing.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/04
| 594
| 2,268
|
<issue_start>username_0: At the moment I am at the initial stages of my PhD, but there is a masters program (M.Sc) I love to follow after my PhD.
**Question 01**
>
> Is it possible to do a Masters Degree (M.Sc) after a PhD
>
>
>
**Question 02**
>
> If I follow a Masters Degree (M.SC) **after the PhD** is it considered as a **Post Doc** (Postdoctoral) qualification ?
>
>
>
---
*My Background*
*I have a B.Sc(Hons) first class, MBA, and M.Sc with 3.74 GPA*<issue_comment>username_1: You may be able to do that, but the qualification will in most cases not benefit you. In most cases the highest degree (in your case, your PhD) is all that people look at. So this is not done very often, because you have a cost (time, effort, tuition, lost pay) without benefit. If there is a limited number of places and the program needs to select its applicants, then this may be a reason to choose somebody else who will benefit more from that degree than you will.
However, most people continue to learn new things after a PhD. They just don't do it anymore as part of a degree offering program. This could be because of the costs I mentioned before. In some cases participating a MA program takes up resources that could be better spent on people who really need that degree, and it is the responsible thing not tie up those resources. Degree offering programs tend to be less flexible then learning things on your own. PhDs use a variety of strategies to learn new things: Sometimes you do it on your own. Sometimes through a MOOC. Sometimes some members of a department decide that they all want to learn a new topic together and meet weekly to discuss a given chapter. Sometimes, ...
As to the second question: definitely not. As I said before, the qualification is largely lost.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Answer to question 1) I know a friend who did a PhD in Physics, after which she decided that she had enough with science, and did a masters in literature. It is not apparent in your question, but assuming that you want to do a masters in a completely unrelated field, and that it is your dream to do that masters, I will say go ahead! Sometimes, it is better late than never.
Answer to question 2) No, post-doc is not a degree.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/04
| 4,843
| 20,957
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 3rd year PhD student in Canada. My research area is different than my labmates. However, they are publishing high impact papers at high rate (2 per year), while I am struggling to get my second paper out. My first paper was in a low impact journal.
It is not only about the impact factor, their work is also more rigorous than what I am doing. Granted that my field of research is different (they work in modeling nanomaterials, while I work in simulation of a coating process), but I get super intimidated by their research output. My research area is not exactly aligned to my advisor's research expertise.
My seniors have gone on to become assistant professors in universities, in industry or are in prestigious research labs for their postdoc. They receive awards and accolades from the university and government, while I am struggling.
What should I do differently? I am working 80+ hours every week, but it seems I am not capable enough. My advisor seems satisfied with my work, but he is a hands-off kind of person, so I don't know if he even cares about my research output. Am I wasting my time with doing this PhD?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a bit of a subjective question: It is impossible to know **if** you're doing something wrong or what you should do differently without knowing your situation. However, as a PhD student myself, I can try to tackle some of the points you brought up:
*My research area is different than my labmates*.
I don't know how it is on the materials field, but in my field of research, some sub-fields are "easier" to publish (i.e. incremental results are worth publishing), whereas others require more tests or practical results.
*I get super intimidated by their research output*.
Do not forget that the grass is always greener on the other side! I work in a lab full of brilliant PhD students and it took me some therapy to stop comparing my work to theirs. My productivity even improved once I stopped looking outside and focused on my own work.
This kind of feeling is very common during this period of your life. **A lot** of PhD students suffer from Impostor Syndrome, for example. I strongly advise you to seek psychological help.
*What should I do differently? I am working 80+ hours every week*
If you're working hard, obtaining results and your supervisor is satisfied, perhaps there is nothing inherently wrong with your work. Trying to measure yourself by someone else's ruler often leads to feeling burnout about your research, and I personally know people that have abandoned their field of interest because of a similar problem.
*My advisor seems satisfactory with my work, but he is a hands-off kind of person*
It is important to trust the judgement of your PI. Moreover, the goal of a PhD shouldn't be to obtain accolades and publish on the best journals. A PhD is more about you becoming a *better* researcher, while making significant contributions to your field. Sometimes what is significant for a given field is 'less shiny' than for others.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you're working 80+ hours a week, it's possible that that's getting in the way of you taking time to get enough sleep, and/or to maintain a healthy diet, and/or to get a decent amount of exercise, and that in turn is adversely affecting your cognitive function and impeding your ability to produce your best work. It might be worth trying taking your foot off the pedal a bit.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Between PhDs and faculty positions there are often one or more postdoctoral positions, so if you decide to continue in research, you might think about what kind of postdoc you are looking for based on your experience (eg work in a hot field or in a group that publishes a lot).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> I am a 3rd year PhD student
>
>
>
If you are a 3rd-year PhD student and still not entirely clear on how to conduct yourself in your research field with respect to expectations, impactful topics and so on - either your advisor is not doing their job or you are a bad listener. You should talk with your advisor ASAP.
>
> their work is also more rigorous than what I am doing [...] My research area is not exactly aligned to my advisors research expertise.
>
>
>
Again, this sounds an awful lot like there's a problem of fit. Your advisor is not offering you the guidance and support you obviously need. You mention that they are more hands-off: this is fine if your students are capable of conducting independent research, less fine if they're struggling.
>
> What should I do differently?
>
>
>
First of all, talk with your advisor and convey these concerns to them. They may be satisfied because they think that you're a "late bloomer" that will produce good research; they may think that hearing negative feedback from them will make you feel bad, or just are generally averse to conflict; they may be used to working with more independent student and just don't know how to deal with you; they may not care about you as much as you think they do - what's one bad PhD student as compared to the string of superstars they've already produced?
Secondly, if you're working 80+ hours a week and not getting results it could be because you don't know how to make good use of your time (chasing inconsequential issues or lacking focus), or because you are not working on a good problem. The first part is your responsibility. The second part is a shared responsibility between you and your advisor: you should know whether you're working on a good problem.
Other good habits to pick up: write and document your (lack of) progress. This will make you more efficient (avoid repeating mistakes) and allows you to share your work with others more easily. Perhaps others could tell you how to do better. Secondly - get active: talk to others about your work, give seminar talks about the partial results you got, and get feedback from you peers.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: My answer is not focused on the academic, but on the working hours.
**Working 80+ hours of mentally challenging work a week without a proper support network and proper mindset to keep you grounded will lead to burnout and extremely reduced output quite quickly.**
It is really important for you to get a proper support network and working conditions, by which I mean a place to unwind from your research and not think about it and something to improve your mental hygiene.
After some time there is no other solution than to **find some small goal, make sure everyone who needs to know knows you finished it and are going to be switching off for a small while - holidays YEAH - and TURN OFF!**
After that, you need to make sure you:
1. **Have some small waypoint to work towards** instead of just the large ones and manage your planning with enough time to work on it and COMMUNICATE with your colleagues/advisors in a **timely** and open manner about any bad and good events that have influence over them. It might require you to change advisors or find new co-advisors and change your workplace.
* after you finish that REALLY small goal, celebrate it. Go to a nice dinner, drink a beer, do something to unwind, and enjoy your small victory. Take the rest of the day or the day after that as your day off.
2. **Establish proper and sustainable foundations.** No man is an island and solving the large problems of your research in conjunction with all of the small things going on in your life will break your back. It was the last STRAW that broke the camel's back, not the fridge and wardrobe loaded before that.
* it's really important to work with the people around you. Find a psychologist to whom you can tell anything that comes to mind. Find a friend who you can tell the same. If you live with your family or with a significant other, make time to be with them and make sure they have time to be with you.
3. **Strive to find something that will allow you to SWITCH OFF** and not think about work/research for some short time period (for example before sleep). Reading, watching stupid TV shows or going out with your friends, or working out for an hour in a gym and watching the nice ladies around you (in a non-perverse and respectful manner) or anything else that "floats your boat" will work for that.
4. **Reduce your working hours.** Working 80+ hours a week might seem like a good idea but it is just exacerbating the problem since you're probably just forcing yourself deeper into the hole. It's like thinking that the answer to not having enough speed/power output on a redlined motor is to keep in in the redline for longer. It might work for a short while but long periods of over-revving will just destroy it.
5. Oh, and small victories. If the only thing in your life is this big research project you're doing, which is going badly, you're doing it wrong. Take your time to solve small problems that inconvenience your life and keep solving them periodically and take your enjoyment from work well done on them. Make sure you have fresh groceries and you make your laundry on time and try to enjoy those small things. The advice to **eat well, sleep long and dress nice** is old and cliche, but it won't hurt you. Au contraire. A lot of the work done on time is in proper preparation and part of that preparation is preparing yourself, as **you are your own most important asset.** It is hard to concentrate on some abstract mathematics if you're hungry, sleepy, stinky, and itchy since you didn't shower for three days. It will also have a compounding effect on your mental health. (unless you're suffering from something serious, and even then the routine might help, but you'll probably hear the same from a psychologist if you ever visit one).
6. **Read the [answer by username_4](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167163/122202)** and think about the possibility of some of it being true for your situation.
7. **Read the [answer by username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167145/122202)** and think about the possibility of some of it being true for your situation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I'll address this very specifically, since you've mentioned enough details and I'm familiar with the field. The other answers are well-meaning, but somewhat questionable, since a lot of this is wildly field-dependent.
@DanielHatton makes the primary point, that you may be sacrificing quality time to put in more hours. This is easy to fall into when you're primarily doing process simulation. This is primarily because of the steep learning curve, and because you can't easily validate what you're doing. It is highly likely that a large part of the time spent trying to set up the simulation is ultimately unproductive.
That's where a strong network is crucial for this kind of work. If you have been placed in this project without any prior work (eg. a previous model or a similar but rudimentary system), and if you don't have any prior background for this, the situation is rather grim. I would go far enough to call it irresponsible on the advisor's part, and to a lesser extent on yours for not doing due diligence. It is even more irregular considering that the other students are working on a topic that is presently extremely easy to publish in (contrary to the comment viz. "2 high impact papers per year is not normal").
I strongly suggest conveying your current situation and predicament to your advisor at the earliest and prevailing upon them to add some experimental component that is less uncertain.
The grass may be greener, and you may indeed be too critical on yourself; notwithstanding, your situation requires urgent attention.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Relax, rest, you are doing fine\*. Don't damage yourself over the achievements of others.
Not every field is as productive as others. Even if they are close, the output potential could be vastly different. I work on multiple fields, some are easier to publish in respectable journals and in one, we are struggling to get anything published. You might be in the side topic that is difficult to publish. Now this could hamper your ability build your CV, but working on a field that is probably not very well developed has its benefits too. And you can always switch your topic once your PhD is over.
\* I know this because your advisor said so. Trust your advisor, and if you are worried talk with him/her about it. Hands off advisors are generally more apt at judging students, otherwise they can't be in their positions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: My answer is complementary to the answers given by others, so please take them into account too.
You mentioned that your colleagues work in different fields. Did you ever compare your research output to others within your own specialization?
* In what journals do other scientists in your field publish? Is it common for your field to get into high impact journals? Or an exception?
Sadly, whether it is easy or common to get into high impact journals depends a lot on the field of research and whether your article produces enough hype. For example, I believe that many of the most impressive intellectual achievements are generated within mathematical physics. But long documents full of complicated equations for abstract problems are simply not interesting for most researchers.
This may or may not affect the fields you mentioned. *Nanomaterials* is a word I heard a lot over the years, while *coating* is not. But this may be just because of my own background.
* Read papers from your field!
If you have no expert in your field to discuss with, then it is even more important to read lots of papers in your field and learn from them. What do people in your field care about? How do they organize the content of the paper, the introduction? What are their scientific methods? How elaborate do they explain the results and their methods?
* How many papers do other graduate students of your field publish?
Again, the output frequency of papers can depend a lot on your field. For example, I know of experimentalists who spend their entire PhD studies just setting up and performing one really difficult experiment, and then only publish one or two papers about that experiment. However, it is common that these papers go straight to Nature or Science.
* What methods and workflows are you using? Can they be adapted to different problems without restarting from scratch?
Here, I am not sure with what methods you are working. You mentioned *labmates*, but then you say you work in *simulation of coating processes*.
In case you work in simulation, you probably spent a lot of time learning a particular programming language or simulation framework. And in particular developing workflows and concepts for how to input a physical scenario and produce predictions. Can you adapt your knowledge to other but related problems?
My impression about computational/numerical fields is that it is quite difficult to get started. Because computers, in particular programming languages, can be very specific and yet cryptic about how they want their inputs and about what their outputs means. However, once people have figured out the framework or programming language and have written enough code they know how to reuse, the field turns into a paper machine for them. Just change the differential equations, the initial conditions, and you have something new to publish.
Do your labmates also work in something related to simulation? Did they begin their studies earlier than you? If so, it might be possible that they are already in the "paper machine"-phase, while you are not.
* Try to get in touch with other groups in your field.
This is in general a good idea and referred to as *networking*. But in your case, since you doubt the expertise of your advisor, it might be even more important. Under normal circumstances, conferences would be a great opportunity for this. But with the pandemic, emails will have to suffice for a while. In general, group leaders are extremely busy, but graduate students or postdocs are usually happy if anyone shows interest in their work at all. So this might be a good conversation starter. And in the process, you might reflect in more detail about their work and might learn from it. You might also ask your advisor to write the first emails. A group leader is less likely to get ignored. Perhaps you could invite these other experts in your field to give a presentation to your group or institute?
Important goals of this "networking" would be to find opportunities for collaborations within your field, and learn the way of thinking, tricks, shortcuts and methods that are typical within your field. And learn what topics other groups care about. If you try to become an expert in a field on your own without speaking to other experts, you end up losing a lot of time. And despite this, you might remain insecure because you never get feedback from someone who knows whether your things are right or wrong. Guidance by experts is extremely important. You need to understand the intuitions, interests, methods and workflows of others in your field. And often times, papers do not convey such things in a way that is elaborate enough for you to actually apply them.
From my own experience, my guess is that you invest a lot of your 80+ hours per week into proof-reading and checking your work. I expect this because you have nobody to evaluate the details and correctness of your work. This costs a lot of time, often more than doing the work itself. And even then you may remain insecure and full of doubt. It is extremely important to have other experts you trust who can judge the correctness of your work. But for that, you first have to get in contact with such experts.
* How much time do you have left? How can you make the most of your time?
You mentioned that you live in Canada. As far as I know, a typical PhD in Canada takes 4 years, of which the first is a year completely dedicated to mandatory courses/lectures.
It is quite common that graduate students output half of their papers or more within the last year of their PhD. That is because before they spend a lot of time learning the methods and actually producing results. And then they have to think about how to split them up into papers and actually publish them.
A general rule of thumb is that it is better to have several papers, each of them with a clear message and one focus result, instead of trying to squeeze everything you did in years into one paper. Many people only read abstracts or skim through papers in a minute or two. So if a paper contains too many different results or concepts, they might end up not knowing what the paper is about. And in particular editors of high impact journals want that the achievements of your paper can be summarized with one clear, short statement.
* Present your research at conferences in your field and in seminars of other groups of your field!
While high impact journals are important for getting positions and grants, usually this is not how people get to know your name and your research. With the inflation of papers in academia, you might need additional ways to get attention. Apply to give presentations at conferences! In particular now that traveling is impossible for most people anyway, you might be able to give presentations from the comfort of your home without having to worry about travel arrangements and funds. When contacting other groups, you might also offer to give a presentation. Often, groups have group seminars, but people are too busy to ask for presentations. So if you contact them and remain flexible with respect to their schedule, they just have to write an announcement email to their group internal mailing list.
* Don't worry too much about awards.
You can only do your best. And awards usually involve a lot of politics and personal opinions. There is no objective measure of what makes a paper the best, or a research result the most important. If people don't know you, they won't consider you for awards. So also here the contact to other experts in your field can help. Also you should be aware that you have to apply for many awards, while for many other awards your department or advisor has to do the application for you. If you want awards, you should look for awards, apply to them, or tell your advisor/department that you would be interested in trying to get this award. Unless you explicitly contact people, people just try to avoid bureaucracy as much as possible.
* Is it an option to switch to your advisor's field of expertise
How much time do you have left? How different is your advisor's field from your own? Are the methods you learned and workflows you implemented useful to work in your advisor's field? For this it is important to discuss with your advisor.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/04
| 2,522
| 11,092
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some time ago, I submitted my paper to a reputable journal (but far from being one of the best in my field) and have recently received two reviews. One review was positive overall and the reviewer recommened to accept my paper. On the other hand, the second reviewer was very critical of my work. The reviewer explained, in great details, why everything was wrong with my paper (even including the notation I use) and why such research is absolutely pointless and irrelevant. Moreover, the reviewer also criticized my other publications, implied that my research is way below the international level, and recommened to reject the paper. Despite such a bad review, the editor did not reject my paper and asked me to provide a revision without any additional comments.
To be entirely honest, I would've preferred my paper to be rejected after such a review, because I think that no revision can change the second reviewer's opinion about it. In addition, I do not really know how to revise my paper. I can change the notation and rewrite some parts of it in response to some of the comments, but I cannot change the topic of my research to make it relevant in the eyes of the second reviewer.
What would you do in my situation? I'm thinking about writing an e-mail to the editor in order to ask their opinion about the situation and what they would consider as a proper revision of my paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Since
>
> the editor did not reject my paper and asked me to provide a revision
>
>
>
you can revise the paper and resubmit with a fair chance that it will be accepted. Respond to all the comments in the favorable review, either by changing something or explaining in your cover letter why you didn't.
Try to put the tone of the unfavorable review aside so that you can decide whether addressing any of the comments there will in fact improve your paper.
You could write the editor in advance to ask if this is a reasonable strategy. You don't have to withdraw just because one reviewer was unprofessionally nasty.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To receive such conflicting input from the reviewers could indicate that either reviewer 1 (with the positive response) did not do a good job in reviewing and overlooked all of your submission's shortcomings, or that reviewer 2 is biased against you — or a combination of both. If reviewer 2 will also do the second round of reviewing (which is quite likely), I would assume that they would not be much more favorable if you did not change the whole article to a large extent. This could lead to more rounds of revisions, and a very long and time-consuming journey until your article might finally be published.
So if I were in the same situation, I would consider resubmitting the whole thing to a different journal (preferably with a double blind review process, thus preventing reviewers to judge your current submission based on former work (which is bad practice)). It might make the whole process less complicated and time consuming in the end, even though it may feel like admitting defeat towards reviewer 2.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Email the editor first**. The editor clearly did not auto-reject after the bad review, but you got a revise-and-resubmit. These are common, and sometimes a revised paper is accepted and sometimes it isn't. You are under no obligation to revise or resubmit, but it's best to seek out more clarity on the editor's decision. It is also possible that the editor made an error, and you want to avoid wasting the effort of a resubmission if it will be rejected anyway.
You mention that reviewer 2 attacked your research quality and your previous contributions. This is not acceptable behaviour of a reviewer. The reviewer's job is to assess the work that is submitted, not to critique the scientific qualifications of an author. Truthfully, if I were to be judged for my more recent papers based on past performance in conferences I'd never get anything accepted, and that simply doesn't make sense. People learn and grow.
What you need to do is carefully review everything reviewer 2 said. Sort the comments into groups: "I agree with this comment", "I do not agree with the comment, but that is because the reviewer misunderstood the paper", and "I do not agree with the comment, the reviewer is wrong". For each of the three categories, figure out the next step:
"I agree with the comment" - Here the reviewer makes a valid point. Addressing this with further work will definitely strengthen the paper.
"The reviewer misunderstood" - this is sometimes your fault, not theirs. Assuming that the reviewer was acting in good faith, then a misunderstanding on their part implies that your paper wasn't clear enough. Clarify it, since it will strengthen the paper.
"The reviewer is wrong" - Be careful but confident here. Don't just assume that the reviewer is always wrong and that's that, but also make sure that you don't just agree because the reviewer said. For these comments, you need to write a professional rebuttal in your resubmission letter: "We respectfully disagree with the reviewer. Their claim X is in fact not a claim that we have made. We have not modified the paper for this reason".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> On the other hand, the second reviewer was very critical of my work. The reviewer explained, in great details, why everything was wrong with my paper (even including the notation I use) and why such research is absolutely pointless and irrelevant. Moreover, the reviewer also criticized my other publications, implied that my research is way below the international level, and recommened to reject the paper. Despite such a bad review, the editor did not reject my paper and asked me to provide a revision without any additional comments.
>
>
>
If the paper is not rejected while one of the referee reports is negative then the journal is not really "reputable". You do not gain much by publishing there. So I suggest that you withdraw the paper, improve it as much as possible and submit elsewhere.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: There's a good chance the editor is implicitly asking "what do you think of this review?". When the reviewer said everything is wrong with your paper, they want to know why you think the reviewer is wrong; when they criticize your notation, they want to know why you use the notation you do; when they say such research is pointless, they want to know why such research isn't pointless from your point of view.
So it's the same as with every revise decision: make the changes you think are justified, and rebut the comments you think are not justified (or provide reasons for why you are not making the changes). Remember that you are not trying to convince the second reviewer that your work is good - you are trying to convince the editor, [who is able to overrule the reviewer if it comes to it](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32397/why-do-editors-sometimes-accept-a-paper-even-if-a-reviewer-recommends-rejection). Your paper is not rejected, so there's still a chance it will be accepted, but you will need to provide a strong "response to reviewers" document.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Follow the advice and submit. The editor feels your paper is worth including so just revise and submit taking into account the specific and constructive comments of the negative reviewer. Not the general ones like - this stuff is worthless because the other reviewers and editor did not agree, and think what you have is important.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: If I were you, I would first email the editor to ask what happened to me, why there are two different responses, which may not make your article acceptable but it will make you feel comforted, then the editors will acknowledge their mistakes and correct.
Next, I will revise my article to the wishes of the second reviewer (to the best of my ability). Then, I will submit my article to other reputable journals. I think the results will be better.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: "The reviewer explained, in great details, why everything was wrong with my paper (even including the notation I use)"
It is up to you. The editors clearly think you should have a chance to respond to the reviewers, then they will evaluate if your paper is wowrthwhile for publication. The review is not a democratic process, the editor may at any point overrule the suggestion of the reviewers. The editor may even have an idea about the topic you are discussing.
Please divide the personal from the professional aspects of the review (unfortunately, you should not need to do that, but thank to one of the reviewer you have to). If you think it is worthwhile, address the technical/scientific points the reviewer raised (yes, even briefly the notation, for what it matters as long as it is consistent you can note gravity *b* instead of *g*). About the ad-personam attack, better get used to them: unfortunately, in the academia there is a lot of personal pride at stake. Think about how a third impartial person would see the discussion, if done live on a stage: one guy making a huge preamble, with many details on a techincal level, to conclude with a personal attack.
I see two possibilities:
* If you respond with the same personal level, it will quickly go down
the road "how boring, cockfight between expected-to-be-smart people
discussing who has the bigger ego". It may be good for your ego, and even for your career, polarizing the line of thoughts;
* Answering on the technical level only, the reviewer will have his ego satisfied, good for him, the general audience will think "interesting discussion, but that ego-driven professor seems an a\*\*\*e".
Good luck, if someone spend so much time and emotion reviewing your paper it is somehow a good sign, formally it means your paper is questioning some scientific belief (held by someone) and the same someone had to spend time in proving them true.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Occasionally in academia, one professor has a personal dislike of another researcher or a dislike of a research approach, and will tend to give negatively biased reviews to any such manuscripts. Such reviews are not an objective evaluation of manuscripts. It is the job of editors to consider the bias in such reviews when making decisions about individual manuscripts.
>
> The reviewer explained, in great details, why everything was wrong with my paper (even including the notation I use) and why such research is absolutely pointless and irrelevant. Moreover, the reviewer also criticized my other publications, implied that my research is way below the international level, and recommened to reject the paper.
>
>
>
This criticism of other publications seems to indicate some sort of bias. It is entirely possible that the editor does not fully agree with this reviewer, and might choose to accept your paper if you provide an adequate response to the reviewer's criticisms.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/05
| 1,363
| 5,959
|
<issue_start>username_0: I emailed a professor asking for my final exam grade (just the number). Nothing else in the email, tried to keep the inquiry as short as possible. The professor refused.
Is there anything I can do about this, or are professors able to withhold grades at their discretion (other than the final course grade)?<issue_comment>username_1: In most universities professors are encouraged to be transparent about grading, but whether they *have to* show you your grades is up to university/department policy.
If it’s important to you then seek recourse elsewhere: does your school have an ombudsperson or undergraduate academic support? If so - ask them to help mediate. It may also be helpful if you get other students on board: if you’re the only one complaining it’s less likely that you’ll be taken seriously.
In my department, for example, I have to tell students exactly how much they got in each assessment criterion (assignment/project/exam etc.). In addition, I must tell them (in the syllabus, before the course starts) what the numerical to letter grade conversions are (so what grade qualifies you for an A+/A/A- etc.). But this is by no means the norm in other universities to my knowledge.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Email can be used as a formal means to communicate, especially with time stamps. Email is however not unilaterally considered a respected forum to share course grades.
In the US, this lesson hinges tangentially if not primarily on guidelines from FERPA. In a nutshell, an instructor cannot share FERPA-level information such as course grades when he/she has no certifiable permission from the student to do so. This guideline is interpreted as limiting if not restricting entirely the use of email and even phone calls to give out course grades, sometimes even with a release from the student to waive FERPA restrictions.
When a FERPA-based policy is in place at an institution and when that prohibits a US instructor from sharing grades via email or the phone, the policy holds regardless of whether any policies exist that require instructors to share grades with a student. The latter question is [addressed here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/144597/do-students-have-the-right-to-see-how-their-papers-were-graded). In the US, the general practice is that instructors should not/cannot prohibit students from valid requests to review their own graded submissions. Indeed, in the US, FERPA gives students the right to inspect and review their course records. Instructors may be allowed to set the manner of the review. By example, a university policy may be in place that allows instructors to hold the final exam for one year before releasing it back to the student. But the student should still be able to request a chance to review the final exam. The instructor may also be at liberty to prohibit such things as pen/paper or camera devices during the review.
Also, a FERPA-based institutional policy that prohibits instructors from sharing grades with students by email and an institutional or departmental policy stating that email is the only sanctioned method to correspond with students are not mutually exclusive. An instructor can be required to correspond with a student about official class policies only by institutional email (e.g. not by the university learning management system or by private email), but the instructor can also be cautioned about if not restricted from corresponding via any form of email with any student about the details of their performance in the course.
Policies with restrictions based on FERPA may not be in place at your institution, perhaps especially if your request originates somewhere other than from a university in the US.
In summary, you may need to determine whether instructors are or are not permitted to share grades via email. Ask at your university offices of academic affairs (starting perhaps through the offices of academic affair or the Provost for institutions in the US). You may also need determine whether your institution has a policy on how to request to review graded work (e.g. you may be required to file a written petition). Ask through the instructor or the departmental offices.
With all this said and done, and allowing for grace for the bluntness of the instructor, you might simply try asking the instructor for ...
* Clarification on the policies to review your final exam and grades.
* An office visit to review the final exam in person.
* A video meeting where you present your university picture id to review your final exam "in person".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Usually grades are published on a specific location (either physical or digital). It is not a duty of the professor to communicate grades to you personally (not in the majority of western countries, at least).
The duties of the professor or whoever is responsible for the exam/course are usually limited (for good reason) to make grades accessible to the people attending the exam/course (it does not mean public).
Some Western countries have even a stricter policy regarding communications between professor and students, preventing to exchange this kind of information in written or via remote means. You may be based in one of these countries.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In the UK, most grades that count towards the final degree grade are preliminary until they have been certified by both the external examiners and the departmental exam board, which generally takes place at the end of the semester. Marks for indevidual piece of work are subject to changes due to moderation by the internal moderator, grade boundaries can change on the recommendation of the external examiner, or the exam board or examiner could (in theory) refuse to certify marks they didn't think were arrived at correctly.
Thus it is normal not to give marks to students until they are official.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/05
| 2,079
| 9,107
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working towards my PhD in a quite specialized area of engineering, at the overlap of two technologies. Because of this, there are not as many publications available in my field compared to other topics. Furthermore, there is no journal specializing in my area of work, and articles are published in a wide range of journals, some of them not the most reputable ones, to put it gently.
I nevertheless have used such references from journals perceived by some as disreputable, just because there are not that many in total to choose from. But often also because the articles aren't of bad quality, in fact, some of the articles in "shady" journals can be of better quality (IMHO) than articles in more reputable publications.
On the other hand, a lot of academics seem to find the idea to publish in a "low quality" journal abhorrent and claim they would never do so, indicating that these journals represent second-class science.
So my question is: is it bad practice to reference journals of low or no reputation or is it OK to do so if
* there is a limited overall number of references to chose from?
* the quality of the article is high enough? (This would beg the question if I, a lowly PhD student would be able to determine quality in a publication...)
* any other reason
I am curious what your opinion on this is.<issue_comment>username_1: As a PhD student in engineering myself I personally got the feeling that not many scholars care about the journal reputation in our field of research.
I do not know how it is perceived in other areas, but, if the articles you cite are of quality although they are published in a „low reputation“ journal, you should absolutely cite them.
---
Edit: I expressed myself very poorly in my original answer (hence, I deleted the paragraph!). My original answer could be (and was) understood in such a way that I recommended you to not cite papers from predatory journals. What I originally wanted to imply was that you should proceed with caution when using results from such papers if they were published in predatory journals. However, if you use them, you definitely have to cite them, also!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you use insights from a publication, you *must* cite that publication, no matter how low the regard in which you or others hold the venue.
If you're nervous that there's a high risk the insights will be wrong, there are things you can do to reduce that risk:
* seek out an independent corroborating source for the same insight (and cite it *in addition to* the "low quality" source);
* check the chain of logic from evidence to conclusions in the "low quality" source step-by-step for yourself (and still cite the source);
* if it can be done ethically and affordably, repeat a few of the experiments (if any) reported in the "low quality" source to see if the results are reproducible (and still cite the source).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer the question: No, it's not considered bad practice. You are meant to cite work that is closely related or even had an impact on your work, regardless of in what journals this is published. There is no problem with this.
Generally you should not blindly trust published work and make up your own mind about whether it makes sense, regardless of the reputation of the journal.
Something more general about journal reputation. Impact factors and the like, as well as the subjective opinions of people about journals, are not a very reliable quality indicator for the work that appears in the journals. Some journals achieve high impact by publishing headline-grabbing cutting edge stuff fast, sometimes sacrificing quality. High impact journals get loads of submitted papers these days and can easily reject papers after having an Associate Editor looking at the paper for three minutes. The authors may then be forced to publish in a lower reputed journal even if their work is actually fine. The same may happen with work that editors of highly reputed journals don't find "of general enough interest". I have even occasionally experienced better qualified reviewing at lower rated more specialist journals because these would nominate specialist reviewers whereas high impact journals are sometimes more interested in appealing to a more general audience and use reviewers that are, while mostly good, specialised in areas somewhat further away.
I'm not saying that high reputation or impact journals are in fact worse; surely the best people send their best stuff there, which means that many top papers appear in top journals. However there are a number of reasons why top papers may end up in not so highly regarded journals, many of which are in fact OK (some exceptions may exist). Particularly, any journal organising a standard peer review without putting pressure on reviewers and editors to accept papers (which may happen in "author pays for publication" journals or also if the main editor presses for speed too much) should normally publish OK quality stuff; responsible competent reviewers wouldn't accept anything wrong. As a reviewer, I will basically write the same stuff in my report about a paper regardless of the level of the journal, however I may recommend "accept" for a lower level journals and "reject" for a top level one if I think that the work is OK but with only rather small and/or predictable new results that don't require much genius even if these results make sense and are for sure fine to cite in related work. High level journals may have a somewhat easier job to convince the best people to review, but this doesn't mean that all reviewers of top journals are super-competent and those of lower level journals are ignorants. From my personal experience as author, the quality/level of compentence of reviews isn't very clearly correlated to the journal reputation. They just reject more at a higher level. The differentiation between the top and the not-so-top journals often is more according to how original and difficult the material is, and how "hot" the topic.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: If you get an insight (or are referencing an idea/discovery), you need to cite where it comes from. Good/bad journal. Even trade journals, websites, personal communications, etc.
In addition, if you are surveying the literature (or semi-surveying at the intro to a paper), than you should list all the papers that would be useful for readers. I would use some judgment (this is a favor you are doing for the reader). List the most useful papers (good ones, mini-reviews, etc.). You should not feel the need to show everything (impossible in active fields, e.g. electronic thin films). But give the reader the best ones--after that he is on his own to get "cites from the cites" or to do his own ad hoc lit search.
In the event that citations are limited, I would probably lean more towards inclusion (of junkier stuff). Conversely, if there's a lot out there...show the best stuff and skip the "this is a paper about an individual film, not a set of them" type dross.
At the end of the day, this is not a Euclidean proof, but a thoughtful help to the reader. And some element of selection/exclusion is what you are delivering to them (and they will appreciate it...after all they can do their own search in addition). It can't be done perfectly since it is always up for debate. But it can be done thoughtfully and helpfully. Just like most practical problems in business, government, etc.
I definitely wouldn't be tentative about junky journals if you know the papers are good or if that's all there is. If anyone contests it, just say (truthfully hopefully) "I have spent years reading and working in this area and am one of the world's experts in it" (as an older grad student, this is actually a reasonable position...you are the expert in your thesis.)
All that said, I have found that junky journals are usually worse. But you will develop your own intuitions here, within your field. I know that in physics and chemistry, the APS and ACS specialty journals still are quite good. Even some of the Elsevier and the like competition. And Nature/Science (while very prestigious and many good papers) do tend to have more of a problem with headline-seekers and fraud. Since it is a big deal to get papers there and since they see themselves as more than just science journals, but somewhat news-y. Non-US national societies (especially excepting France, Germany, UK) tend to be worse. TEND. But I would look with a wary eye at Japanese Applied Films or the like. And I definitely wouldn't bother ever skimming the table of contents of such a magazine--only coming to their papers as parts of lit searches or "cite from cite" tracing.
But of course, look at the specific papers. You should develop enough perspective (and be enough of a critical thinker) to recognize some of the attention-seeker crappiness in Nature and/or find a diamond in the rough in Japanese Applied Films. And then obviously put the better stuff forward. Don't be a mouse.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/05
| 615
| 2,587
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a very simple question : how involved should a Ph.D. advisor be in the work of a Ph.D. student ?
Should he / she be correcting the work assigned to the student after few days / weeks of student's work, won't they check anything for simulations outputs for example ? or should they be saying few guiding words and it's up to the student to write code, simulate and write the paper ?
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there is a universal answer. Different advisers have different styles. I look over the code that my students write and offer suggestions on how to improve it (and sometimes do it myself); my students like that. My adviser did not have any significant programming skills despite being in computational mathematics, and was mostly hands-off -- but I think he was an excellent adviser anyway.
In the end, different students need different advising styles, and one of the things I have learned advising 8 graduate students so far is this: what works with one student does not work for another one. I suspect one could also turn this around and say from the perspective of the student: The style of one professor may work for them, whereas the style of another may not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The goal of a PhD is to make *you* better at research, ready to take up a research position later. So, regarding the advisor, he should be:
* Someone with vast knowledge on your field of research, who knows what is right and wrong, what are the techniques and tools, the latest developments and so on;
* Someone that *stimulates* you to come up with your own ideas;
* Someone who can supervise your work and ideas and see if you're on a good path or if you should be doing something differently.
* Someone (ideally) who adapts to your style in a way: some students need more supervising and to discuss quite often, some do not.
* Someone who motivates you to use the scientific method and report relevant conclusions, even when they do not please you.
Your advisor should not:
* Micromanage you, following every single step;
* Tell you exactly what to do. Don't forget a PhD is a research job, so neither you or your advisor will always have the answers; however, if it's always your advisor telling you what to do, you're not a PhD student, but a technician.
There must also be a mutual trust between you two. If the advisor knows you and your technical capabilities, he won't need to correct every line of code you write, only the results coming from it (unless your thesis is about the coding itself).
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/05/05
| 705
| 3,163
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to complete a Masters in Physics (thesis based research) at my undergraduate institution after being rejected during PhD applications. I feel like this will bolster my research experience and strengthen my research application. After this, I plan to apply to PhD programs, both at my home institution and at other schools. Do PhD admissions committees favor a Masters degree with research? Did I make the right decision in going for a Masters?<issue_comment>username_1: This is hard to answer, but I have some advice that is too long for a comment. In general, in the US, there is unlikely to be much preference for someone with a MS vs someone with a BS for graduate admissions. Coming with only a BS gives you a longer time frame to get ready to pass comprehensives before you start dissertation research. A MS candidate will still need to pass those exams and may be ready at entry or not.
But among those with a MS, having research experience is probably a plus in many fields, though it might narrow your possibilities since it has narrowed your focus.
But the bigger question is why you were denied entry already. Perhaps your record is poor. Perhaps you applied to too few schools. Perhaps you applied only to very selective programs with a lot of competition.
If your own school rejected you for doctoral studies there is probably something lacking that should be directly addressed.
But, since your current institution has a doctoral program in your field, you have an opportunity to get serious and specific answers to all of your questions by speaking with some trusted faculty member (or two), who are in a position to give you career advice.
The other question you need to answer concerns you long term career goals. Will a BS alone or a BS + MS give you the path you want, assuming you still don't get in to a doctoral program? Think about what your career trajectory might be with all these options. For academia you need a doctorate, of course. For industry, not so much.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In my own field (neuroscience) I don't think a masters really counts for anything in US PhD admissions (but these decisions are all made by humans on an admissions committee; maybe one of those humans reviewing your application likes a masters degree). Research experience you gain while doing a masters is valuable, however, it just doesn't matter that it's part of a masters program rather than a job or anything else. Sometimes a masters is the best access a recent grad has to research, though.
Unlike what username_1's answer implies, in my field having a masters doesn't change where you are on the PhD track - you'll have just as many years and courses as someone coming in with a BS.
I can't say whether you made the right choice or if it will work out for you - no one can - but if you can gain experience in research and work with people that can write you strong letters of recommendation then this choice will increase your chances of PhD admissions. Whether it will get you into the program you want (or any program) can never be guaranteed, though.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/05
| 509
| 2,277
|
<issue_start>username_0: When submitting a research proposal for a funding agency, I heard two different pieces of advice from principal investigators that have won several awards. The first suggestion is to submit a proposal that is directly related to the PI work and consider that as a preliminary result. The second piece of advice was to submit something totally new which might extend the boundaries of science. I wonder if there are any general recommendations for research proposals that would increase the chance of being funded.<issue_comment>username_1: No, there are no such general recommendations.
>
> The second piece of advice was to submit something totally new which might extend the boundaries of science.
>
>
>
Some funders give money for research with a high risk to fail.
>
> The first suggestion is to submit a proposal that is directly related to the PI work and consider that as a preliminary result.
>
>
>
Others want to be more on the safe side. It totally depends on where/in which program you apply for funding.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no one-size-fits all answer. The key factors to consider are: (1) alignment to the funder's mission and (2) credibility.
**Alignment to the funder's mission.** Different funding agencies have different motivations. Some have a particular capability gap (whether mundane or extraordinary) and want to fund the group most likely to fix it. Some routinely fund well-established university groups and just want to see progress. Others specifically exist to fund high-risk, high-reward endeavors. Whether to propose "incremental" advances based on past research or "revolutionary" advances will depend on the funder's needs.
**Credibility.** Even for high-risk programs, successful proposals will usually provide a basis of confidence that the proposed idea will be successful (i.e., simply writing down some crazy idea to "extend the boundaries of science" will not be enough). In some cases, this basis of confidence could be the involvement of the proposal authors themselves (due to their publication record or performance on other programs). In other cases, this could be that a proof-of-concept of the proposed idea was already carried out and gave good results.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/06
| 1,372
| 6,007
|
<issue_start>username_0: *Disclaimer, I already posted this on StackOverflow and got advised to post it on "The Workplace" where I got advised to post it on "Academia". Please don't send me back to StackOverflow. In my opinion, it's deeply related to all three of them, so probably people who are active on all three subs have the best perspective.*
We are currently an academic institute of around 50 people. The institute does typical industry research, batteries, metals, magnets, etc. Recently, we began more and more relying on algorithmic developments for evaluation. Most of the recent research results depend in one way or another on custom-built solutions a.k.a software, some even required a User Interface to limit the burden on less tech-savy people.
We are currently building these solutions internally on a per-need basis. I joined the team 1 year ago as a "Machine Learning Expert" but my origin is in computer science and programming. I have some experience in DevOps, Software Project Management, and CI/TDD, and also other people have concepts of how things could be organized. If it's relevant, I will be working on my Ph.D. there. Also, we are doing industry transfer. 4 or 5 more people have at least some experience coding so I am not all on my own with the following mess:
We have data management by chaos and network drives, there is no CI or TDD, no common code-base, everything is pushed on network drives via mercurial (if at all, often it stays local) we slowly have to start using docker because some of the hardware requires it, but we don't have the time to get to the point where it starts saving time, we have high fluctuation and that's only some of the problems you can imagine. Also, we have tons of meetings on how to structure stuff and improve the situation (theoretically). Nothing changed in a year.
The management structure is "by objective" and the DevOps horizon ends at excel. How you do DevOps in excel? You don't. So nobody really cares what we do, how we do, or even who does what as long as you document your stuff in PowerPoint and application guys can use it. There are multiple people supervising multiple students, which sometimes have some sort of coding experience and add to code-abyss. As long as stuff gets published no one cares. Later on, we have a "knowledge" transfer program in cooperation with industry partners ("knowledge" basically means software), that's where everything comes crashing down. In my opinion, working like this and continuing in such a way is tremendously short-sighted, to put it gently. I love this institute and I want it to play in the SotA league. Currently, nobody is holding us back other than ourselves. Freeing time for actual reproducible research by having modern infrastructure and fitting management, sounds too good to be true?
Because it seems we are going nowhere without radical change and external input, I thought I'd give it a shot here as there are people with much more experience than I have. Maybe someone who already completed a Ph.D., started working as a Developer, and now moved into Management. Please share your wisdom. Other institutes could clearly benefit from this, as I can imagine, we are definitely not the only ones struggling.
The best answer from the previous posts was purely from a management perspective: Start with a maximum effect thing and show how much time it saves. This is to convince other people by action and not by words. While that was certainly helpful, that was very unspecific. We need first-hand experiences from institutes that have been transforming and have been adapting to stay relevant to the industry. I promise you, many people will thank you for sharing how you transformed.
The worst answer sadly came from a purely academic perspective which might cost me a few sympathy points here but I tell you anyway. It said I should not care because "it is what it is" and "there are other people who should deal with this". I promise you, they won't be coming. Further, handling the industry transfer under these circumstances is already unbearable. The answer might be true if your scope is really limited to academia only and you solely care about publishing papers, but outside that world, things flow differently.<issue_comment>username_1: No, there are no such general recommendations.
>
> The second piece of advice was to submit something totally new which might extend the boundaries of science.
>
>
>
Some funders give money for research with a high risk to fail.
>
> The first suggestion is to submit a proposal that is directly related to the PI work and consider that as a preliminary result.
>
>
>
Others want to be more on the safe side. It totally depends on where/in which program you apply for funding.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no one-size-fits all answer. The key factors to consider are: (1) alignment to the funder's mission and (2) credibility.
**Alignment to the funder's mission.** Different funding agencies have different motivations. Some have a particular capability gap (whether mundane or extraordinary) and want to fund the group most likely to fix it. Some routinely fund well-established university groups and just want to see progress. Others specifically exist to fund high-risk, high-reward endeavors. Whether to propose "incremental" advances based on past research or "revolutionary" advances will depend on the funder's needs.
**Credibility.** Even for high-risk programs, successful proposals will usually provide a basis of confidence that the proposed idea will be successful (i.e., simply writing down some crazy idea to "extend the boundaries of science" will not be enough). In some cases, this basis of confidence could be the involvement of the proposal authors themselves (due to their publication record or performance on other programs). In other cases, this could be that a proof-of-concept of the proposed idea was already carried out and gave good results.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/06
| 480
| 2,104
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a high school senior. One of my friends did a research project in a certain field of Computer Science 2 years ago and it won a lot of awards. He is now at university. I read his paper and relevant work in the area and the research area looks really interesting. I want to do research that's closely related to this idea and I have a few ideas on how to extend the research. Is it ethical to do this project? My main concern is that he/other mutual friends will think that I just used the same idea so that I could win as well.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can do this. You are not taking his ideas, you are using your own (note you wrote "***I*** have a few ideas").
Basically, once a paper is published, all the ideas within becomes public knowledge and you are free to build on them. You should still cite the original paper if you are building on their ideas, but your extensions are yours and yours alone.
By the way, many authors will be quite flattered if you work on their ideas - it implies that you find their ideas interesting.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Good part of research done is based on or similar to many other studies done before. Actually, most papers cite and compare the results with many other similar researches. If you do another research and cite them properly they should feel honored unless your are really just copy-pasting / plagiarising. In fact, research papers' quality and influence is generally measured by quantity of citations it got in other papers.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: This is of course not a problem! In fact, it's exactly how scientific research works. I would say there are two things you definitely should do to avoid any ethical concerns:
1. Clearly cite your friend's previous work.
2. Provide a fair review of the work your friend did as a part of your project and presentation. Emphasize what they accomplished and how your work fits in or extends the existing research.
As long as you do those two things, there are no ethical qualms with doing this project.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/06
| 442
| 2,080
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted an article (media and communication studies) to a ScholarOne journal. The paper was accepted with minor revision (two reviewers both recommended 'minor revision'). I revised the paper accordingly and addressed the feedbacks. After submitting the revised article for a week, a ADM was assigned and the status has changed to "awaiting reviewer invitation." Does it mean that my paper will go through another round of review with new reviewers? I was told that for paper with "minor revision," it is likely like it will not be sent back to the reviewers. Has anyone experienced similar situation?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know what "awaiting reviewer invitation" means.
But usually, the paper with minor revision will be sent directly back to the same reviewers for the final decision. They need to check whether you revise according to their reviews.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Does it mean your paper will go through another round of review? Not necessarily. It depends on whether the editor invites new reviewers. "Awaiting reviewer invitation" should strictly be a very brief status, since the time between the editor deciding to invite reviewers and the editor actually inviting reviewers should be very brief, on the order of a few minutes. The fact that you are apparently seeing this status for more than a brief moment indicates that the journal is using it as a substitute for "Editor assigned".
You can think about the timeline as so:
* Your paper is resubmitted. Status shows "Revision submitted to journal".
* Either the desk editor (i.e. the employee of the publisher assigned to the journal) or the editor-in-chief assigns an editorial board member to handle the paper. Here the status could show "Editor assigned", or it could show "awaiting reviewer invitation".
* The editorial board member could make a decision now, or they could go ahead and invite reviewers. It depends on how substantial the changes requested are, and whether the editor is able to check it himself.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/06
| 1,142
| 4,874
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work on a research team of four people. However, different members use different tools and this makes working together more challenging. I'm wondering if there are any solutions to this problem (besides insisting everyone use one set of tools, angering at least some of the team members).
For example, two of us use Zotero and two use Endnote. Likewise, two of us use Word and two of us use LibreOffice.
The challenge is that those who use LibreOffice were sick of Word and do not want to go back. However, others are comfortable with Word and do not want to change away from something they know and works well for them. Another challenge is some use Linux and Word on Linux is less simple than Word on Windows or Mac.
It is not as simple as "LibreOffice can edit Word documents" because of the way each handles reference links.
The same problem exists with reference managers. For example, Endnote does not run on Linux.
What we end up with is someone writes 10,000 words in Word and Endnote. Then someone else edits it down to 7,000 in LibreOffice and Zotero. When the original author goes in to make some additions / edits, things get very messy and it requires significant efforts to go back and fix everything. Sometimes, when the first person re-opens the document (which was edited in LibreOffice) in Word, the in-text references will actually be missing.
Has this problem been solved (other than mandating the tools to be used)?
Is editing papers online (Office 365 / Google Docs) a workable solution (do any work with reference managers)?<issue_comment>username_1: I have worked in similar cross-platform teams. Mine in the past was more Latex on Linux with bibtex versus Microsoft Word on Windows with Zotero. In that case, we were working on multiple papers together, so our policy was that everyone went along with the tool that the first author preferred, so we all got a lot of cross-platform experience. That worked for us, but it sounds like what you labelled as "other than mandating the tools to be used".
That might not work in your situation, since your team members seem more inflexible about using tools that other people prefer. In that case, I would suggest something like this:
* Everyone should use Open Document Text (ODT) format, not .DOCX format. Both LibreOffice and Microsoft Word can handle this format just fine, and I think that they can work together (though I have never actually tried this).
+ Although LibreOffice can edit the original version of DOCX, I understand that the current (as of 2021) version is not the open standard version, and so it could probably get messy if people tried to work on the same DOCX document with both LibreOffice and Microsoft Word.
* For reference management, only one team member should edit references. Whether that team member uses Zotero or EndNote, that is for you all to decide (though I have the impression that Zotero might work better on ODT documents; I'm not sure how good EndNote's support is).
+ Whenever any other team member wants to add or modify a reference, they should leave a comment instead that contains the full reference; then the team member that handles references should format it later.
+ This might sound awkward, but it worked quite well on teams where I have done this, due to Zotero versus EndNote member preferences. It is simple and clean to say that only one person is allowed to modify references directly.
+ Of course, if more than one member uses exactly the same platform setup, there should be no problem if they are all allowed to modify references (e.g. Zotero on LibreOffice for Linux only).
I hope one of my above solutions (either everyone just follow the leader, or use ODT and only one reference-handling team member) works for you. In any case, be sure not to let technological tool flame wars burn an otherwise great research collaboration team!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would (and have) take the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167244/75368) a step further.
Invest all of the actual formal writing of the paper in one or two people who agree to use the same tools whatever they are. Everyone else suggests updates/changes as needed, providing their comments in any suitable format. When changes are distributed to the team members they might also be provided with something like a PDF, along with an "active" document, to assure that everyone sees the same thing.
For some changes, the "editor" just needs to cut and paste. For others, they need to do more, but that needs doing in any case.
When I was part of such a team, the "editor" was also the best writer on the team as evidenced from past work. He was empowered to accept/reject suggestions and we produced a very nice product. I don't even remember what tools he used. My choice was LibreOffice.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/05/06
| 817
| 3,345
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have published several papers and have done a number of peer-reviews (on request by the journals) as well. In the communication with these journals, I frequently get addressed as "*Dr. Lastname*", although I have not finished my PhD yet.
I don't mind when this happens in predatory requests from shady journals and conferences (science spam), because I don't expect them to do their due diligence in finding out correct personal info on all the people they send these requests to.
But coming from more serious sources it feels weird.
In the beginning, I made the effort to correct them, but as it started to happen more and more, I stopped, but always wonder if this is not misrepresenting myself. Maybe the requests for e.g. peer-review would not have been sent to me if they knew that I didn't have my doctorate yet, as several journals I know only invite PhD-holders to review.
So should I always clarify my status, or is this a pretty common thing happening to many researchers, and no one really cares?<issue_comment>username_1: The journals are not contacting you because of your title, but because you have published research that they think makes you a good candidate to review the given paper.
There is no need to correct them, the quality of your review does not depend on your title.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: ### Include your proper title and position in your email signature.
I'd say not to explicitly correct them in the email, but to include a signature to the email that says something like "Mr/Ms Sursula, PhD Candidate at Faculty of ABC, XYZ University". Ideally you'd want to use your university's official email footer format to do so.
That way, you can inform them of how you're properly meant to be addressed, without openly chastising them for getting it wrong.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: This typically happens because for editors who do not know you personally, keeping track of whether you have graduated yet takes more time than just finding your name from one of your publications. It is better to err on the side of overstating your title than understating it: if they refer to a PhD-holder as "Ms." or "Mr.", the PhD-holder might be offended, but if they refer to a graduate student as "Dr.", the grad student is less likely to be offended. Combined with the fact that most reviewers have a PhD, it's easier for editors to default to the "Dr." title when inviting new reviewers.
There's no obligation for you to correct them in the submission website. As a reviewer, correction is unlikely to be an issue as reviewers' names and titles should not appear in the publication. As an author, you may want to correct your title and affiliation on your publications.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: It may be worth mentioning, that at least in Germany you are indeed (theoretically) legally obligated to correct them. Not doing so has been ruled unauthorized use of an academic title in the past, which is illegal according to [§132a StGB](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stgb/__132a.html) (translation [here](https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html#p1373)) and carries a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or a fine.
In practice nobody will care about your private emails.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/05/06
| 619
| 2,775
|
<issue_start>username_0: I heard somewhere a few days ago that while selecting a college for an M.Sc., it would be great for me to look up with *whom* the professors there have coauthored papers. This would mean that the two professors know each other and it would lead to a more *trustworthy* recommendation letter if written for a PhD.
How true is that? My guess is that it *could* make a difference but in the end it is mostly about the quality of research work that I have done.
I am from India thinking of applying to the US or UK in the future.<issue_comment>username_1: In my view (and I was MSc admissions officer at some point) recommendation letters at MSc level are largely a tick box exercise. I have admitted more than hundred MSc students and a recommendation letter hasn't made a difference even once. It is fine from my point of view that the student shows they can find somebody professional to recommend them, but as long as such a letter is not actively damaging, the box is then ticked and it doesn't make much more of a difference. Obviously I can't speak for all places.
This makes sense as well; applicants shouldn't have an advantage if they know somebody who published with me or XXX from our institution. Generally admitting students is not about whom they know but how good they are, and because 99% of recommendation letters are positive, I have to assume that there's very little information in them about the quality of the student. Even if some read a little bit less positive, this may be because the writer has a more critical attitude to recommendation letters, rather than the student being bad. People who write glowing recommendation letters for everyone who asks are around all over the place. Also recommendation letters at this level are quite regularly written by people who don't know more about the student than their set of results and maybe that they asked a few questions in class, but maybe not even that (at PhD level this is a bit different). Previous marks and course choices should totally dominate what's in recommendation letters. I'd go so far and say I'd be wary of institutions where this is different.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are applying for a Ph.D. (or an academic job), a strong recommendation letter from someone who is known well by the person making the admission or hiring decision is almost always a *very* big advantage. It will ensure that your application gets serious consideration, and will give you the edge against similarly-qualified candidates.
That said, for M.Sc. admissions, the evaluation is likely done by a small committee, and if that committee does not include the specific professor who knows your recommender, it might not matter at all.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/06
| 3,075
| 12,973
|
<issue_start>username_0: I know, this is a bit of a broad question. But looking at the developments and having experienced a reasonable amount of pain with established publishers and their either complex, slow, or restrictive processes/production stages, I'm tempted to ask it here and look what others think or know about that.
Post-publication peer review has been discussed quite a while ago [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/21326/how-would-you-decide-to-publish-or-not-in-f1000research-or-other-journals-with) and [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51734/risks-of-shifting-to-post-publication-review), it's been promoted and practised on platforms such as [Publons](https://publons.com/blog/5-steps-to-writing-a-winning-post-publication-peer-review/) and [PubPeer](https://pubpeer.com/).
But is this idea, launched many years ago to complement "classical" peer review, really successful? Are established processes/practises being replaced/improved?
**Note for clarification:**
I envisage something like a combination of classical pre- and an optional post-publication peer review strongly based on open self-archival platforms such as [arXiv](https://arxiv.org/). Nothing on the academic side would change, editors and reviewers would move over to such platforms to continue their work just like before, largely unpaid. Even cult-like reputation-building, gate-keeping, etc. is still possible even if not desirable. But in domains such as CS, physics, or math, where production is largely done by authors anyway, costly, error-prone, after-acceptance production stages would be replaced by just self-archival and EiC-driven quality labelling systems as they have been used for years at top-tier conferences to certify such things as reproducibility. I think, it's time for a change. (I wonder whether this question is more something for meta.)
**Further note:** After the many useful comments and answers, I'm extending or rephrasing my question to: *Why isn't full-fledged self-archival with classical peer review and curation, post-publication commenting, and avoidance of old-school production procedures finally taking off?*<issue_comment>username_1: In a sense, it has taken off; you just need to change your definitions: in mathematics, most papers get peer reviewed *after* they have appeared on the Arxiv and are available to the public.
Results then appear in prestigious journals, so they are ultimately trusted and used to evaluate researchers and compare academic egos, only after they have been carefully been reviewed; but that seems working as intended and I wouldn't want it to be different.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In a sense, post publication peer review has always been in place. Prior to publication peer review has the purpose of improving a paper before it appears (or at least prior to its formal publication). This is normally a private matter between a journal or conference and the authors.
Post publication, however, peer review has a different purpose and can no longe improve *that* paper. But anyone reading a paper can comment on it, make corrections to it and publish extensions or corrections. This has always been the case. Once a paper becomes visible it is open to comment by any "reviewer". This has, of course, let to some mighty intellectual battles, such as Leibniz v. Newton. If memory serves, Einstein's early papers weren't universally accepted but created some turmoil among the great names of the day. They generated a lot of comment, but also a lot of additional work attempting to refute or verify or extend them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Most papers that are published are uninteresting.
The median paper has less than one reader not counting the authors and the reviewers.
The current reviewing system relies on a network of responsibilities that are independent of the author. The editors have a responsibility to the community as a whole to get papers reviewed properly, and the community gives them esteem for performing this duty. The reviewers have a responsibility to the editor to actually do reviews, and the editor is usually some influential person (and in any case will probably at some point be the editor for one of the reviewer's papers).
Suppose I have written one of my usual mediocre papers that is among the 70% (my estimate) of papers that are never read. How would post-publication peer review be organized for it? If I have to find reviewers myself, then everyone is going to say 'No' or do a bad job, because no one feels any need to impress me and it's not a very interesting paper to read. Moreover, the best reviewers for my paper are people with a little higher status than me, and they would definitely say 'No' to me, but they might say 'Yes' to an editor. (Keep in mind that, as the system is set up, some top people in a field do far more reviewing than they write papers, while many people write one write-only paper every several years (or grad students who stop doing research write one paper from their dissertation) and never review.)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Because post-publication peer reviews are not currently recognized as useful contributions, so why do them when I could do something that would help me get a job?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As in the other answers, the premise of the question is a bit inaccurate.
For work that turns out to be important, people look at it critically (with interest) long after it has supposedly been "refereed" and "published" (in the sense of being endorsed by a journal). And will look at it critically (with interest) as soon as it's available (e.g., online), whether or not it's submitted to a journal.
And, as has been true for 20+ years, there is the internet. Public availability of documents is no longer monopolized by "publishers" in the traditional sense. Of course, some people are less shy than others about putting online dubious stuff.
If one wants to be confident of the correctness of a journal document, one should probably check it in detail oneself, *unless* it is a very high profile case. In recent years, the guidance I've gotten as referee is that it is *not* my duty to check for correctness! And, well, in cases where no one cares much whether the conclusion is correct or not... ?!?
In math, in the U.S., we are still in the situation that, in most places, the only official way to score career/status/tenure/promotion points is by publication in refereed journals. People scrambling for tenure are not going to throw away their professional currency. And, in my experience, many people who've succeeded in this system are loathe to "make it easier" for the next generation. (I myself have recovered from any affection for artificial suffering... :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In a sense, there *is* post-publication review: It just doesn't happen on websites, but in subsequent papers written by others. And the opinions of others are also recorded: A citation is like a "Like" on Facebook: The citing authors thought the cited paper offered some useful background to readers of their authors.
In other words, papers that are highly cited are, in some sense, positively post-publication reviewed. The converse is also true.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm taking the definition as provided in OP:
>
> Why isn't full-fledged self-archival with classical peer review and curation, post-publication commenting, and avoidance of old-school production procedures finally taking off?
>
>
>
The first part has already "taken off" and is standard in my field (physics). The latter part, post-publication commenting, has not. The reason is, why should it have taken of? For something to supplant the original, it needs to be *better*. Post-publication commenting is not better for several reasons:
* What would be the point? Pre-publication review can conceivably lead to the paper being improved. Post-publication review cannot.
* What are you going to say? You can't provide suggestions for improvement because the paper is already published. You could say "This paper is great, I enjoyed reading it" which is nice to read but doesn't lead to anything. Meanwhile "This paper is bad, it should never have been accepted in the first place" is painful for the authors, especially if the criticism is public, and especially if the criticism is anonymous. [Example I am aware of](https://cosmocoffee.info/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3254&sid=ea7c63404fc08ea8ef7f496c5c21622c#p8929).
* What would one gain from making the post-publication comment? [Think about why people do peer review in the first place](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/7570), and compare that to whether people should do post-publication commenting. Many of the reasons simply do not transfer: the results are already published so you don't get to read new exciting stuff before it's published, these things aren't organized by journals so you gain nothing from that front, and you can't say you're an acknowledged expert because odds are anyone who wants to submit a comment can do so.
* Finally, it's not a reciprocal relationship. Traditional peer review is reciprocal - you peer review for others, and in return they will peer review for you. The same does not apply for post-publication commenting.
Everyone knows the traditional peer review model is flawed, but coming up with a better alternative is pretty damn hard. Post-publication commenting is an example. You might be interested in others - off the top of my head there is open peer review, where the identity of reviewers is public, and the accept-then-review model where the journal accepts every paper before putting them up for review.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: As <NAME> [wrote in 2013](https://gowers.wordpress.com/2013/06/16/the-selected-papers-network/) in the context of an experimental peer review website:
>
> [...] It is easy to come up with ideas for websites where people can review papers, complete with clever protocols for how the reviewing should take place, whether it is open, reward systems, etc. etc. It’s much less easy to persuade people to use the sites that are created as a result: what is going to persuade them to make the effort, when there’s only rather a small chance that the site will become in any sense “official”?
>
>
>
"Becoming official" is the problem here: the publishing system's main function is no longer scientific communication, no longer improving and evaluating papers. The system has been coopted by administrators and funders, in order to manage researchers' careers via bibliometric indicators. Its continued dominance makes it difficult for alternative modes of peer review to emerge, since any new initiative must compete with an entrenched, official system.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Post publication peer review has a model that has proven to work, in both principle and in practice: Stack Exchange. The "research question" is generally posed by someone other than the author; there are multiple short "articles" answering the research question; peer review consists of comments and, in many cases, other articles under the same question; and, ultimately, a quantitative rating is given to the quality of the question and most of the articles, with the original questioner getting a binary (checkmark) say as the "editor."
Imagine if, for example, someone posted a question on a (relevant subject) exchange to the effect of: "Is the linked article good?" Then, assuming it didn't get taken down for being off-topic or overly vague, the resulting exchange and ratings would constitute PPPR by almost any definition. (Wikipedia would be another example, but it doesn't allow original research. You might say that little on here consists of original research, but that's really only true for the quantitative, empirical sciences, and even then a lot of published journal articles just aggregate known information.)
Most of the reasons for PPPR's failure to launch, as given in other answers, are refuted by Stack Exchange. This community consists of thousands of people, including "real" experts, who are willing to read and respond to what frequently are indisputably boring or obvious questions, for free, in an unofficial forum. Some even perform basic copyediting! True, the questions and answers, individually, are shorter than an article. But Wikipedia shows that people are also willing to read and contribute to much longer articles. And sure, there's little incentive for authors to submit their work to an "unofficial" site, but as the above example shows, you don't need the author to submit it themselves.
So, either Stack Exchange has uniquely captured lightning in a bottle (in which case it should establish its own PPPR forum) or PPPR sites have failed to copy a remarkably effective format. And that's the answer to your question.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/05/06
| 997
| 4,366
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently reviewing a paper which deals with iris recognition, submitted to a top conference in the field of biometrics. The paper's main contribution is a recognition model that, while presented as novel, is in fact essentially a very simple convolutional neural network.
However, in the experimental section the method is compared to several state-of-the-art approaches (including deep CNNs) and while the state-of-the-art achieves 70-80% accuracy, the method from the paper gets close to 100% accuracy. In addition, the methods were tested in 2 scenarios, first with 50 identities, then with 100 to recognise from. All the state-of-the-art methods performed worse in the 100-identity case (as expected), however the paper's method actually saw a slight increase in the performance accuracy.
This to me smells fishy, to put it mildly. However, there are 2 considerations:
1. Technically it is possible (however improbable my experience in the field says this is), that the simple approach just handles this specific problem that much better than the deeper convolutional networks.
2. Even if the experimental work was devised improperly, this may not have been done with ill intent. Simple mistakes in the training/testing procedures (such as training the model on the testing data) could conceivably cause such a discrepancy, without malicious intent on the authors' part.
To put it bluntly, I intend to reject the paper, however I would like to do so without making either direct or implied (possibly unwarranted) accusations of misconduct on the part of the authors.
How I have currently addressed this particular issue in my review (listed next to other shortcomings of the paper):
>
> In the experimental section it is unclear how the models were trained. How was the data split into training, validation, testing data? Did all the trained models (including the [redacted] model) use this same data split in their training? In my experience a (near-)100% accuracy is unlikely to be achieved, regardless of the chosen recognition method, when the dataset is difficult enough that state-of-the-art methods (like [redacted]) only get 70-80% accuracy. Oftentimes such unnaturally high accuracy points to a mistake in the training/testing process (such as testing on previously-seen data). The fact that the performance *improves* from the 50-category case to the 100-category case, rather than dropping off as it (understandably) does for the other approaches, makes this even stranger. I would suggest the authors either publicly release the training/testing data and the code used, or provide enough detail in the experimental section to make these results directly reproducible.
>
>
>
Is this an appropriate way to address such results? Should I confer with the conference editor on this and voice my concerns to them directly?<issue_comment>username_1: If it's technically possible but unlikely to be correct, in my opinion the best option is to request major revisions asking for more details and results, such as evaluating the model on new datasets, providing the code and trained model to the reviewers, etc. It's good to be skeptical, but it is weird to outright reject a paper that you believe *might be* correct without making sure that it really is incorrect. In other words, if you submitted a paper with a surprising result, would you want the reviewers to reject it simply because they are surprised, without determining why it is wrong?
>
> Is this an appropriate way to address such results? Should I confer with the conference editor on this and voice my concerns to them directly?
>
>
>
For most journal submission sites, there are comments sent to the authors, and comments for the editor only. The latter is a good place to send comments to the editor. You could also email the editor directly if the journal submission site does not provide for private comments.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your response already seems exceptionally well-crafted to me; it is non-accusatory but also sets out the reasons that the results appear strange. I wouldn't change a thing about your statement. I also doubt it is necessary to confer with the the editor on the matter, because your written response is clear and does not require supplementary explanation. Good work.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/06
| 395
| 1,810
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been asked for a faculty position interview. Regarding the time, in their email they have only asked me about my availability for two days without a specific time. I want to know that in my confirmation reply, should I provide a specific time for interview or I just determine the day?<issue_comment>username_1: If it's technically possible but unlikely to be correct, in my opinion the best option is to request major revisions asking for more details and results, such as evaluating the model on new datasets, providing the code and trained model to the reviewers, etc. It's good to be skeptical, but it is weird to outright reject a paper that you believe *might be* correct without making sure that it really is incorrect. In other words, if you submitted a paper with a surprising result, would you want the reviewers to reject it simply because they are surprised, without determining why it is wrong?
>
> Is this an appropriate way to address such results? Should I confer with the conference editor on this and voice my concerns to them directly?
>
>
>
For most journal submission sites, there are comments sent to the authors, and comments for the editor only. The latter is a good place to send comments to the editor. You could also email the editor directly if the journal submission site does not provide for private comments.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your response already seems exceptionally well-crafted to me; it is non-accusatory but also sets out the reasons that the results appear strange. I wouldn't change a thing about your statement. I also doubt it is necessary to confer with the the editor on the matter, because your written response is clear and does not require supplementary explanation. Good work.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/06
| 511
| 2,133
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been waiting for a week after my first-round interview for a tenure track position in the US. The interview went well, I think, and ended up with a nice response from the chair of search committees. She was impressed with my presentation, but I took it as her courtesy. From the interview, I also knew that the initial interview was completed yesterday.
This position was posted in March (very late) and closed in April (very short). If offered, the candidate will have to work in August. I am curious to know if anyone has any experience with such quick hiring. What should the timeline be for the hiring decision?<issue_comment>username_1: Timelines in hiring can be messy, especially if the committee does not immediately agree on a candidate or there is some other stuff going on behind the scenes that leads to extended discussion meetings. In many places, scheduling meetings is now messier than ever, since we still live in pandemic times. The fact that they want to hire someone to start in August may help a bit to speed things up, but doesn't have to.
In short, one week is nothing. If you have not heard back after 4-6 weeks, you might want to contact them and ask for the status.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: After the last interview, the committee will have to come up with a ranked list of candidates. Then this is forwarded to the department head for approval. Then this goes to the dean for approval. Then an offer letter will have to be drawn up. This has to be approved by the Office of Equal Opportunity. This process can easily take 2 or more weeks, and this is particularly true at places where final exams are running at the same time.
In other words, have patience!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the other good answers, it may be (as at my R1 Univ in the U.S., regarding math) that although some advertised jobs have been allowed, economic/budget issues may be so unsettled (here, the state legislature still hasn't given us a biennial budget!) that no actual commitments can be made.
A very awkward... and ugly... situation, yes.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/06
| 1,184
| 4,766
|
<issue_start>username_0: ### Background
1. I failed a course in one of the last few semesters of my undergrad. I had poor grades in most courses in that particular semester.
2. In the summer just prior to that semester, I had a disturbing experience in a foreign country (sexual assault by a guy, against my will and sexual orientation). It affected me very much while I was there, but assumed that I was alright after I came back to my home country.
However, in retrospect, I think #2 was indirectly responsible for #1. My grades were much better in all previous semesters and they recovered after that one.
I have already graduated from university and now wish to apply for PhD in the US/Europe (including few top univs).
Overall, my GPA is 8.9 on scale of 0-10, I have one conference presentation (conducted by top scientific society in my field) and one journal paper. However, **the course in which I failed is important for my PhD field.**
### Question
I know that a fail grade is a huge red flag in PhD admissions, so I really wish to address it in my statement of purpose (SOP). But due to the disturbing nature of my reason, I am afraid that it might make my SOP "controversial" or just too "negative". I am also slightly afraid that it may be interpreted as seeking sympathy.
Most importantly, I'm afraid of bringing the fail grade into focus, which might have gone unnoticed otherwise.
Should I address my fail grade in the SOP or just let it be? Will transcripts be thoroughly checked?<issue_comment>username_1: The SoP is not the place to discuss the past except for brief statements that show how the past supports your future goals. It is not a place, in particular, to discuss a failed course. The SoP should be entirely forward looking stressing goals and how you intend to achieve them as well as what prepares you for success.
The past appears in the CV. Leave it there.
I would probably suggest that you don't mention the failed course at all unless it was in a key subject in your field and you didn't have a way to make it up. If it is brought up, say in an interview, simply say that you were dealing with the trauma from a physical attack at the time. At most, a single sentence like that in some other place (not the SoP) might be given.
And, as user astronat says in a comment, no one will ever be concerned once you gain a higher degree. Few would even have a way to know. Relax.
But make the SoP entirely about the future.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: No. You are understandably deeply disturbed by that whole episode... *BUT* other people can understand that you had some distraction that negatively affected your work without your going into any detail at all.
Having read many, many applications to grad school in the U.S. over the last 40 years, I am well aware that bad things happen to people, and that this disrupts their lives, not to mention school-work. And that the good luck to avoid bad stuff is not any sort of personal virtue. It's mostly just luck. And although I do brace myself to hear very upsetting stories... I aim to accommodate people *in\_advance*, rather than somehow pretending to insist that they give a sufficiently awful story ...
Even at more mundane levels, I would strongly advocate respecting students' reasons for delays and such. I am not interested in doubting that they had a relative pass away, or that they were ill, or that they suffered personal violence. The kind of thinking that makes people "prove" these things is grossly abusive of sincere people who've had something bad happen.
I think we should not pretend to make rules to "be sure" that "no one ever cheats"... in part because this is impossible... and, meanwhile, it is abusive to the vast majority.
EDIT: from Azor-Ahai-him-'s comment, I should clarify: include a simple sentence in your personal statement or CV or wherever (given the format you have) that some very unfortunate external events seriously disrupted your life, resulting in that dip in your grades. Don't go into detail.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Here's how you can address this:
>
> I was a victim of a major crime during [month]. This interfered with my studies during [time period]. This is unlikely to recur. I have subsequently done/will do [whatever relevant study] to make up for the disruption. My performance in [course] where I got a grade of [good number] is indicative of my abilities under normal circumstances.
>
>
>
This is essentially the same way you would address a medical, financial, or family disruption. The details of what happened to you are not relevant to your PhD application; just explain it in a way that shows you are likely to succeed in your PhD, even if you have a few bad grades.
Upvotes: 6
|
2021/05/06
| 505
| 2,165
|
<issue_start>username_0: I came across a job post of "Research Assistant Professor" in the biology/medical field. This institution (ranked #50-100 in National Universities) states that this is a great opportunity to get research mentorship before initiating the tenure clock. The successful candidate will get lab space, equipment, and personnel support for their research projects. However, this is a **3-year temporary position** and there is **no guarantee** that you will transition to a tenure-track position by the end of the third year. They want to see you get an NIH R01 first.
What are your thoughts? If I am interested in a tenure-track position, should I choose a 3-year Research Assistant Professor position at this institution (ranked #50-100 in National Universities) rather than a Postdoc at a world-renowned institution (e.g., Ivy League schools, Stanford, MIT)? Just curious about your strategy.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there can be a general answer about future outcomes for a position like this. It seems like a bigger investment for the department than a typical post doc spot, though, which may be a positive.
I would look at the history of the position in the relevant department. Are there tenure-track faculty there that came from this path? I'd also ask current tenured faculty in the department, not just in leadership, for their candid opinions on the future of tenure-track slots in the department. It might be that these positions exist for political reasons that make future tenured spots unlikely, or it may be that it's a good introductory role.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's possible that a Research Assistant Professor position remains only a Research Professorship, meaning that it's not TT and you have to self-fund with grants. However, I would think that a Research Assistant Professor who is publishing and obtaining grants as PI could be more competitive for TT positions in general (at other schools) than a postdoc who is not a PI. A postdoc also has a time limit, whereas a Research Professorship can usually continue indefinitely provided that you are self-funding.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/07
| 407
| 1,689
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've seen that academic papers tend to have the sections Abstract, Introduction, Material and Methods, Results, Acknowledgements, and Literature Cited. My question is if I wanted to publish an academic paper would it need to have these specific sections or could I have a different set of sections from the ones mentioned depending on the contents of my paper?<issue_comment>username_1: That depends on where you want to publish. Some journals are strict on requiring a specific structure, e.g. [IMRAD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMRAD), or on the naming of sections, while others are more freeform. As a general rule, read any "Guide to authors"/"Author information" or just try to follow the structure used in recent papers published in the venue of interest.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is somewhat field (and even more so journal) specific. You should have an idea the normal structure. But then if you decide to separate Results and Discussion or combine them is a bit up to you. (Or for long papers to use more topical subheadings.)
I recommend to take a look at '
1. Several papers in the journals you submit to (think of it as a biologist observing birds in the wild).
2. The specific journal's directions to authors (usually in January edition).
3. On Research by Wilson
4. Technical Writing (NASA pub) by Katzoff
---
After that, use best judgment as to what will help the customer (the reader best). In my experience, after doing so, editors will leave your structure as is.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Have a look at a few papers in a few journals in your field. Probably will be illuminating.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/05/07
| 547
| 2,207
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to finish my masters degree, and I want to apply for a PhD in the near future. I know that when contacting a potential advisor, they will ask you to send your CV and your previous research. The issue is that, according to my current advisor, my masters thesis will have no issues on being approved and my grades are good. Due to the pandemic, though, I was not able to be in the country my university is located in; communication and feedback with my advisor was very complicated. In my opinion, my thesis could be improved in some ways, but now I am lacking the time to do so.
My question is:
When a potential advisor asks me for my masters thesis or my previous research, it is compulsory to send the document I submitted for graduation? Can I send an updated version of it (I know I will be able to improve it, because I will work on it at my job)? Is this wrong?<issue_comment>username_1: That depends on where you want to publish. Some journals are strict on requiring a specific structure, e.g. [IMRAD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMRAD), or on the naming of sections, while others are more freeform. As a general rule, read any "Guide to authors"/"Author information" or just try to follow the structure used in recent papers published in the venue of interest.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is somewhat field (and even more so journal) specific. You should have an idea the normal structure. But then if you decide to separate Results and Discussion or combine them is a bit up to you. (Or for long papers to use more topical subheadings.)
I recommend to take a look at '
1. Several papers in the journals you submit to (think of it as a biologist observing birds in the wild).
2. The specific journal's directions to authors (usually in January edition).
3. On Research by Wilson
4. Technical Writing (NASA pub) by Katzoff
---
After that, use best judgment as to what will help the customer (the reader best). In my experience, after doing so, editors will leave your structure as is.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Have a look at a few papers in a few journals in your field. Probably will be illuminating.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/05/07
| 386
| 1,745
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a PhD interview (Computer Science) 3 weeks ago with a German institute. The interview went well and they said they will make their final decision in a week (the latest) and let the candidates know. However, it's been 3 weeks and no response. I emailed them a week ago asking if they have decided yet. Still no response. Before the interview, they were extremely responsive. E.g. I emailed and asked many questions about how I should prepare for the presentation etc. They would typically respond in like 5 mins. But after the interview, they seem to be ghosting me. Does this mean I should forget about this position?<issue_comment>username_1: You can't actually conclude anything. There might be many reasons for a delay and a lack of communication. One reason might be a time of negotiation with another candidate and holding on to the others in case they can't come to agreement.
If you were the first choice then chances are you would have heard by now, but the delays might be just administrative and seeking internal agreement.
What you can do, however, is keep any other options you have active and open.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It could be that unforeseen circumstances have prevented a timely decision. However, most likely you are not their first choice but they don't send out rejections before their first choice has signed the contract. That's pretty standard.
Something similar happened to me in the past. Three months later they called me and asked if I would still be interested. Their first choice had decided against the position. If they had send out rejection letters they would have had to restart the whole process again (with a new job posting).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/07
| 345
| 1,483
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a campus interview on Apr 19, and there are other two candidates were interviewed after me in the same week. I sent out a thank you note to the search committee after I finished the interview. I believe I did a good job in the interview, especially for the research talk part. One of faculties told me that it was a good presentation and good job. I received an email from the chair two days ago and he told me that they are working on finalizing the candidate and asked me to send him the degree, transcript, and EIT designation. So, I was wondering does that a good sign to me? Am I the top candidate to them?
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: There is no guarantee, but it seems that you place highly, at least. Do what they ask and hope for the best.
My best guess is that unless the required documentation shows something critically wrong, then you are likely to get an offer. But it is their process, not mine.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally speaking: asking you for more details means that you’re definitely being seriously considered. Rejection letters are usually short and to the point; no one would ask for more details if you’re not under consideration.
Are you the top candidate? It’s actually likely: they’re asking for administrative information which is likely needed to verify your credentials, something that’s usually done at a later stage of the hiring process. Of course, you’ll know soon enough!
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/07
| 266
| 1,242
|
<issue_start>username_0: When applying for a PhD position in Germany typically one of the required documents is:
* **Contact details of at least 2 academic references**
This is just contact details (e.g. email addresses) of the people who agreed to act as your reference, not the actual reference letter (the latter is not required).
When do the application reviewers contact my references? Is it before or after they invite me for an interview? Or do they contact my references at all? In other words, in what stage of the application process my references have an impact on the probability of my application being successful?<issue_comment>username_1: I think once they like your CV and the other stuff, then they contact the referees to be very sure about everything you mentioned in your application. Of course that's before the interview.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Admissions committees may contact you references at any time, or not at all. Usually they will look through all applications, then choose a subset to contact references, and a subset of those to invite for interviews. It is also possible that they video interview a subset of applicants then contact their references afterwards.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/08
| 879
| 3,643
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student. Four weeks earlier my professor asked me to work with him on a literature survey project. He asked me to update him every week about the status of the project. The project I am talking about basically marks the gender gap in an interdisciplinary field and I have to go through research papers and separate males and females, contact people rather than doing any research work. I worked on it for the first week showed him the excel sheet I made, but he didn't express any thoughts on that rather told me few other sources where I can get more data and answered the question I asked. I knew I was not very motivated to work since all I have to do was copy-paste data from sites to excel.
Then, my family members got sick(with most symptoms of COVID), I have to involve myself in that and it really brought my motivation down to zero. I couldn't bring myself up to manage time, I suffered from anxiety and depression in the second week, this disrupted my thinking I guess as I didn't inform my professor about the project. And in the third week as well I made no contacts with him and no progress in project.
But now when I think I am a little better, I see this as being irresponsible from point of professor and that unknowingly I have done a harm to my reputation since he is one of the best professors in my department and he has always been supportive to students.
I still haven't prepared enough data, what should I do now, how should I talk this out to my professor? Would an apology be enough? Should I ask him if I am still allowed to work on that project?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> what should I do now?
>
>
>
You should contact your professor and let them know what happened.
>
> How should I talk this out to my professor? Would an apology be enough? Should I ask him if I am still allowed to work on that project?
>
>
>
You should just tell them what happened, why you were absent, and that you would like to continue working on the project. While copying data to Excel is nice, it's certainly not more important than your family! Your priorities were in the right place, and what happened is not your fault. You should perhaps apologize for not letting them know earlier what was going on, but certainly not for anything else.
It's annoying when students ghost you, but in your case, the situation absolutely warranted it. If your professor is a reasonable person then they would understand and be nice about it. They may not let you continue working on the project because they already found someone else that would help, but it's definitely worth asking them to continue if you're interested (though it sounds like you're not *that* interested in this project).
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Update your professor about why progress has not been made and what your next steps are. If you need more time to focus on your mental health, then let your professor know.
One other important thing we should make clear: you are doing [this work on your own time](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/167328/how-should-i-talk-to-professor-if-i-have-been-absent-from-project-for-weeks-due?noredirect=1#comment450574_167328), as opposed to being paid. Research mentors or professors with unpaid research assistants *should* be grateful for any time you can devote to the project assuming you do not take their time for granted. It appears thus far that your professor has not invested a lot of time into the project with you, so you are fine. We should also note that you have no contractual obligation to do the work.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/08
| 695
| 3,073
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper for publication several days ago. This was a resubmission after I had responded to the critique from the reviewers for my first draft. However, while I was looking at my data again, I saw that there was a section where my data points *increased* between phases, but I had written that they *decreased*. What's more, I had qualified why it made sense for the values to decrease, according to literature, so it's possible that the data I acquired was flawed. The reviewers had not marked this, and I had missed it upon reading through everything.
Apart from this, there is a missing comma and a missing word at another spot in the paper.
What I'm wondering is, is this a common occurence? And would it harm my credibility as an author/chances of getting published?<issue_comment>username_1: I can tell you with absolute certainty that almost every published paper contains at least one minor mistake. At the very least, I know that every single one of my papers has at least one typo that survived several rounds of reviews and revisions, and I can always find an error or two in every paper that I read carefully.
If the error is not a substantial one, i.e. one that significantly impacts the validity of the main results, then you shouldn't worry about it too much.
If you realize that your methodology is broken, your data is wrong, your theoretical analysis has logical flaws, your conclusions contradict known results or something of the sort, then it is worth considering taking some immediate action. The ethical thing to do would be to contact the journal's editor before the paper is published and have it retracted (as painful as that may be), and resubmit it if/when you manage to fix the problem.
For fixable mistakes found after the fact, some journals publish errata - appendices to the published paper that resolve issues found post publication.
If it's just a typo (missing comma/missing word/use of antonym) then don't stress too much. If you feel like the decrease/increase typo is in a *key* sentence describing your results (say, the intro/abstract, or in the sentence describing the key findings), it may be worthwhile to contact the editor and ask to resubmit a correction.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @username_1's comment that minor errors are ubiquitous, and (taking the information from your comment that the errors are indeed minor), you could contact the editor and ask if could submit a corrected version immediately.
Another thing to keep in mind is that most journals follow a procedure where they will contact you before publication with **proofs** for you to check. These proofs typically have a few queries from the typesetter (e.g., requesting page numbers for a reference that you left out), but you can also use them as any opportunity to make small corrections. (Technically, these are supposed to be to correct errors *made by the typesetters*, but in my experience you can get away with making *minor* corrections of your own errors at this stage.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/08
| 473
| 2,007
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m kind of in a rut right now with my admissions for a program. I’ve requested for a LOR from a professor and they had no issue to do it for me. However, they’ll be sending it to my email. The only thing is the program that I’m applying for is asking that the LOR comes in a sealed envelope with the recommenders signature on the seal or the recommender mails it themselves. My recommender is out of the county and can’t do that at the moment (not to mention the program’s deadline to apply is in 2 weeks) and the only way I can get the letter is via email and I print it and send when I mail my application. Now I’m wondering do I just leave a note stating that I couldn’t get their sealed signature but and I did not change any of the information provided, and they can contact the recommender for verification? Or should I just withdraw my application as a whole?<issue_comment>username_1: Try contacting the program's admissions office first before submitting the application, and as long before the deadline as possible (so, immediately). They may offer a workaround. For example, they may provide an email address to which your professor can directly send the letter. Even if it turns out that they allow you to mail the letter yourself, you need to check with them first.
I did this once when in a similar situation, where I could not submit the recommendation letters in the usual method prescribed by the program, and was told of an alternative method on contacting them.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to the [good advice of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167344/75368) it might be possible for someone at your own university, perhaps a clerical person, to serve as an intermediary, preparing a sealed document from what the professor writes. They might just ask the professor for a copy of the email and seal it in a departmental/university envelope. They might need to sign it and state their (administrative) position.
Upvotes: 5
|
2021/05/08
| 4,987
| 21,265
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in school systems, and I have a question regarding the "college" level. (I have a French background).
When I look at college math or physics books, it seems to me that there is no big difference with what is taught at the high school level.
By comparison, in France, first year university math or physics books dramatically differ from high school books.
To put my question in a provocative way: what is the purpose of teaching at the college level what students already know from their high school courses? Or don't they? Or, is my vision of college contrary to actual facts?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a US centric answer. Over the past 50 years there has been a vast change in what happens in HS. For example, when I was in school it was extremely uncommon for a HS student to take beginning Calculus. Now the better students do that pretty regularly through the Advanced Placement program which is an attempt to teach college courses in HS.
So, the course in Calc I and Calc II might look the same in an advanced placement course and in a first year college course, but those students who have done well in the advanced placement program (courses and exams) don't have to repeat those courses in college (ideally, anyway). They are able to start at a higher level and it then becomes easier for them to take higher level courses throughout.
But a student who hasn't done "AP" but wants to study math will start with those courses in college.
There are also a few exceptional secondary (HS) schools that teach quite advanced courses, such as multivariate calculus, advanced analysis, and a few others. But they are both difficult to get in to and hard to succeed in (as in lots and lots of work).
At the other end of the scale there are also secondary schools with insufficient trained staff to offer much in the way of math beyond Trigonometry and Analytic Geometry. But, 50 or so years ago, that was the standard for most US schools.
I'm quite certain, however that this model isn't practiced in very much of the rest of the English speaking world. It is quite different in UK, but so is the university system quite different there than here.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, the US has no university **system**. It has somewhere around 1500 community colleges offering 2 year degrees and 3500 colleges and universities offering 4-year degrees, all of which run with more independence than an ordinary French university. (Keep in mind the federal government has established only [a tiny handful of universities](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_academies); public universities are nearly all set up by the individual states.)
Second, you should understand that there is no high-school leaving exam like the bac. Basically anyone who is willing to sit in the classroom and do a minimal amount of work can get a high school diploma. Harvard is incredibly selective and it's about as hard to be admitted to Harvard as it is to be admitted to the ENS. The top 100 or 200 of US universities are all selective, and the average student would not be admitted. However, most universities and all community colleges will allow anyone with a high school diploma to attend. (My university officially has admission requirements based on high school grades, but high school grades have been inflated to such an extent that these requirements are almost meaningless, and the admissions office routinely gives waivers to these requirements anyway.) About 85% of Americans earn a high school diploma and can attend community college. (Another several percent obtain a GED.) Only about 45% of French take and pass the baccalaureate general and can attend university.
At a community college, you should expect that many students do not actually know what you might think they should have learned from high school, and a significant number of students will have trouble with upper elementary material such as adding fractions. There will even be a few students who are functionally illiterate.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: They may use the same books, but college is about twice as fast as high-school. A year-long high school "AP computer science A" course tests out as a semester-long college computer programming-I. In practice, it's a little less (the high school version covers as many topics, but they write fewer program so are a bit weaker overall). I think high school chemistry is the same way.
The hours work out. The rule was that for a difficult college class you'd have 6-9 hours of homework each week, whereas -- I don't know this as well -- high school is a lot less.
It's understood that 1st year college classes can often be tested out of or handled with some sort of transfer credit. It was (probably still is) common to go to a nearby community college, transfer those credits, and come into college as a 2nd year student. That's when you get into the subjects that no one else teaches except a university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: American "college" student here (I know that word has a different meaning in French). In my narrow experience, American college courses and books do indeed differ from high school courses and books, but there is a significant degree of overlap. For example, chapters 1-11 of *Calculus: Early Transcendentals* by <NAME> cover single-variable calculus, which I learned in high school (albeit with a different book), while chapters 12-17 cover multivariable calculus, which I learned in college. Furthermore, some students take both single-variable and multivariable calculus in high school, and some take both in college, so the same book may be used at both the high school and college level, but that does not mean that colleges reteach students what they learned in high school. More generally, most American colleges offer courses that are offered by most high schools, such as precalculus, and courses that are not offered by most high schools, such as abstract algebra and analysis. Furthermore, as others have pointed out, I think you will find a higher degree of overlap with high school material at a community college than you will at a four-year college, especially a more selective one.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In my experience as an American student, the overlap depends heavily on 1. how good your high school is and 2. how good the college is. There is a huge range in the academic rigor of high schools and colleges. Public schools depending on region vary widely in how many advanced courses such as AP courses they offer, some only one or two, others 10+. Top level public high schools and good private high schools will already overlap with basic undergrad curriculum, and very good private schools already teach college level material. I went to a good public high school in a relatively wealthy area which had students who performed decently well at highschool olympiad type competitions and had one or two advanced classes taught by people who also taught at local colleges. Highly selective colleges will be much faster paced and expect much more math background, for example the first year undergrad math courses teaching set theory and combinatorics may already be more advanced than all of community college's math courses.
One important difference I noticed is that college gives much more independence in terms of homework. Most of my college classes had assignments given once a week and most professors did not care if you showed up to lecture or not. My college homework required much more independent thinking and persistence in solving problems, for example each math problem in one homework may take me anywhere from 0.25-10 hours of total time thinking and experimenting, while I would rarely spend any significant time on any one high school problem.
Some colleges let you "test out" of introductory courses if you have a certain score on the corresponding AP exam (usually a 5, the highest grade, sometimes a 4) or have credits from taking a course at a local college already. This varies widely depending on college and even between different majors at the same college. You might expect more selective colleges would be less accepting of AP credit, and this is true in some circumstances but doesn't hold in many others. My university, which is well known for its CS department and intro CS course, let students skip different levels of the intro CS course depending on if they got a 4 or 5. (They also had a placement test that I took to try to skip the intro class, but my personal gripe is that it wasn't written well with typos and it tested Java, for which I had no experience.) For some AP exams I got credit for the minimum major units but it didn't fulfill my major course requirements.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: The other answers here are correct. Colleges and high schools across the US are so different (in my opinion the single biggest problem with US education) that it's almost meaningless to speak of how the average high school education compares to the average college education.
However, there is one difference between high school and college in the US that is more or less universal: **instructional style**. At the high school level, teachers are punished if students don't score sufficiently well on standardized yearly exams. This means that at most high schools, teachers employ a variety of strategies to make sure that as many students perform well on these exams as possible. The philosophy of high school level instruction is "if the students didn't learn it, the teacher failed (and should be punished)." By contrast, the philosophy of college level instruction is usually "if the students didn't learn it, the students failed (and should be punished, e.g. by failing the course)."
Because of this, in high school classrooms, instruction is typically varied and focused on remediation. The onus is on teachers to make sure that students learn. In college classrooms, instruction is typically synonymous with lecture. The onus is on students to learn what the course requires (indeed, even if the professor doesn't teach it).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: It's going to depend on which math and physics books you're looking at. There are typically several levels of 1st year college courses. First year calculus, physics, &c for liberal arts or business students are not the same courses as those intended for STEM majors. If you're looking at texts intended for the former, they probably do cover basically the same material that would be in the high school courses that students interested in math & science would take.
For example, looking at my local university's online catalog, there's "MATH 176 - Introductory Calculus for Business and Social Sciences" and "MATH 181 - Calculus I" for STEM students. Both of these require either passing some of the 20 or so basic math courses, or a sufficiently high score on college entrance exams. (ACT 28 or SAT 650.) Most people intending STEM studies will have taken those basic math courses in high school, and will have the necessary scores.
MATH 176 is a 1 semester course, and except for perhaps a statistic course, the last math course those business & social science students will take. MATH 181 leads to MATH 182 & 183 the next two semesters, then differential equations &c.
Likewise, we find General Physics I & II for non-majors, but Physics for Scientists & Engineers, General Chemistry vs Chemistry for Scientists & Engineers, and so on through all of the sciences.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: There are several differences between the two systems. It might be helpful to think of the first year of American colleges as weakly like the college preparatory courses in France. I say that because there is some attempt to even out the pretty substantial disparities among state educational systems. College in the US is one year longer than college in France.
For example, my cousin was from Louisiana when he went to college. Because they require both French and English, they do not require students to take four years of English. That can be an insurmountable barrier to a college that requires a student to have four years of English to be admitted unless they voluntarily took extra English. Some community colleges use that first year to teach deficiencies, although these are often "zero credit" courses.
Also, most, if not all colleges have a mission. It is usually a population they are designed to serve, but not always. We have local community colleges and tribal colleges that are designed to serve the college educational needs of the local population. They are a good choice for many students because they are adapted to the local education systems. They transition students from the local public school system to that which is expected from a person with a degree.
In addition, we have a system of private colleges and universities. They often have a different mission than the public colleges and universities. Quite often, they are as concerned with the intellectual and moral formation of the student as a reasoning adult as they are with conveying content. There are also private technical schools that provide narrow education and are focused on a single professional group such as engineers.
Intermixed with these are the research institutions. They are usually doctoral granting colleges and universities. They can be extremely rigorous and selective institutions or they can have a community college component where they transition students from the local educational system to research level education.
Also, although small in number, there are a number of military institutes and academies. They exist to train the future officer corps for both the state and national military systems. They are often elite institutions. The U.S. Naval Academy, based on post naval career outcomes, is probably the nation's number two or three school.
Finally, there are the Ivy's and the Public Ivy's. They are the place where the children of the wealthy who are at least slightly talented meet the nation's best and brightest. About a third of the students are "legacies," the children of alumni. They get in because their parents or grandparents or great grandparents got in. Admission is a combination of wealth and talent.
Another factor is the difference in the goals of the French and American educational systems. Except for technical education in American high schools, the goal is to teach a little of everything. The education is general and only focused if the student chooses to focus it.
So, to try and answer your question as to why some college textbooks are similar to high school textbooks, the books fill a need. Some students enter college with two semesters of calculus, an extra year of chemistry, an advanced English composition course, and an advanced biology course. Others are struggling with math, English, and the sciences.
America is very uneven and very unfair to be born in. Without being here, it cannot really be explained because of the size and political differences. There are places in the United States without running water, sanitation systems, or electricity. There are states that still rely on "one-room schoolhouses," where all grades are taught at the same time by one teacher. That teacher is teaching first grade and twelfth grade in the same room. There are places where the teacher does not speak the same language as the students. There are schools in the US that don't have books because they cost too much.
Sometimes in the same town, there will be a public school where students are required to turn in their science lessons in virtual reality modeling language. Some schools have robotics programs. Some high schools offer college classes in their building alongside high school courses.
American colleges are the last chance for the students who have the greatest disadvantages to be given the opportunity to catch up with the most privileged.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: You already have very detailed answers on the U.S. system. Let me talk a little bit about how a French perspective creates distorted expectations.
In the French system, the curriculum is (essentially) set at the highest level by the Ministry of Education. Much of the nonsense passed as education in some countries (sometimes with sectarian affiliations) is simply illegal in France. The educational content you get in France is tightly controlled. In many other countries (including the U.S.), not so much. There are pros and cons.
Pro: at the time of writing, the French have competent or semi-competent government officials with a tolerance for logic and common sense. Meanwhile in some U.S. schools, Huckleberry Finn and To Kill a Mockingbird are banned.
Con: There are occasional missteps and missteps have huge consequences in France since they affect every student. An example is intolerance for the headscarf: a wonderful, avant-garde idea when it was implemented and almost certainly a huge national embarrassment a few years from now. I can already hear American T.V. networks making fun of the French.
Pro: new knowledge can be disseminated to every student in every part of the country. You don't have regional inequalities like you do in the U.S.. Sure Paris schools have better students on average, but a good student in a small French village will learn: in the U.S., redneck begets redneck.
Con: It takes forever for innovations to find their way into the curriculum as the ageing technocrats retire and are replaced by younger ones with a better grasp of the world around them. In the U.S. a school will not hesitate to teach the earth is a cuboid and if it is, they're ahead of their time, while the French will always lag behind.
Pro: Since bureaucrats at the Ministry of Education, not students nor their parents, set the curriculum, they can choose to emphasize math and technology, while de-emphasizing art and ancient Greek if they feel that's what will take the country forward. Meanwhile in the U.S., students and parents decide what the schools will teach them (schools adapt their curriculum to demand) and if that means teaching that the earth is flat and that the election was stolen, they will.
Con: In France centralization has created a system where it's nearly impossible to switch fields: If you took the literary stream (whatever it's called these days, they rename it every decade), you are unlikely to be able to study math and physics at "university" (I say university, but I include the classes prépas and grandes écoles of course). If you choose the wrong stream at the age of 12, you will pay for the rest of your life. Meanwhile in the U.S. you can major in "Poetry and Chemistry" or "Logic and Religion".
**Edit (clarification):** There is a great deal more diversity in the United States and other countries than there is in France. It's not just because of population size: Switzerland is also far more diverse than France. French centralization goes back a long way to the days when students who spoke their local dialects were severely punished (Louis the 14th and all that; see how widespread local dialects are today in, say, Spain and Italy compared to France). In France, if you took the "literary" stream, you're not very likely to attempt to take math/science/technology classes. Moreover math is (currently) unusually strong in France, by world standards, as a result of the early specialization. The U.S. system is far more flexible, mainly because it caters to student demands. So yes, many U.S. universities and colleges offer easy subjects, but if the students are willing to pay for it they must be getting something out of it.
That was too long for a comment.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: The **content** doesn't differ between advanced high school courses and college courses, but the **pedagogy** and **evaluation** techniques do.
For example, when I took AP biology and calculus in high school, they were taught over the course of 2 or 3 semesters, and the grades were based roughly 80% on attendance, homework, and regular quizzes, and 20% on mid-term and final examinations. Classes were mostly lecture, but also included in-class work, where students could get familiar with the content and receive help from the teacher. The teacher was concerned with each student succeeding.
In college, the classes which teach this same content are taught over the course of a single semester, with the evaluation criteria basically flipped: Grades were based roughly 80% on mid-term and final exams, and 20% on homework. Classes were completely lecture, and while the instructor wants you to succeed, the burden is on the student to ask for help when they need it. Another difference is that these classes were often accompanied by companion "classes", such as twice weekly recitations (where a graduate student would help a 20-30 person subset of the lecture class, without a separate grade), or labs (focused on experiments, graded separately).
\*This is an anecdotal answer based on my experience as a millennial growing up in the US, going to public schools and a public R1 university.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/09
| 668
| 2,952
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am graduating soon and in the last minute my advisor found an issue in one major theorem in my thesis. In an hour, my advisor sent me a write up with a fix. The result is a little bit different than what I have, but it does the job.
I was not expecting him to fix this issue. We were supposed to meet and discuss this issue. Instead, my advisor just sent an email with this fix. Since this is *the* major result in my thesis and my advisor's contribution is more significant than mine, what is the appropriate way to acknowledge this in my thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: Just write a short paragraph at the end thanking your advisor for all their help during the writing of the thesis. If you ever turn it to a research paper, they’ll be a coauthor obviously.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Clearly your advisor thinks well of you and thinks you are ready to move to the next level professionally. You both missed the issue at an earlier stage. Had he found it then he might well have pointed you to a fix rather than providing it.
He is probably as pleased as you are that a fix was possible.
So thank him for support and guidance (perhaps "particularly on Theorem X") and move on. Remember this incident when you advise your own students.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: When I wrote my Master's thesis, I had several parts where other group members and my advisor contributed parts, even if those were only helpful discussions that lead to further insight. Apart from mentioning this in the usual acknowledgements at the end of my thesis, I also added references to "private communications" with the respective contributor wherever possible or added a short entry in the references section that described the exact contributions from said person.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You credit your advisor's help at the front pages of your dissertation, where he or she is listed as your advisor. In a regular advising relationship, the contributions of the advisor are diffuse, at multiple levels, and impossible to quantify or pinpoint meaningfully. No need to make special mention of the very special circumstances that you relate, it will already be understood that your advisor has had a significant impact on your work.
So the advising relationship is sufficient formal recognition; the rest you can reserve for the acknowledgements section, and for your in person conversations. (For comparison, it would be a rather different situation if someone *other* than your advisor had contributed a fix to a problem of the magnitude that you describe.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: This is your thesis advisor's job, even though this might be a borderline case. He does represent your findings with his own name, after all.
What I would suggest is to thank him in the preamble, and make a footnote in that specific place the contribution took place in the text.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/09
| 2,393
| 9,877
|
<issue_start>username_0: I think I have a few questions here.
I've said this before: I don't have many talents, but I can teach, and I can teach very well. Education is my passion and that is one of the reasons I am pursuing my PhD (that, and the fact that I love doing math eight hours a day).
This being said, can anyone with a PhD write a textbook? Or do you have to be well-known in the field and have lots of papers published? What if I write a really good textbook- will nobody buy it because my name is not known?<issue_comment>username_1: Anyone with or without a PhD can write a text book. Yet independently of how well-known the author is, text books are not particularly well-selling items, since the audience is very narrow. And even if they sell well, you will certainly not get any significant money from the sales.
If you want to write a text book for teaching purposes and because you think you can write a high-quality text book, then do it, go ahead. Yet its popularity will probably grow if you make electronic copies available for free.
I am writing two text books at the moment, yet not in English, so I expect the audience to be fewer than 100 people. :-) However, I am still writing them because they will be nearly the only textbooks on that topic in this language, and people have already been very thankful for the drafts.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Anyone can write a textbook if they want to. No publisher would publish it (and nobody would buy it), but you can still self-publish, put the book on Amazon, and say you've written a textbook.
On the other hand if you want to get a publisher to publish it, then you'll need to demonstrate you're an expert in the field. This is necessary because otherwise the book won't sell. It's not strictly necessary to have a PhD to be an expert, but practically speaking it might as well be, because almost every real expert has a PhD.
>
> What if I write a really good textbook- will nobody buy it because my name is not known?
>
>
>
If your name is not known, the textbook will not sell well regardless of how good it is. Conversely, if you are *very* well known (think <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>) then your book will sell well regardless of how good it is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, you can write a textbook, even without a PhD. But the first problem is that you need to make a connection with a publisher. If you send a manuscript to a reputable publisher they will most likely return it unopened to avoid future claims if they read it, reject it, and then publish something in the future.
But a common way to connect is to attend some educator's conference in your field. Most such conferences have "book fairs" where publishers show off their wares, seeking adoptions. But these are also typically attended by "acquisition editors" who are on the lookout for new products. You can arrange to have a conversation with such a person and pitch your idea. It might fit a need they have and you can then work toward getting a contract.
You can do all of this before or after you have a draft of the manuscript, but they want to see and evaluate the proposal before they look at any manuscript.
And, as others have said, there isn't much money in it for authors with a few exceptions. And the money isn't likely to last for long unless the book takes off and you are willing to revise it every three years (approx.). Remember that those acquisition editors are still out there looking for something to replace your book. The "next new thing". A textbook that still has sales after about five years is an exception in most fields.
---
Those educator conferences are also good for meeting like-minded people. And some of them are probably better known than you are. And some of them are also known and trusted by the editors. So, getting involved in a circle of educators, while it has many other benefits, can also help you connect to an editor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Unfortunately, yes. Anyone can write a text-book. Even people who
absolutely should not.
The attached image is from a book I found at my local library. 'New Method in Mathematic'. Yes, this is the title, and yes, it is misspelled.
Every page in the book looks more or less like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0dzni.jpg)
I have no idea what the new method is either, and I did really try to figure out. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would spend that much type typesetting what seems to be complete nonsense. In any case, it is perhaps to no-ones surprise that it is self-published.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I completely agree with the other answers here which emphasize the big gap between writing a textbook and having it published by a publisher (and then the further goal of expecting people to buy it).
If you do not want to go the traditional publisher route, you can always self-publish as a free online textbook. It is very possible that a free online textbook will have wider circulation and more overall teaching benefit than a hard copy by a traditional publisher. Here is an example of a quite extensive online textbook: [Advanced Data Analysis from an Elementary Point of View](http://www.stat.cmu.edu/%7Ecshalizi/ADAfaEPoV/), by <NAME>.
Related: In some newer fields, such as machine learning, there is a culture of open access: see [the famous petition against a new subscription journal from *Nature* in favor of a new open access journal](https://openaccess.engineering.oregonstate.edu/home). Andrew Ng's online lectures have probably been seen by more students than any physical machine learning textbook. I assume most other disciplines are more traditional in using textbooks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: For all popular subjects, there are already popular textbooks that are good enough. I do not believe it is possible to make an improvement large enough to convince people to switch to your book. If you want to create a successful textbook, you need:
* To write something that is not worse than what is already popular.
* To be cheaper than what is already popular.
* To spend money on marketing.
You will notice that there is no benefit to the author to meeting these three criteria.
Who you are is not very important to textbook writing. It's tough for anyone to be successful in textbook writing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: One of the services that a publisher provides (along with editing, design, printing, distribution, legal, etc) is marketing. They have a sales force that goes out to bookshops. They send out review copies and written blurb to magazines and newspapers. They advertise to the target audience.
THAT is what gets books sold. 'Word of mouth' will only get you so far, and needs to overcome a lot of inertia before going 'viral' or 'global'.
I'd wager that most books in education are marketed on the strength of their content, than on star quality. *"The new standard in Statistical method!"*
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: If you are well established as an expert in your field, the major academic publishing houses will come and find you. (You may have posted lecture notes online that they like.) Otherwise, you may be in for a hard time as explained in detail by the other answers here.
Since hardly any textbook makes its author a lot of money, it is best done if your day job is a professional environment in which you have the opportunity to spend the requisite amount of time.
In practice these criteria tend to apply predominantly though not exclusively to tenured academics or retired ones; a PhD is not a requirement but usually comes with the territory. Also, the book will absorb ideas that could have gone into primary publications. So even tenured academics often effectively sacrifice their prospects within academia by writing books.
That said, if you have a book in you that absolutely needs to be written, do go ahead. You do run the risk of producing something that is only acceptable to viXra.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Anyone can Write a textbook.
Most professors that publish textbooks use the chapters as lecture notes for several years so that their students end up proof reading the textbook for free.
I have done this as a student, I'm absolutely OK with it as the student gets a very well prepared set of lecture notes and a very very well prepared class out of it.
If you try do do this without being a professor, you will
1. not have the army of free proof readers that university professors have, making the job much harder.
2. the university wont subsidize the publishing of it
3. You won't get a sabbatical year writing it.
Bear in mind that unless they are for very popular courses, many text books not only loose money for the author, but the publisher as well. bearing in mind the time to type set it and things.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Anyone can write a book/textbook. If you feel you have something to offer that doesn't exist, or that you feel you can improve on something, then you should definitely give it a shot. As others have said, the publishing houses may ignore you. Self-publishing is a good way to go, just do your research and don't give up the rights to your creative property. My wife joined a group called Author Academy Elite, for a fee they offer instructions on how to self-publish, help you publish your first book, and you can put AAE down as your publishing company. Again, do your research, because there are more companies like AAE, this is just the one my wife chose.
If you are really passionate about the subject, knowing that you have helped at least one person learn about that subject is a great feeling. (royalties can give you a great feeling, too, though!;) )
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/09
| 2,734
| 11,337
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am located in a small European country and studying computer science in one of its Universities, admittedly not the most prestigious one. I am set to finish my undergraduate degree at most a year from now. Recently, an opportunity has come up as I have been offered a PhD position right after I am done with my bachelor's. Along with that, I have been offered a position in a EU funded project that is right on my field of interest.
I am struggling to make the choice as I would have to give an answer before I am done with my degree so that if I decline they will have the time to look for someone else to take the spot.
My purpose and hope is to have an academic career in a university that does significant research in the field I am passionate about. However, those universities even in Europe seem to be the most prestigious ones (Oxford, Edinburgh, ETH Zurich etc). I can currently boast a few conference publications, some upcoming journal publications, and hopefully two more will come out of my undergraduate thesis currently underway. All in all I hope to have at least 8 papers to my name by the time I get my bachelor's. I should specify all my works but one are research focused, not surveys.
My dilemma is as follows:
Do I choose to do my PhD in my university and hope to break in the academic world abroad with my post doc?
Do I do a master's elsewhere and then hope to get funding for my PhD abroad?
Or can I hope that I will get accepted for a PhD position abroad if I apply after my undergraduate is done? This would be the optimal scenario but I have not come to contact with any cases that did their PhD right after their undergrad, much less in a different institution. I guess I am wondering what my chances of pulling this through would be, and if they are low to zero, which of the aforementioned two scenarios would help me more to pursue an academic career in the Computer Science field?
Thanks for any insight and advice.<issue_comment>username_1: Anyone with or without a PhD can write a text book. Yet independently of how well-known the author is, text books are not particularly well-selling items, since the audience is very narrow. And even if they sell well, you will certainly not get any significant money from the sales.
If you want to write a text book for teaching purposes and because you think you can write a high-quality text book, then do it, go ahead. Yet its popularity will probably grow if you make electronic copies available for free.
I am writing two text books at the moment, yet not in English, so I expect the audience to be fewer than 100 people. :-) However, I am still writing them because they will be nearly the only textbooks on that topic in this language, and people have already been very thankful for the drafts.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Anyone can write a textbook if they want to. No publisher would publish it (and nobody would buy it), but you can still self-publish, put the book on Amazon, and say you've written a textbook.
On the other hand if you want to get a publisher to publish it, then you'll need to demonstrate you're an expert in the field. This is necessary because otherwise the book won't sell. It's not strictly necessary to have a PhD to be an expert, but practically speaking it might as well be, because almost every real expert has a PhD.
>
> What if I write a really good textbook- will nobody buy it because my name is not known?
>
>
>
If your name is not known, the textbook will not sell well regardless of how good it is. Conversely, if you are *very* well known (think <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>) then your book will sell well regardless of how good it is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, you can write a textbook, even without a PhD. But the first problem is that you need to make a connection with a publisher. If you send a manuscript to a reputable publisher they will most likely return it unopened to avoid future claims if they read it, reject it, and then publish something in the future.
But a common way to connect is to attend some educator's conference in your field. Most such conferences have "book fairs" where publishers show off their wares, seeking adoptions. But these are also typically attended by "acquisition editors" who are on the lookout for new products. You can arrange to have a conversation with such a person and pitch your idea. It might fit a need they have and you can then work toward getting a contract.
You can do all of this before or after you have a draft of the manuscript, but they want to see and evaluate the proposal before they look at any manuscript.
And, as others have said, there isn't much money in it for authors with a few exceptions. And the money isn't likely to last for long unless the book takes off and you are willing to revise it every three years (approx.). Remember that those acquisition editors are still out there looking for something to replace your book. The "next new thing". A textbook that still has sales after about five years is an exception in most fields.
---
Those educator conferences are also good for meeting like-minded people. And some of them are probably better known than you are. And some of them are also known and trusted by the editors. So, getting involved in a circle of educators, while it has many other benefits, can also help you connect to an editor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Unfortunately, yes. Anyone can write a text-book. Even people who
absolutely should not.
The attached image is from a book I found at my local library. 'New Method in Mathematic'. Yes, this is the title, and yes, it is misspelled.
Every page in the book looks more or less like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0dzni.jpg)
I have no idea what the new method is either, and I did really try to figure out. It is a complete mystery to me why anyone would spend that much type typesetting what seems to be complete nonsense. In any case, it is perhaps to no-ones surprise that it is self-published.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I completely agree with the other answers here which emphasize the big gap between writing a textbook and having it published by a publisher (and then the further goal of expecting people to buy it).
If you do not want to go the traditional publisher route, you can always self-publish as a free online textbook. It is very possible that a free online textbook will have wider circulation and more overall teaching benefit than a hard copy by a traditional publisher. Here is an example of a quite extensive online textbook: [Advanced Data Analysis from an Elementary Point of View](http://www.stat.cmu.edu/%7Ecshalizi/ADAfaEPoV/), by <NAME>.
Related: In some newer fields, such as machine learning, there is a culture of open access: see [the famous petition against a new subscription journal from *Nature* in favor of a new open access journal](https://openaccess.engineering.oregonstate.edu/home). Andrew Ng's online lectures have probably been seen by more students than any physical machine learning textbook. I assume most other disciplines are more traditional in using textbooks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: For all popular subjects, there are already popular textbooks that are good enough. I do not believe it is possible to make an improvement large enough to convince people to switch to your book. If you want to create a successful textbook, you need:
* To write something that is not worse than what is already popular.
* To be cheaper than what is already popular.
* To spend money on marketing.
You will notice that there is no benefit to the author to meeting these three criteria.
Who you are is not very important to textbook writing. It's tough for anyone to be successful in textbook writing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: One of the services that a publisher provides (along with editing, design, printing, distribution, legal, etc) is marketing. They have a sales force that goes out to bookshops. They send out review copies and written blurb to magazines and newspapers. They advertise to the target audience.
THAT is what gets books sold. 'Word of mouth' will only get you so far, and needs to overcome a lot of inertia before going 'viral' or 'global'.
I'd wager that most books in education are marketed on the strength of their content, than on star quality. *"The new standard in Statistical method!"*
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: If you are well established as an expert in your field, the major academic publishing houses will come and find you. (You may have posted lecture notes online that they like.) Otherwise, you may be in for a hard time as explained in detail by the other answers here.
Since hardly any textbook makes its author a lot of money, it is best done if your day job is a professional environment in which you have the opportunity to spend the requisite amount of time.
In practice these criteria tend to apply predominantly though not exclusively to tenured academics or retired ones; a PhD is not a requirement but usually comes with the territory. Also, the book will absorb ideas that could have gone into primary publications. So even tenured academics often effectively sacrifice their prospects within academia by writing books.
That said, if you have a book in you that absolutely needs to be written, do go ahead. You do run the risk of producing something that is only acceptable to viXra.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Anyone can Write a textbook.
Most professors that publish textbooks use the chapters as lecture notes for several years so that their students end up proof reading the textbook for free.
I have done this as a student, I'm absolutely OK with it as the student gets a very well prepared set of lecture notes and a very very well prepared class out of it.
If you try do do this without being a professor, you will
1. not have the army of free proof readers that university professors have, making the job much harder.
2. the university wont subsidize the publishing of it
3. You won't get a sabbatical year writing it.
Bear in mind that unless they are for very popular courses, many text books not only loose money for the author, but the publisher as well. bearing in mind the time to type set it and things.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Anyone can write a book/textbook. If you feel you have something to offer that doesn't exist, or that you feel you can improve on something, then you should definitely give it a shot. As others have said, the publishing houses may ignore you. Self-publishing is a good way to go, just do your research and don't give up the rights to your creative property. My wife joined a group called Author Academy Elite, for a fee they offer instructions on how to self-publish, help you publish your first book, and you can put AAE down as your publishing company. Again, do your research, because there are more companies like AAE, this is just the one my wife chose.
If you are really passionate about the subject, knowing that you have helped at least one person learn about that subject is a great feeling. (royalties can give you a great feeling, too, though!;) )
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/09
| 920
| 3,895
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student in STEM.
* I have noticed that several of my peers (also in STEM) have published in journals or conferences (multiple times).
* I have also seen that in online forums for graduate admissions (such as PhysicsGRE), almost all the profiles have published several times in conferences and journals (granted that profiles in online forums do not present a well-rounded view of undergraduate students).
* Many of them are also first or second authors in their papers.
**Has there really been an increase in papers co-authored by undergraduates? Does this mean that publishing a paper does not carry the same level of significance as it used to in graduate admissions?**
I know I am being paranoid, but I am hoping to apply to graduate school and I feel under pressure to publish since it seems like there are so many who do this, and hence someone who has not published any of their research would not stand out to the admission committee. This pressure is at the back of my mind every time I am working on my research, and is preventing me from enjoying its process.
Of course, this could be confirmation bias and I tried to find statistical answers regarding this, but could not find any, so I am asking here, since several members here take part in the graduate admissions process.<issue_comment>username_1: This answer is specific to the US. I think the Canadian system is a bit different.
It still seems relatively rare that undergraduates are able to publish significant research while enrolled in a US university. A few will, of course, but not so many due to the nature of the US curriculum, which is intended for a general education with only some specialization. Even in the major of a STEM degree the coverage tends to be broad rather than deep.
That isn't to say that US undergraduates don't do any research, but it is difficult to reach the "research edge" of specialization under the US system.
More important and more common in the evaluation of students with only a BS applying to doctoral programs is enthusiastic letters of recommendation from professors who have worked closely with candidates and can predict their success. You need a good GPA, and possibly good test scores as well, but, relatively speaking, letters are important.
Your Statement of Purpose is also important. It needs to show realizable goals as well as the seriousness to achieve them.
Any research, even if unpublished, such as a senior thesis, is a plus, but that should also lead to a good letter from the advisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: * Has there really been an increase in papers co-authored by undergraduates?
These facts can be established:
1. There has been an increase in the number of undergraduates, except for recently in a few areas that have falling birth rates.
2. There has been an increase in the number of papers published.
3. The average number of authors per paper has increased.
4. For most papers, it is impossible to tell if an undergraduate is an author without asking the authors.
On balance, I think that there has been an increase in papers authored or coauthored by undergraduates, but that it is impossible to tell how big that increase is because nobody is collecting the data.
>
> This pressure is at the back of my mind every time I am working on my research, and is preventing me from enjoying its process.
>
>
>
As a PhD student in STEM, you will be assessed primarily on your research publications. If you particularly dislike being assessed that way, do not get a PhD in STEM.
>
> Does this mean that publishing a paper does not carry the same level of significance as it used to in graduate admissions?
>
>
>
The number of PhD students is also increasing and admissions practices are slow to change, so I doubt there has been or will be much change.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/05/09
| 584
| 2,280
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last year one of my papers was rejected. The editor provided the comments of referees so I have continued to work on this paper following their suggestion. I have done a great deal of work and I think that now the paper is really worth a publication.
I was considering to resubmit it to the same journal: can I do this or is it frowned upon?<issue_comment>username_1: Some journals won't accept a resubmission after rejection. For some others it might depend on the reason for rejection. If the editor deemed it not suitable for the journal it isn't likely to be reconsidered.
But otherwise you should be able to resubmit it. You can also ask the editor whether it would be advisable or not. Follow their advice, of course.
And "frowned upon" only matters if the editor is the one frowning.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you submit a previously-rejected paper to the journal, what happens in principle\* is that the editorial management system flags the paper as a duplicate. [Screenshot](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/101864/can-you-share-some-screenshots-of-editors-control-panels) if you want to see what it looks like from the other side.
Once flagged, the editor (or more likely the desk editor, i.e. the employee of the publisher) will have to decide if they should pass the paper on to begin the peer review process. The default reaction will be "no". You will need to convince them otherwise. The easiest way is to write an explanation in the cover letter. There's a good chance they'll be looking at the previous reviewer reports while making this decision, so you might want to address the reports directly.
The worst that can happen is that your paper is desk rejected. Rather more likely (assuming you did a good job updating the paper) is that the paper is sent for review, but the same reviewers that reviewed the original paper are invited again.
**tl; dr**: yes, you can resubmit.
\*This is only in principle. It's possible the journal [fails to detect the resubmission](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences/article/peerreview-practices-of-psychological-journals-the-fate-of-published-articles-submitted-again/AFE650EB49A6B17992493DE5E49E4431).
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/10
| 2,361
| 9,836
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in pure mathematics about 4 months into my program. After consulting with my supervisor and some peers, I have signed up to give a 20 minute talk at an online conference, which has invited final year undergraduates writing a bachelor's thesis, masters students, PhD students and postdocs to sign up and optionally give a talk.
My supervisor and peers have told me that it is a good idea to sign up as it's really good for my CV. At this point in my program however, I am mainly learning about my field, and haven't produced very much original research. I have however come up an (in my opinion) interesting question that would make for a good talk if I had a partial answer, but at this stage I have not had much time to explore the answer.
The conference is in about a month's time, and I think it would be a great exercise to write a talk giving an introduction to the field and how it came about, but at this stage this is all I could do, and even this would be quite a task to do in a month!
The sign up page for the conference does encourage works in progress however, but I am not sure how much I can do in a month.
My questions are:
* Was it a mistake to sign up for this talk?
* If, in a week's time say, I feel that I can't present any partial progress, can I ask to be removed from the schedule, or is this unacceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: Twenty minutes is not long for a talk. Moreover, most students drastically overestimate how much material you can put in a short talk. Giving a short introduction to the field and how it came about will be more than adequate to fill that amount of time, and would be a perfectly reasonable topic for an incoming PhD student with only four months in the program. Time permitting, it might also be nice to mention your research question and the general avenues of inquiry you are going to use to solve it. You should also leave a few minutes for questions and comments, particularly since this will give researchers in the audience an opportunity to offer suggestions on your research idea.
So no --- you didn't make a mistake signing up for this talk. Don't bother trying to cram out new research results for it --- just stick with your plan to give a short introduction to your field and a brief outline of your research question. That should be enough to hold people's interest and solicit some questions, and the twenty minutes will go by in a flash. I doubt a short talk like this is really going to help your CV all that much, but it will be good practice for giving conference talks, and if you are lucky, it might precipitate a longer conversation on your research idea with one or more of the researchers in the audience.
(And as [Buffy](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/) points out in the comments below, no one will be upset with you if you don't use all your time --- running over time is bad, but having time to spare is fine.)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Do you have any MSc project work or the like? I pretty much had the same experience and chose to talk about the project I had done before starting the PhD (at that point this could have been a basis for the PhD but ultimately this turned out differently). It wasn't super original and I felt slightly bad about it when preparing, but it turned out to be a good experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: For the past 30+ years, I've been giving talks at conferences, both academic and non-academic. Many, many times by the time I start writing the talk, I start to think "how am I ever going to fill the allotted time". Then, when I have my first draft ready, it's more "OMG, I have 60 slides, and only 20 minutes".
20 minutes is not a lot. If that includes time for questions, and an introduction, time will fly.
>
> Was it a mistake to sign up for this talk?
>
>
>
That seems unlikely. Unless you show up without any slides and no preparation because you planned to write the slides the night before, but got drunk in a bar instead (I've seen that happen).
>
> If, in a week's time say, I feel that I can't present any partial progress, can I ask to be removed from the schedule, or is this unacceptable?
>
>
>
It happens frequently that people ask to be removed from the schedule, for many different reasons. For conference organizers, this is part of the game. I was in charge of the program of a conference last year, and I had to make last minute changes because a few speakers cancelled. Conference organizers cannot force people to show up and speak. But you would do yourself a disservice.
Now, I understand you're nervous. I still am before giving a talk -- that will never go away. But whatever you're talking about, you are the expert. You know more about it than the audience. Presenting at conferences are a good way for people to get to know (of) you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: * Was it a mistake to sign up for this talk?
No, you will be soon in exactly the same situation you describe, but the talk will be in front of the heavy weight of your topic, not BSc, PhDs and the likes.
Why do I say so? because a talk will and *must* be showing a work in progress, at different stages of completion. If the work is done, then you are presenting a paper you completed, which is relatively "boring". I can read paper, I prefer to read a paper rather than attending a talk with an introduction by the author to the paper (off-topic: same reasoning applies to the fact I do not like most of the travel guides, where you are suggested with which mood you should enjoy a certain view/building/landmark).
* If, in a week's time say, I feel that I can't present any partial progress, can I ask to be removed from the schedule, or is this unacceptable?
You are facing a big climb: preparing your first presentation. In the next years you will use and reuse this material, as the core building block of your talk. Or at least, you think so. In reality, you will discover that you will be basically rewriting everything and even having only marginally acceptable partial progress, this will translate in a humongous amount of work in the last week. This first time experience, however, will help you survive for the future iterations of this process.
Jump in the unknown. Present your problem/goal (2 minutes). Present the literature you are based on (3-4 papers, 5 minutes). Present literature open points (3 minutes) and your questions (3 minutes). Present your approach (2 minutes), without any partial progress (0 minutes). Present your partial progress (2 minutes, if any).
One slide = one minute (or more).
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I will try to provide general answer that might help you later too.
You have to ask yourself: **what is the function of your talk and who is your audience?**
>
> I have signed up to give a 20 minute talk at an online conference, which has invited final year undergraduates writing a bachelor's thesis, masters students, PhD students and postdocs
>
>
>
This *suggests to me* very general audience, and function of this event is more education than presentation of research results. You **can choose** other function/audience but you risk to have a mismatch.
Assuming these function and audience, 20 minutes is plenty to (for example):
1. educate your audience on importance of your field, and how it connects to other famous fields
2. present "an example of research-level question and process to answer it"
3. educate undergrads/other PhD students on your process. Undergrads will want to learn how math PhD looks like in practice
As soon as you understand the function of your talk, it shouldn't be hard to see that you will provide value/be useful if you *just* teach people about your field and process. It is still hard though and require polish (short talks especially important to polish).
PS: still you can decide that the function of your talk is to present Fields medal-worthy work, and aim to fulfill that function. But should you?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In my years of giving and listening to talks, I've *never* heard someone complain about a talk that was *too short*. If you have ten minutes of material for a twenty minute talk, that's *perfectly* fine; there will be a few minutes of introduction, then your ten minutes of talk, then a bit of time for questions perhaps, then everyone will have a few extra minutes to get to their next talk - it will be refreshing for folks to not have to rush to the next talk after a 28 minute talk, as often happens.
And of course, don't be surprised if your talk does go longer than you expect. They usually do!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Those types of conferences (including students and PhD candidates) are often designed specifically, or at least partially, for young scholars to test their findings on training grounds.
This is more than likely that you do not have enough material, or that it's not original, but that's okay--this is a great opportunity for you to talk about your problem/field of study:
1. By preparing a talk you learn how to rethink and summarize the issues you tackle, which has a potential of deepening your understanding.
2. Feedback from your peers and superiors will help you improve your research--by pointing out flaws, suggesting new venues for exploration etc.
3. Chances are that to many among the audience those issues are new and they can learn something--this is inevitable in all domains too broad to be mastered by one person, and math is indubitably one of those.
There is a great value in being able to define and conceptualize problems concisely and simply for a variety of reasons, and this is an opportunity for you to learn how to do so (incrementally, of course).
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/10
| 944
| 4,076
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm about to graduate college and this is my first time submitting a manuscript and I need some guidance because my PI has been busy with his grant. I submitted my manuscript to Behavioral sleep medicine since January and it has been sitting with the editor and did not enter the peer review process.
I thought this was a great journal because of their [metrics](https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?show=journalMetrics&journalCode=hbsm20).
I found out it was a lie. When I looked them up on PubMed I noticed only 40 papers got published in the last year which is [really small compared to other journals even during COVID-19](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Behavioral+Sleep+Medicine+%5BJournal%5D&sort=date).
I emailed the journal multiple times about a time frame and they copied and pasted this same message twice "I do apologize, but I have no further information at this time. The editor is working diligently to get decisions out as soon as possible."
I'm about to graduate and I feel like I won’t have time to work in this journal and neither would my coauthors and I was wondering what I should do. I worked on this project for 6 years straight from undergrad to grad. Should I withdraw and submit it to sleep health?<issue_comment>username_1: The average length of time that it takes for a manuscript to work its way through the submission/review process can vary from one discipline to the next, and I'm not really sure what that would be for yours. Coming from my own experience in the humanities, I would normally expect an editor to take no longer than a month to get a manuscript out to reviewers. Of course, there are a number of legitimate reasons for delays, such as an editor having a hard time securing reviewers (or getting reviewers who end up backing out or are unresponsive to an editor's request for evaluations).
That said, I do think that a case such as yours seems unprofessional. You've reached out and haven't received any specific explanation for the delay and the response doesn't even seem to align with your situation (you mention that your manuscript hasn't been sent out for peer review, yet they mention that they're working on sending decisions out...) I would probably send another email indicating that I'd like to withdraw my submission. However, if you have co-authors on this paper, do not do so without consulting them first. I would also copy them in this email if they are also OK with withdrawing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not fair to say the *journal* isn't responding. They clearly are - "I do apologize, but I have no further information at this time. The editor is working diligently to get decisions out as soon as possible."
Evidently the person who isn't responding is the editor (or possibly the reviewers). Here you are out of luck. If it's the editor not responding, the journal cannot really force the editor to respond; if it's the reviewers, the journal cannot invite new reviewers either (that is mainly the purview of the editors of the journal).
So you'll have to decide for yourself what to do next. If you decide to wait, you could easily be waiting for a really long time. On the other hand, if you submit elsewhere, you'd not only be starting from square one, you could still end up waiting for a really long time. There's no easy answer for this one. If it's any comfort, journal editors regularly have to make this decision too (except for them it's whether to invite new reviewers or wait for the already-invited-but-not-responsive reviewers to finish their reviews).
It's possible the journal will be willing to share some more details with you if you ask for them. The journal might be willing to answer "how many reviewers are invited?" or "when are the reviews due?". If it's the reviewers that are not responding, it might be better to wait, because an active editor should always be able to find reviewers eventually. On the other hand if it's the editor who isn't responding, it might be better to submit elsewhere.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/10
| 8,546
| 36,759
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach mathematics and computing; for example, our department's discrete mathematics course. As is customary for that course, it's used as the first foray into formal mathematics, including a heavy emphasis on reading and writing proofs throughout the semester (required for both our math & computing majors). In response to difficulties I've seen students wrestle with in past semesters, on the first day of the course I have a slide with this quote:
>
> **Writing Proofs in English**
>
>
> “The best notation is no notation; whenever it is possible to avoid
> the use of a complicated alphabetic apparatus, avoid it. A good
> attitude to the preparation of written mathematical exposition is to
> pretend that it is spoken. Pretend that you are explaining the subject
> to a friend on a long walk in the woods, with no paper available; fall
> back on symbolism only when it is really necessary.” – <NAME>,
> *How to Write Mathematics*
>
>
>
Now, the last few semesters I've done this I find that I regularly get pushback. For example, this semester I had a student write in the live online chat, something like, "This seems unfair to students who have poor English skills". And I've been a bit stumped for a short, solid response to that.
Note that I'm at a community college in the U.S., which is part of a large urban university, and about half of our student population is foreign-born. We have a [TOEFL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_of_English_as_a_Foreign_Language) requirement for enrollment, but some students indeed have very weak English skills (I've had a small number that apparently needed every course lecture translated by a friend, and couldn't communicate with me directly).
My initial instinct is something like, "You enrolled at a university where the instruction is in English, and has an English requirement for registration, so no one should be surprised at this." But (a) that seems wordy and byzantine, and (b) misses the underlying problem that people are led to believe that math work is entirely deterministic symbol-pushing, such that some people pursue it precisely because they think they won't need strong language skills (in fact, some of our advisors explicitly say this to students).
Obviously, replace "English" here with "natural language" at whatever institution and location you might consider.
**What's the best, shortest response to student criticism that "It's unfair to expect writing in English"?**
Related from SE Mathematics: [Why there is no sign of logic symbols in mathematical texts?](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1368531/why-there-is-no-sign-of-logic-symbols-in-mathematical-texts)<issue_comment>username_1: For writing proofs, full knowledge of English is not necessary. Most proofs can be written using a single tense. It is sufficient (and often advisable) to keep the structure of sentences very simple; that is very similar to how logic statements are written using math notation. Arguably, this exercise requires students to use only a small and simple subset of English level. Most students are expected to have it by the admission requirements of the course they signed on.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Communicating academic work is a key part of doing academic work. Communicating in different forms (symbolic, graphical, natural language prose, computer code, ...) is essential to engage with different audiences. As an effective communicator of academic work, you don't get to choose what is best for your audience, so you have to learn to be effective in multiple approaches.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Being at a disadvantage due to a lack of necessary skills does not seem unfair to me. The ability to communicate clearly in written form is an essential skill for pretty well everything that we hope that our students will go on to do in their later life. Thus, it is a skill that we should actively encourage them to develop, by pretty much the same methods that we encourage them to develop, say, mathematical skills. That includes methods such as assessing them on that ability.
Just for reference, my department explicitly awards 20% of the available marks on each assignment (not including exams, because expecting people to re-draft work under time pressure is unreasonable) for "clarity of written communication". Neither this, nor a more implicit approach, is unfair: it is an assessment system rewarding better results to more able students, which is *precisely* what assessment systems are supposed to do.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: The ultimate defence against 'It's unfair to assess us on skill X' is 'Skill X is listed in the published "Intended Learning Outcomes" document for the module/programme'. So, the question for OP is: does the "Intended Learning Outcomes" document, either for the module or for the programme, include something like "By the end of the module/programme, students will be able to make a case for a particular result, using verbal reasoning in English"?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Your experience resonates with me. In my classes I also have many students with imperfect English. I have often noticed (including as recently as a couple of weeks ago) that when I give lengthy word questions explaining a complicated real-life problem and asking to model it mathematically, some students struggle to understand what they are being asked to do due to language difficulties; and this is despite the fact that the question is written in grammatically correct, plain English, and I even make a conscious effort to edit the questions and “water down” the level of the English by removing complicated words and phrases to the extent possible.
Although I haven’t gotten pushback and don’t believe I have anything to answer for, thinking about this issue over the years has led me to conclude that there is a real problem of students who come to US universities with an incomplete mastery of English being at a disadvantage — often a significant one — because of their language skills. And I’ve wondered what I can do about it. For example, consciously trying to speak and write with slightly less complicated English words and phrases than I might be inclined to do if I knew I was addressing only native English speakers is one remedy. But it is a small and mostly (as far as I can tell) ineffective one. The students who were going to struggle are still struggling.
Now, whether or not this is “unfair” is a complicated ethical question and I don’t think it is my place to answer it. But one thing I’ve come to believe is that, at least, *to the extent that it is unfair*, the unfairness is a systemic kind of unfairness that is built into a university system that admits a large number of foreign students and expects them to handle an environment in which knowledge of (high-level, academic) English is assumed. In other words, it is not me who introduced the unfairness, and it is not me who has much power to do anything about it.
At the end of the day, my job is to teach mathematics, using English as the language of instruction, and that is what I do. If the subject I’m teaching involves writing word problems to teach people how to model and interpret real-life problems, that is what I will do. If the subject requires students to write proofs verbally, that is what I will require (though grading will be done based on the mathematical correctness of the answer and not based on correct grammar and spelling). There just isn’t any other way.
When a student says to you that what you are doing is unfair, tell them that you are simply teaching the subject you were assigned to teach as it should be taught by a qualified instructor. Ask them what they are suggesting that you do instead. My guess is they will not be able to make a coherent suggestion, and perhaps that will lead them to understand that the problem is more complicated than they realized.
Also: tell the advisors at your college not to tell students that mathematics does not require strong language skills! That is a horribly false and misleading thing to tell people and can obviously set them up for trouble and disappointment.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: For my university at least, English proficiency is a requirement for enrollment to the point that students who learned English as a second language are required to take an English test like TOEFL as part of the admissions package. Therefore, although it may sound harsh,
>
> You enrolled at a university where the instruction is in English, and has an English requirement for registration, so no one should be surprised at this.
>
>
>
is the assumption I make. (If I were to take classes or teach in a country that does not speak English, I would think it reasonable to have to learn the local language.) My class is not about reading, writing, or speaking English, so I will suggest students visit the university writing center if I notice them struggling.
>
> (b) misses the underlying problem that people are led to believe that math work is entirely deterministic symbol-pushing, such that some people pursue it precisely because they think they won't need strong language skills (in fact, some of our advisors explicitly say this to students).
>
>
>
I think that math work definitely requires less language skills than some other subjects where writing is a larger part of the answer, but students still have to be able to understand the instructor's communication and explain their answers.
As a side note, I sometimes see students trying to derive a result algebraically without understanding what the math represents, and I usually suggest they describe their approach conceptually before going through the technical details.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Maybe something like:
"It is important to understand the motivation of why something is done as well as the underlying beliefs/assumptions the writer has made. The role of mathematics is to allow us to understand complicated relationships between aspects of reality, the symbols' role is to help reduce mistakes in logical reasoning and allow us to deduce counter-intuitive relations with a high degree of confidence. However seeing a formula, and understanding a formula, are very different things. The second of which is important for extending our understanding to more advanced mathematics and applying these formulas in new or innovative situations."
If you are working with computer scientists or physicists this ability to explain in words rather than just symbols is important since the mathematics is only a means to an end rather than a thing unto itself. For mathematics students you could find the counter argument that mathematics is separate from the rest of reality and so symbol pushing should be enough. But that fails to take into account that the mathematics that they are working with is being worked with in a fleshy ball of meat, living deep within reality. Something that doesn't work well with just symbols disconnected from reality and has a limited amount of memory. This leads to the need for any student to be able to *chunk* ideas together when they want to learn more advanced topics, this is much easier to do with verbal and intuitive explanations than just a bunch of formulas and relations.
As for the students who are really bad with English, get them to first write their response in English, then a second time in their native language and run it through google translate. You're not going to be testing them on their grammar so the mistakes google translate put in probably won't obscure the underlying understanding that much if it was there to begin with (assuming its a fairly well represented language). And since your language of instruction is English, then if they can't understand that they should be spending time improving their English, and this gives them an opportunity to practice using English in a highly specialised case which they probably wouldn't otherwise get.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: In addition to the other good answers:
There are two somewhat separate questions here, or maybe three. One is about the way "natural" mathematical questions arise in an English environment. Another is about old-or-new English formulations of direct mathematical questions in a classroom setting. Another is about *responses* in either case.
For complaints about having to *respond* coherently, as though it demanded an inordinate level of English fluency: well, no, it doesn't. A very rudimentary style is sufficient, and perhaps even better than long compound-complex sentences that self-interrupts, etc. Hemingway, not Faulkner. But, yes, English-style *sentences*. Not strings of various nouns and verbs with neurotic periods and capitalization.
*Comprehension* is a harder question. But for kids wanting to work in the U.S., "even in Math or tech", the "secondary" skill of fluency in English can be a decisive competitive edge. There are lots of people with good technical background, but with communication problems.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: A *short* explanation of my grading philosophy in this instance often comforts my ESL learners:
>
> While I will not take off points for general English mistakes (for example with grammar), I do take off points for *mathematical English mistakes*, that change/obscure the mathematical interpretation of your response.
>
>
>
While this does not put ESL students on the same footing as native English speakers, both groups struggle with technical language in their early proof classes, and so this puts the emphasis on what it's my job to teach all of them: good technical writing skills.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_10: I would answer:
"It is, nevertheless, an essential part of the skill you are here to learn. It is no different in principle to students with a weak *mathematical* background due to their previous education. As with any other challenging circumstance a student may face, specialist help is available for anyone having difficulties with any part of the curriculum and who needs to catch up on prerequisites."
If this is a common problem, there ought to be language tuition available specialising in remedial technical/mathematical English. Or they could get in touch with older/former students with a similar language/subject combination, find a study group, etc. But as regards "fairness", this is no different to the disadvantage faced by students who went to bad schools that didn't teach them calculus, or complex numbers, or whatever. Everyone has their own individual hurdles. For one student it's calculus, for another, English. Ask yourself, how would you answer someone who said they were not taught some prerequisite bit of *mathematics* at their previous school and it "wasn't fair"?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if changing “English” to “Plain Language” was sufficient to quell students’ concerns. It neatly sidesteps their manifest discomfort with the language itself. I doubt the manifest objection is the whole story—STEM folks always bristle at problems you can’t just calculate—so maybe you’ll even have more interesting and relevant conversations.
If you still hear objections, why not provide some resources? From the lowest level of personal effort to the greatest: You could refer your students to an on-campus writing clinic. You could offer a list of texts you found particularly illuminating when *you* learned to express complex mathematical ideas in writing. Or you could make sure students who were struggling knew you were available to discuss their work during office hours.
The responses others have offered are oriented towards *winning* your conversations with your students. It’s true there are larger structural problems in play for which it would be unreasonable to hold you responsible. The observation that Kids Today demand license and call it liberty is also hard to dispute. But your class isn’t about that, and your students aren’t an expedient means to proving a broader claim about society.
Your question makes it clear that you take your students’ education seriously and believe you do them a service by pushing them. Good! That’s demanding work, and too few academics are interested in doing it. But whatever else it may accomplish, making “Life is unfair” the hill you die on doesn’t teach them anything they didn’t know already.
(It also seems way more exhausting than pasting a couple hyperlinks into your PowerPoint, but that’s between you and your clipboard.)
The quotation is meant to be a little uncomfortable—counterintuitive, surprising, thought-provoking. Discomfort is an opportunity to learn. For that purpose, “English” is the single least interesting and relevant word you’ve got.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_12: >
> I've had a small number that apparently needed every course lecture translated by a friend, and couldn't communicate to me directly
>
>
>
If they can't communicate in even the most basic English, I have a difficult time understanding how they could pass TOEFL to begin with, unless your university's entry mark for TOEFL is in negative territory.
Anyway, you seem to think that this is something that's your responsibility and something you can and should do something about. **It's not.** If students are coming into an English university, with courses taught in English, then they had better bloody well be able to keep up with the English that the instructors are using.
The simplest way to explain this is by turning it around on them, so:
>
> What's the best, shortest response to student criticism that "It's unfair to expect writing in English"?
>
>
>
"If I had chosen to study at an institution that uses for instruction, and I lacked a fundamental grasp of that language, would it be valid for me to claim that it is "unfair" that I cannot understand the instruction being given?"
If they answer "no", they have defeated their own argument.
If they answer "yes", get them to articulate why, because either they are just being difficult, or their reasoning will be unsound and easily defeated.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: If students have been assigned to write in English and they complain:
>
> This seems unfair to students who have poor English skills
>
>
>
The correct response is
1. Some students learned English as a native language and other students learned some other native language, but everyone is expected to write in English. **Yes, this is unfair.**
2. Most of the money and power in the world is associated with using the English language. This is unfair to people who speak other languages, but nobody knows how to change it.
3. The best thing we are able to do about the situation is help students learn English.
4. Completing this course will help you learn English. For example, writing proofs in English will help you learn English.
5. Many students who are English language learners are successful in this course and in this discipline. (add examples)
6. The resources available to help you are ...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: The original slide doesn't push the reader to use English. Pretend that you are explaining the subject to a friend. This pretense could be done in the favorite language the two of you share. It doesn't have to be English. There are many languages that are just as well suited as English for this purpose.
Now the question becomes how to communicate with the professor. If the best language for this purpose is English, then that's the language to use. This may not be fair, but it's useful.
It may put some people at a disadvantage. They may have to work harder to polish their English communication skills. This could serve them well later on. Another solution is to find a different professor who teaches the same course, but in the student's first language.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: Consider the statement "Requiring students to exhibit a skill is unfair to students who don't have that skill."
The statement is true if the skill is not related to the course. It is unfair for a course in, say, discrete mathematics to require that students exhibit, say, the ability to swim. This is because one can do discrete mathematics even if one cannot swim.
The statement is false if the skill is related to the course. If is fair for a course in discrete mathematics to require that students exhibit the ability to count. This is because one cannot do discrete mathematics if one cannot count.
Is the ability to write mathematical proofs related to a course in discrete mathematics? Yes, if the focus is on theory; no, if the focus is on applications.
Is the ability to write in English related to a course in discrete mathematics? Yes, if the course is taught in English; no, if the course is not taught in English.
Tell your students that your course focuses on theory and is taught in English.
---
Edit: It has (correctly) been pointed out in the comments that even though one cannot do discrete mathematics if one cannot count, one can still do discrete mathematics if one cannot write in English. The reasoning I used in paragraphs 3 and 4 is not the same as the reasoning I used in paragraphs 2 and 3.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_16: Each unnecessary mathematical symbol has a universally-applicable English equivalent
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Replacing symbols with words is easy. Your students can just learn a single phrase to replace each symbol, and use that whenever they would use the symbol. Avoiding symbols isn't the hard part of writing mathematics in English.
The hard part of writing proofs is writing with proper structure. Students need to present their ideas in a logical order, signpost how each idea relates to the next, and have an appropriate structure for their proof. Importantly, these skills are only slightly language-dependent. If a student can write a good proof in their native language, a word-for-word translation of that would probably be better than many proofs written by native English speakers.
Your course notes or textbooks contain many examples of the language used in proofs
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Native speakers as well as non-native speakers often don't know how to write proofs. I tutor a mathematics course with a writing assignment, and our standard first-instance answer when students ask how to write proofs is that they should copy the style in the notes. Our university devotes two weeks of one of its courses just to writing proofs, and I've heard of a university with an entire course dedicated to mathematical writing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_17: I first would recommend that you talk to the writing support services people at your institution, such as the writing center or the center for teaching and learning. They will have some suggestions for you about how to approach this topic in a way that is constructive and useful for students. I'm not in math, but I do have students who have challenges with standard written English, both immigrant and native born.
Here are some ideas I would suggest.
1. I always say that one of my learning outcomes is that you will *improve* your skill in writing. This is not a grammar class, and writing mechanics will not be an important part of the grading, but what will be important is that you get a lot of practice in professional writing in our discipline.
2. You can also add oral expression to this, and your example of explaining on a walk is a nice way of expressing this. I would even consider adding something about that in your learning outcomes.
3. All the writing pedagogy people will tell you two things. One is that to get better at writing you have to write a lot. The second is that revision is essential. Create opportunities for your students to revise their writing.
4. Don't try to teach a grammar or composition course. You're not actually qualified for that besides the fact that you have math content to cover. If you can help students make small steps in their writing be happy with that.
5. Make sure you encourage students to take advantage of tutoring and other academic supports. Remind them every week that this is an option so that using them becomes de-stigmatized.
Since you are a fellow CUNY person I would strongly suggest that you see if you can get a WAC fellow to work with you. They are generally excellent and have good training.
---
Update
I have been thinking a lot about your question. I think we were missing the point (largely) because the students weren't asking about *writing* but about *writing in English*. Here's what I've been thinking.
First I think you should reassure them that if they are doing math in their first language, that is normal. Being able to do math in a second language is the last or close to the last point of fluency.
What I might suggest is that you say they can write in their own language, but then translate into English if they prefer. I'd have them hand in both along with the Google translate version so that you know they went beyond that (which is the obvious first step). Your goal then, even though you won't exactly grade on it, is to help them get more fluent in English.I think you should stress to them how important this will be in the workforce. You can also encourage them to write directly in English and say that you'll grade it to the same standard as the translated submissions, not expecting perfection.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_18: This is barely an answer, but having students with language issues is hardly new, and your college probably has resources for such students. You should locate them, and guide your students to them.
You should look into what language assistance resources are available for students, particularly ESL students, at your community college -- maybe there is a writing lab or something.
If you can locate the resource, you should have a discussion about this issue with the person that heads this resource, and work out a plan for how to bring these students to a higher level in your course.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_19: Rather than trying to respond to student reactions to that particular quote, it might be better from a sensitivity standpoint to simply give several examples with explanations, perhaps categorizing the examples into a few named types of poor exposition. Then, perhaps at some later time when students have had some experience in "writing mathematics" and getting feedback, you could present the Halmos quote in class and ask students to discuss what they think it means.
One type of poor exposition is excessive symbolism, which is discussed in Section 15 *Resist Symbols* of the Halmos paper ([originally published in 1970](https://www.e-periodica.ch/digbib/view?pid=ens-001%3A1970%3A16%3A%3A524#278) and [reprinted many times since then](https://www.google.com/search?q=halmos+%22how+to+write+mathematics%22+%22The+second+time+you+say+something%22&filter=0)). For example, one should resist the temptation to introduce notation in the statement of a theorem that is only needed to prove the theorem, such as "Theorem: Every point p in a bop-bee quasi-uniform space X has a proactive neighborhood." There is no need to include p or X into the statement of this theorem. However, I see this advice violated in just about every math paper I look at. Regarding excessive symbolism in general, see my answers to the Mathematics Stack Exchange questions [Using the implies symbol in proofs](https://math.stackexchange.com/q/3509803/13130) and [How formal or informal should math texts (written for different purposes) be?](https://math.stackexchange.com/q/79176/13130)
Another type of poor exposition could be roughly identified with the linguistic term ["structural ambiguity"](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22structural+ambiguity%22+linguistics), and would include both incorrect and ambiguous uses of quantifiers, such as missing quantifiers, incorrect quantifier order, and what is sometimes called a [hanging quantifier](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22hanging+quantifier%22&filter=0). It also includes more English-specific scope issues like "John sent a letter to each of his students" (Was the same letter sent to all students, or did each
student get a personalized letter?), and "Every researcher of a company gave a presentation" (Did all of the researchers belong to the same company?), and "big truck driver" (Does this refer to a driver of big-trucks or to a big-driver of trucks?), although these more English-specific issues might be too tangential and overload your students with too much information (and thus handled on a case-by-case basis as they arise).
Still another type of poor exposition is the incorrect use of notation and terms, and I'm sure you can give many examples. One type of ambiguity that ordinarily doesn't cause problems, but which might be useful to mention in light of your course topics, is the use of "and" when an order is involved, such as "the ratio of p and q" and "the difference of p and q" and "the quotient of p and q" ([example in my present line of work](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/496210/348829) and [my comments about it](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/498891/348829)). However, I definitely recommend not falling into the rabbit hole of being obsessively correct for your students, and instead stick to the most significant concerns. Some things in the answers/comments to [Abusing mathematical notation, are these examples of abuse?](https://math.stackexchange.com/q/2505777/13130) are what I consider as obsessively correct for your students, and very many of the things discussed in [this critique of Rotman's book **An Introduction to the Theory of Groups**](https://web.archive.org/web/20160804023715/http://people.ds.cam.ac.uk/mg262/rotman%20group%20theory,%20copy.pdf), written by the author of [this book](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/364237011X), are what I consider as obsessively correct for your students. Probably a better term than "obsessively correct" exists, but this is the best I can think of now.
For the most part the examples I've given are of a logical and mathematical character, and I think most of your focus should be on these types of examples, and not on grammar issues specific to English, although of course when grading student work you should point out grammar issues if you notice them (except those students who have a huge number of grammar issues in their writing, and for those students you may want to seek the advice of someone locally, as suggested at the end of [@username_17's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167505/49593)).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_20: I would turn this on its head: 1) English is a basic skill you need in all paths of life - especially but not only in an English speaking country. 2) Some natural language is specifically needed to communicate about math and in your course that is English. So English is a two-fold requirement, thus it is fair to use it and request using it and in addition, using it also supports acquiring and improving the general skill of communicating in English. Languages are far better acquired if they are actually trained in different settings than solely in language courses. **So you do your students a favour in helping them improve their English alongside learning math.**
I've studied in a country where English is a foreign language and yet the same argument was provided there (university-level/college) for why the majority of classes was in English. Sure there were nay-sayers, too, and they were guaranteed enough courses held in the country's official language to pass their Bachelor's degree without having to go to an English language course, but few used that offer and there it was English or official native language of the country which likely in your case is English, too.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_21: I agree with the students, and think that quote is used in the wrong context. I don't know why you'd discourage using standard notation. In my teaching I wanted the students to use the correct technical terms. More importantly, I tried to get them to understand that jargon for a complex idea is natural and not show-offy at all. It seems to me you're going out-of-your way to add English proficiency where it's not needed.
Jargon-wise (which I realize isn't the same as notation, but close) I was glad when students were finally comfortable replacing "*rules for how the symbols have to be*" with "syntax" or "*the input value in the call*" with "the argument" and so on (I taught lots of intro programming). I had plenty of international students and quickly realized that most plain English is chock full of idioms, complex tenses and other challenging bits. They're already stuck listening to my colloquial English explanations, which is torture enough. And it's not as if jargon is a crutch -- you have to understand it to use it properly.
That quote -- I think I know what it's about. Most new notations are bad. Alternate ones spring up and it takes a decade before the "obvious" best way takes hold. I've read papers on new ideas where they spent time on a notation which wasn't all that clear and wasn't used much. They could have simply written "*let A-prime be a compressed version of A which adheres to the previously discussed requirements*". I think the quote is saying: "*if you have a new idea, just say it. A good notation will come much later once the idea is explored*".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_22: This is an overreach, but I suggest that instead of just formulating a counter-response, you spend a class or two familiarizing the students with the required terms/words in their English sense (rather than the strictly mathematical sense).
Many non-native English speakers struggle to build an intuition for slightly abstract math, because they have never used the words manifold, convergence, degenerate etc. in their daily life.
Exposing students to these terms in the preparatory part of the course will help allay anxiety and also implicitly convey that appropriate terminology/syntax is required in the course. Maybe that can be made explicit as well. If the course schedule doesn't permit these extra hours, you could consider circulating handouts and having a non-graded quiz on the same.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_23: ### Short and to the point
>
> This is not unfair. The college has a TOEFL requirement for
> enrollment, and any student work will be graded in English only.
>
>
> Algo, the guidelines ask for *simple* English, so it's beneficial to
> people with no mastery of English.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_24: There's so many great answers here -- so I'm submitting my own so as to organize my favorite observations for future reference. My answer in future classes will be a combination of these insights:
* English proficiency was required, and tested, to enter the college.
* Writing in natural language is an integral part of the subject, as well as any academic work.
* The writing we do is in fairly plain, simple English. If one can write a cogent, simple proof in another language, then it's a fairly easy job to translate it.
* The hard part is really understanding the mathematics, not the notation.
* If someone is weak at writing, then it's good to get practice, which we provide.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_25: This quote is not about English but about avoiding symbolism when natural language can be used. <NAME> was born Hungarian, and the best way to understand this is to imagine him discussing math in Hungarian with another Hungarian born prominent mathematician of his era, such as <NAME> or <NAME>.
And this quote is generally misunderstood when applied to students.
Students (and mathematicians) should acquire proficiency both in using symbolism and in avoiding it. When one is unsure if an argument is valid one should be able to write it symbolically and that may help in verifying whether the argument is valid. Then when one wants to communicate an argument to someone else, avoiding excessive use of symbols helps.
Students should be encouraged to experiment with writing the same argument with more and with less symbolism. Students who are less proficient in the natural language required in the homework would have the added value of acquiring more experience in the use of that language.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/10
| 797
| 3,391
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started work on my project in January right off the back of losing a very close family member, which didn't give me a very good mindset to begin with.
I had an initial doubt in my mind that the project wasn't for me but I suppressed it, thinking that over the coming months it would die down as my experience increased.
4 months later and the feelings are still there, it's at the point now where I dread the thought of having to work on my project and I feel myself staring at the clock almost obsessively. I'm still not allowed back on campus and have very limited contact with the faculty (to make matters worse I'm the only PhD student in the group) so I'm almost totally cut off in that respect.
Moreover, my motivation and interest simply aren't there any more and there's no point in me lying - I'm simply really unhappy and don't know what to do.
I haven't told my parents or supervisor because I really don't know what to say other than "I'm extremely unhappy and don't know what to do".
I recently had to sit some exams as part of the training I'm doing and they were almost impossible for me to answer which pushed me further into this way of thinking. I truly am very unhappy and don't know what to do. I'm only in my first year so I suppose it isn't too late.<issue_comment>username_1: As @Buffy says, you should probably talk to someone about your situation in general. A PhD is hard under optimal conditions, let alone when coping with loss and depression. There’s no need for you to suffer alone.
As for your research progress, nobody here can give you a right answer. You should talk with your advisor whose job is to resolve such issues. They may suggest switching fields, techniques or collaborators; they may give you a different problem you like better; they can tell you that you should quit the program and do something else. This is all very dependent on you, your advisor and your institution’s attitude towards grad students.
If your advisor is not someone you can discuss this with, you have a bigger problem on your hands. Talk to an ombudsperson, senior mentor, student counseling services, vice dean for graduate matters or any other resource your school offers. You may get a different advisor, switch to a masters or a plan will be worked out with your existing advisor.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have been in the same situation as you. At the start of my PhD I had suspicions that maybe the project wasn't right for me, but I went ahead anyway. I thought maybe it will get better.
Now, here I am four years later and that doubt was correct! I am still having issues. If I could have changed things I would have been more upfront with my supervisor early on and worked on radically changing the project in the early stages. A PhD is hard and takes long-term focus and commitment. You need to be mentally onboard and committed - doubts must be assuaged, they will not go away and just sort themselves out.
It is crucial that you talk to your supervisor about this. Be totally honest with them. They want this to work for you but you must be up front. If you feel you cannot speak to them about this, I would question whether it's right for you to be doing the course at all in its current state: if that is indeed the case, you need a new supervisor as well as a radical change of tack.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/10
| 2,625
| 9,993
|
<issue_start>username_0: It’s a well known fact that textbooks are expensive and that writing a textbook earns you very little in royalties (e.g. <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167367/11353> ). At the same time [self-publishing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-publishing) is becoming a bigger and bigger deal in non-academic circles. This sounds like an ideal solution for academic textbooks.
Are there any examples of *popular* self published textbooks?
I am not looking for any type of (exhaustive) lists. I am either interested in even a single example of such a textbook or alternatively answers that explore the main issues with this approach. Going through my collection of books from the time when I was ‘in academics’, I cannot find a single book that looks like it wasn’t published through an (academic) publisher.<issue_comment>username_1: Not sure if this counts strictly as a textbook but [Paul's Online Notes](https://tutorial.math.lamar.edu/) by <NAME> on pre-algebra and calculus appears quite high in search engine results and I have used them as refreshers for calculus concepts, so I guess they are quite popular.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: * [<NAME>](http://www.inference.org.uk/mackay/)'s quite famous textbooks *Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms* and *Sustainable Energy without the Hot Air* were (and are) made available to read free of charge on his research group website in parallel with being published in hard-copy by for-profit publishers.
* [<NAME>](http://potto.org/) has written a couple of decent thermofluids textbooks and made them available free of charge online.
* Press et al. make old editions of [Numerical Recipes](http://www.numerical.recipes/) available free of charge online, although the latest edition at any given time is available only through the for-profit publisher.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: <NAME>'s "Comprehensive Introduction to Differential Geometry" was published through the Publish-or-Perish Press he founded, probably for just that reason.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm not aware of any popular self-published books. However, I want to point out several alternatives that you can consider. First, even if you publish with a "real" publisher, often you can share a manuscript of the book online. In a lot of ways, this seems like the best of both worlds. For example, "Reinforcement Learning: an introduction" by Sutton and Barto, originally published in 1998, has not only been totally free to download for some time; actually the work-in-progress of the second edition was free to download before the second edition was officially published!
Second, the model of having class notes, which can be shared publicly, and eventually turning those class notes into a book. For example, <NAME> has several sets of class notes which are basically self-published textbooks in progress. Oskendal's textbook "Stochastic Differential Equations" originally started out as class-notes, and now it's published with Springer, but the full pdf of the most recent version is available free to download on researchgate.
In summary, if your objective is to keep cost low, this doesn't seem like a reason to self-publish, since you can still post the full book pdf online even after publishing. You can also post your book pdf today, and let people read it, and then still publish the book officially in the future.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm pretty sure *Operating Systems: Three Easy Pieces* is self-published, and it's a widely used operating systems textbook from what I understand. [https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/](https://pages.cs.wisc.edu/%7Eremzi/OSTEP/)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I think this may be sort of an oddball answer, but the very popular (Google Scholar lists more than 7,000 citations at time of writing) ion-material interactions software [SRIM](http://srim.org) has an associated [textbook](https://www.lulu.com/content/1524197?page=1&pageSize=4) that was/continues to be self-published through LuLu. It's not clear to me how popular the textbook itself is, but it is occasionally cited directly, as in [this paper](https://doi.org/10.1080/10420150902949910).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: *Turbulence Modeling for CFD* by <NAME>. The publisher is called *D C W Industries*, so I am pretty sure he is self-publishing his book. It is one of a handful of the leading books regarding this topics (mathematical engenieering).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: I keep on recommending [*Forecasting: Principles and Practice* (3rd ed.) by <NAME>](https://otexts.org/fpp3/), which is available for free online. The 2nd edition also has a paper version. Both are published through [OTexts.com](https://otexts.com/), which was pretty much founded by <NAME> for this express purpose.
As to how "popular" it is... it's definitely one of the most commonly used introductory textbooks on forecasting, written by two of the biggest names in the community.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: The many books of the pretty famous MIT professor <NAME> on linear algebra and other aspects of mathematics are self-published. Just he came up with a fancy quite familiar sounding publisher name so many didn't notice it was self published. <http://www.wellesleycambridge.com/>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: [This seems to be a list-style question/answer so here's one to add to the list.]
*Vector Calculus, Linear Algebra, and Differential Forms: A Unified Approach* by Hubbard and Hubbard - now in its 5th edition - is from Matrix Editions (along with other math books), which is their own publishing house. (And they do a very good job as publishers too: The books are beautiful and the service is personal.)
I don't know how popular it is in general but it's been mentioned [quite a few times here at Stack Exchange](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=site%3Astackexchange.com+hubbard+linear+algebra&atb=v233-1&ia=web&iai=r1-2&page=1&sexp=%7B%22biaexp%22%3A%22b%22%2C%22msvrtexp%22%3A%22b%22%7D).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_11: Elementary Calculus: An Infinitesimal Approach, by <NAME>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From the [download page](https://people.math.wisc.edu/%7Ekeisler/calc.html) set by the author:
>
> This is a calculus textbook at the college Freshman level based on
> <NAME>'s infinitesimals, which date from 1960. Robinson's
> modern infinitesimal approach puts the intuitive ideas of the founders
> of the calculus on a mathematically sound footing, and is easier for
> beginners to understand than the more common approach via epsilon,
> delta definitions.
>
>
> The First Edition of this book was published in 1976, and a revised
> Second Edition was published in 1986, both by Prindle, Weber &
> Schmidt. When the Second Edition became out of print, the copyright
> was returned to me as the author. In September 2002 I decided to make
> the book available for free in electronic form at this site. These PDF
> files were made from the printed Second Edition, and are continually
> being revised with minor corrections.
>
>
> A Third Edition of this book was published by Dover Publications, Inc.
> in 2012, with the agreement that this online version will continue to
> be freely available. This gives you the choice of downloading this
> free version or purchasing the printed book.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: **[*Measure Theory*](https://www1.essex.ac.uk/maths/people/fremlin/mt.htm) by <NAME>** vol.s 1 to 4 and 5 Part I & II.
This is both a *popular* and *controversial* book in 'measure theory' (mathematics).
It is popular because it encompasses the theory to an extraordinary level of both generality and detail (the six volumes amount to over 2500 pages I believe). Together with *Measure Theory* by <NAME>, Fremlin's manual is the modern go-to reference in the field. It is probably the unique textbook reference containing highly technical results otherwise scattered in a series of relatively old (and thus difficult to access), possibly unpublished and/or obscure works in the field.
It is somewhat controversial because the level of technicality of volumes 2 to 5 is considered extremely high (even at the postgraduate level), and the lack of a formal review make some experts skeptical about citing it. It is however generally well-received as a complete source of further references and it has been partially reviewed by the community over time.
Trivia: it is published by <NAME>, and "*dedicated by the author to the publisher*".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: I think if you look at materials dedicated to specific technologies that are widely used, there are many examples of popular self-published books. I know there are many programming languages that have popular self-published books that likely are used as official course textbooks. Off the top of my head, [The Rust Programming Language](https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/) is a good example of this. It is first and foremost an online free book maintained by Rust's developers, and is probably used by everyone interested in the language.
Another example is [<NAME>](http://hadley.nz/), who has self-published multiple books on his website for the R language. He's extremely involved in the R community and is behind some of the most widely used R libraries, so almost anyone using R to a significant degree will at least have heard of him and his books.
In both of these cases, the authors have taken their materials and produced print versions as well. Since self-publishing a print version is generally impractical, they do go through actual publishers for this. But they are both cases where the online material was self-published first (I'm not 100% sure that is the case for Wickham's older books).
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/05/11
| 1,073
| 4,650
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been looking into several different PhD programs in mathematics, and I am trying to keep my options open. After finishing a doctorate, I am open to working either in academia or industry, although I would prefer a teaching job or similar at a liberal arts college. Additionally, I am currently in the US on a student visa in an undergraduate program.
I would say I have a pretty strong resume, and my GPA is quite good (at around 3.7 on the 4.0 scale). I have research experience in combinatorics and data science, as well as independent reading courses, workshop participation and experience at a summer program for prospective PhD students. I have also given several presentations at student conferences.
I have looked at plenty of different schools in the United States. I am from a small state school, and I believe that applying to Ivy Leagues etc, I would probably not stand a chance. Even some top 50 programs I am quite sure I won't get into, although no risk no reward, so I will definitely try.
After talking to my student advisor, she told me that I should definitely have a few safety schools on my list, and that I will do. I started looking into it, and I noticed there are a few R2 universities with mathematics PhD programs that seemed to have professors interested in similar research as I am.
There was just one main concern: if I want to get a postdoc or similar after finishing PhD studies, would going to a R2 university completely kill my chances of doing this? I have been heavily advised against it by some of my peers.
If it matters at all, I am currently mainly interested in research in discrete mathematics and algebraic topology.<issue_comment>username_1: Although the reputational rankings may give you a rough idea, a lot depends on very specific individual factors. It is impossible to predict exactly how things will turn out for you.
I suggest that you should look at how graduates from the programs you are interested in have done after completing their PhD’s. Have recent graduates been placed into good post docs? Going back a decade or so, are graduates finding tenure track positions?
An easy way to do this is to use the mathematical genealogy website to look up graduates from a particular year and then see where those graduates are now by googling them. You’ll probably find a wide range of outcomes. Ask yourself whether you would be happy with all of those outcomes.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, I don't give individual advice for prospective math PhD students without saying that the job market for permanent positions (including teaching positions) is terrible and likely to stay that way. There are significantly fewer jobs than highly qualified candidates.
With that out of the way... You can get pretty much as good an education at a program ranked around 60 as at a program ranked around 20. It's true that, at the lower ranked program, you will likely have to study some more advanced topics independently with your advisor that you might have been able to take a 2nd or 3rd year graduate course for at a higher ranked program. But, given the job market, the qualifications of the professors are going to be pretty much the same. You'll be able to get pretty much just as good an advisor who, if you're capable, will help you work on just as good a project, and the advisor will have pretty much just as good a network to help you promote your work and find a postdoc.
Another difference is the expectations of the culture. At a program around 60, a student who gets a research postdoc is exceptional. The professors will not generally push you to do that level of coursework and research until you demonstrate that kind of capability, and your peers will not be expected to do that level of research. Some people are more likely to make an effort beyond what their peers do; others are not. I don't know you.
However, you should also realize that, if you are capable of earning a PhD with research that will get you a research postdoc, then every program ranked around 20 will be happy to admit you. Of course it's somewhat hard to judge the potential of an undergraduate student, but if the higher ranked programs all turn you down and you do get a postdoc after your PhD, then those programs have all made a mistake. Sometimes that mistake is systemic and out of their control; perhaps all your letters of recommendation underestimated your potential. This means, though, that failing to get admission to a top 25 program is an indication that admissions committees don't think you're likely to succeed to that extent.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/05/11
| 601
| 2,742
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my reviewers put a comment to my paper as "Show pictures of a real experimental test.". However, my paper describes a machine learning technique in electrical engineering. I don't have any real experiments and I don't claim anything in the paper about that. I can not provide any result regarding the real experiment. The other comments are good and I worry about this comment. Could you help me to provide a response for that?<issue_comment>username_1: There are two obvious possibilities here.
1. The review says only irrelevant things. In that case, simply respond to the editor: "I was unable to determine the relationship between the comments of Reviewer 1 and the submitted manuscript. Clarification would be appreciated." The editor will conclude the referee did not read the paper and the review will be ignored.
2. The review is unclear due to sloppy writing or limited English skills. In that case, I would interpret the comment as "Add a graph displaying evidence that the paper is correct." The response would be "We have added a graph displaying y as a function of x, which supports our conclusion that ..."
Also, when you are a peer reviewer, try not to give vague feedback.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you don't intend to do any real experiments any time soon, the best response is for you to be honest in your reply. Explain again that your work consists of a theoretical technique and that (if it's the case) it will be validated experimentally in future works. Maybe support it with a new graph (as username_1 suggested), maybe change some paragraphs/sentences to make your point clearer.
Sometimes, reviewers don't really pay attention to details. It has happened to me to be questioned by reviewers about points that I had specifically explained in the text, as if the reviewer hadn't read that part of the article. So maybe he didn't understand your work is theoretical, or maybe there's a sentence that created some confusion.
By being honest, you'll either have your paper accepted (since you mentioned that the other comments are good) or rejected if the editor considers that experiments are necessary. If it is rejected, it is not necessarily a bad thing: most of the times, a rejection is useful for you to improve your paper and resubmit, and you can even get accepted in a better journal/conference with the same work!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Something has generated this reviewer's request, and you need to try to figure out what that is.
Often, when people ask for an example, it is because something is less than clear when no example was provided.
I suggest coming up with an illustrative simulation to try to satisfy this reviewer.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/05/11
| 1,583
| 6,525
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student majoring in Medical Engineering. My interest in Math is high, but my knowledge isn't. I have just a bit of knowledge in Calculus, Linear Algebra and a little Statistics (just can do mean, median and mode). When I entered my PhD, I was really surprised at the complexity of the concepts we were expected to know, like SLAM, Green's Theorem, Cholesky factorization, etc.
How can I catch up? The time constraint is really short (2 months), and I want to really understand all the concepts to the point where I can derive them. However, if I am stuck, I don't want to see the answer since it makes me feel depressed and that makes me realize that I really lack in fundamentals.
I really like Mathematics, but after seeing a lot of Math problems on YouTube where I cannot even get close to the solution, I am questioning whether I am fit for Engineering or not.<issue_comment>username_1: The truth is: There is no magic bullet. You didn't learn engineering in two months, and you won't learn math in two months.
If there are specific mathematical concepts you need for your work, you can of course select books from that area. If self-study is not fast enough, you can also consider paying a tutor to walk you through material. But short of that, mathematics is like any other field and language: It requires years or studying and practice to become fluent and productive in.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Euclid is reported to have said "there is no royal road to mathematics". Live with it.
Becoming proficient in *any* field, be it math, engineering, swimming, will take a lot of work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You mention having studied single variable calculus and linear algebra. Green's Theorem is a result from multivariable/vector calculus, a course commonly expected to have been taken as part of an undergraduate engineering degree. To get started on vector calculus, you might consider <NAME>'s excellent set of video lectures: [Calculus BLUE](https://www2.math.upenn.edu/%7Eghrist/BLUE.html).
The Cholesky factorization is perhaps not emphasized in all introductory linear algebra courses. Have you seen the LU decomposition? If you're familiar with that, it isn't a big step up to Cholesky. See <NAME>'s [video lectures](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-06-linear-algebra-spring-2010/video-lectures/) on MIT OpenCourseware to refresh/learn topics in linear algebra.
Warning: do not assume that just watching videos is enough to understand; it's a starting point, but you'll still need to do exercises and check or get feedback on your answers. For this you'll need a book or other resource with answers and/or a tutor. Note also <NAME>'s advice in his preface to *Essential Real Analysis*, Springer 2017:
>
> On occasions I advise students in my analysis classes not to spend too much time reading mathematics texts. That view is based on my own experience—an effective way to learn mathematics is to do it, play with it but generally avoid spending too much time reading books about it. Reading a mathematics book can give a veneer of superficial understanding that dissolves the moment one tries to use the theory described in the book. An analogy might be learning carpentry, plumbing or a foreign language—knowing the theory is important but not that helpful; knowing how to use the tools is crucial. That takes time, practice and serious effort.
>
>
>
It isn't clear to me how much knowledge of probability and statistics is required for your particular type of engineering, but "mean, median and mode" are indeed unlikely to be enough. At the very least, find out whether your courses need more probability or more statistics and focus on getting up to speed with the basics of the one that's used most or at least first.
This is to get you started and help fill in some gaps or areas where your knowledge might be rusty. It will take a lot of work, but once you have strengthened your foundations, you may find that you are "fit for Engineering" after all. As others correctly say, though, there are no shortcuts\*. It will probably be a bumpy and painful road for quite some time to come.
\* That said, see username_5' [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/167642/12339); sometimes a more targeted approach can save you time.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: As <NAME> explains it in his blog, [<NAME>'s Blog](https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/theres-more-to-mathematics-than-rigour-and-proofs/):
There are three stages of understanding the mathematical intricacies:
* **Pre-rigorous Mathematics (Undergraduate phase)**, where you understand mathematics by the help of formulae and calculations thus giving you clear insights about what is going on.
* **Rigorous Mathematics (Graduate level studies)**, where you understand proof writing, understanding the formal language of mathematics and
* **Post-Rigorous Mathematics**, where you've pretty much made peace with the difficulties, bumps, failures and successes and still enjoy problem solving.
Feeling imposter right now is quite normal, since I believe everyone does during several parts of their academic careers. It is based on someone else's understanding of something, based on which we judge our capabilities and want to coop in the same manner and end up rushing and getting badly affected.
It is clear that two months are never sufficient to understand something of this magnitude (Would it be called the **queen of all sciences**, if it was so easy to get the queen?)
I do feel, it is important to prepare a hierarchy of the ideas or concepts that you should be focusing on clearing rather than putting your hands everywhere. Make a clear strategy as to what is necessary at this point, prepare a timeline and don't be harsh on yourself.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: [As per request by username_3, upgraded from comment:]
There is a kind of magic bullet: if you can identify what you need, and a use case, and begin by studying first only what you absolutely need for that, so that you can get it to work - it is sometimes surprisingly easy to understand the surrounding theory when you tried to get something to work and then understand why things need to be the way they are.
It's not always possible, and sometimes you need to do some basic groundwork first, but if you can do it, this "pull" strategy can accelerate understanding and motivation a lot.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/05/11
| 4,505
| 19,427
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the fourth year of a part-time PhD. I have at least another couple of years left, the next two years are for writing up and this year was supposed to be for data collection.
I hit problems with research and data collection because of COVID, a lot of us did. But one of the things that has come to my realisation is that it is my supervisor who chiefly hindered my progress.
I cannot blame her for this, she is just doing her job and she is very respected in her field. I do like her. The main problems came in November 2020. I had a tutorial and I said, "I want to do X this way", she came back with "why don't you do it this other way?" I initially agreed but then, a few hours after the tutorial, I felt like the wind had been taken out of my sails. I didn't know it at the time, or understand it, but *she* had totally killed my enthusiasm, not only for the piece I was working on, but for the project. This has been going on since November and I have found it very hard to produce anything. In fact I haven't written anything since November apart from one piece.
The crunch time came a few days ago. I wrote a paper plan for her, something that I was interested and intrigued to get on with. The same thing happened again, she wrote back and said, "this is too broad, remove this [very interesting] part and focus on this [not so interesting but practical] part". Try as I might I could not muster the enthusiasm to continue and the paper has been shelved.
I had a discussion with her yesterday and we have agreed for me to take three months off. It occurred to me after our talk yesterday that the problem is that I am not given enough freedom to do my work how I want. YES she is the supervisor, and I am here to learn, I understand that, but this is not working for me this way. I now have three months 'off' but I am thinking of not *not* doing any work but doing things how I want to do them: I have enthusiasm again for the PhD and am starting to get filled with ideas. I have a research blog which I haven't updated for months because she wanted to vet anything I put on there, but, I asked her yesterday if I can put things up there ANYWAY in the next few months regardless of her input and she said yes.
I am worried that, after these three months, I will have put entries on the blog - much of the content/themes of which I want to put in the final thesis - but we will just go back to doing things the old way and she will say a lot of the stuff I wrote isn't that relevant and she will want me to focus on authors I am not interested in and for me to remove ideas I had.
How do I explain I need more freedom and her management style/suggestions are not working for me? Or should I not say that at all? I respect her and want to put this point across in the best way. Or do I just do three months of work my way and then, when she sees how effective a more hands-off approach is, she will agree to do things that way?<issue_comment>username_1: **There are several intertwined issues here, and it is going to be difficult to sort them out**:
1. Your supervisor is an expert. She likely knows things you don't. So if you suggest one way and she suggests another, it may be because she has seen that way tried before and knows that it doesn't lead anywhere.
2. Your supervisor doesn't seem to be great at leading, or doesn't recognize that you are not her colleague yet. If two people at the same level are trading ideas, shooting them down or poking holes to patch can be a very useful exercise. As a new researcher, you aren't at this level yet, but she may be treating you as though you are.
3. What you consider interesting and what she considers interesting may not overlap
4. What you consider interesting and what is actually publishable within the scope of a single paper or blog post may not overlap.
Let's treat these individually.
1. I have seen many grad students (and I have been one myself) who don't fully grasp the field. I've read papers, thought "Oh, I can fix that problem", then gone on to work for a week and *then* find the paper written 20 years prior that solves it. She has a much broader understanding of the field than you do, and she knows what's been done. Take her suggestions helpfully: "I want to do X, but my supervisor suggested Y instead. I'm going to compare and contrast the two methods in a literature review and see which is best". That's your job as a PhD student anyway.
2. This is time for an awkward conversation. Depending on your personality, I personally suggest being a bit blunt but polite. Tell her what you told us: "When I suggest something and you change it, it takes my enthusiasm away. Can we work together to make sure that my ideas are fully explored, even if they aren't the best?"
3. This is up to you two to figure out. This is more fun. Ask her what she thinks the big problems of the field are, why she's in the field, what interests her about new research etc.
4. My supervisor was *phenomenally good* at writing. I am not. He was also very good at focusing a paper onto the key relevant points. I was not. We fought over papers a lot, to be honest, and to be equally honest it was a mutual problem. Both of us had reasonable ideas, but he was better at it and knew what it took to get published. I did not.
If your supervisor thinks that you are proposing something too broad, that's a very, very good indicator that you are. Think of those broad ideas as your research program, and the individual smaller ideas as your research projects. Projects lead to papers, programs lead to careers. Don't take it as "this is a useless idea", but more as "this is not suitable for publication because you haven't actually solved the big problem. You have, however, solved a smaller problem that moves us towards the bigger solution. Let's publish that and keep making progress"
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with everything in the excellent answer posted already, and would like to add another aspect to consider.
As your PhD progresses, you are expected to **grow into an independent researcher**. And this includes a number of skills, one of which is to **be able to explain, *and defend*, your ideas in front of others**.
From what I see in your question (as it currently stands; this would become a bit different if you actually toned down how the supervisor addressed you), your supervisor wasn't impolite, and offered what seem more like discussion points than "orders". As an expert in her field, they are likely giving you comments representative of potential reviewers and readers of your potential publications. Your supervisor is just the first in a line of people you need to convince of the validity, importance and interest of your research.
My suggestion would be to try and treat it as an invitation for a discussion: an opportunity to better explain the nuances and the reasoning of the approach you propose as well as a chance to compare to different approaches to the problem.
Let me try and use the examples you provided:
* You said you had proposed to explore an approach X, and your supervisor suggested you try a different one Y.
If you had actually went on, used your X to obtain some results and submitted a publication, how would you react to a reviewer saying "I see that Y could also be applicable to your problem. Have you considered comparing your results with Y?"
Instead, if you treat this as an invitation to explain your reasoning, it will only strengthen your work. Why did you chose X over Y? Do you think X has more desirable properties, or Y has shortcomings?
* You proposed to work on a problem A, and the supervisor proposed to focus on a sub-problem B.
Is B a very important factor in A? Is it possible that using sub-optimal B would change the performance on A substantially? (In which case, if you do not do B well, maybe your work on A wouldn't be valid?) Or, do you instead think that your supervisor *misunderstood* the proposed scope of A, which you believe is a well-rounded and self-contained research question?
If your own advisor does not understand you well, it is an indication that the reviewers or readers might misunderstand you too -- and it is on you to express your ideas clearly.
In both of these cases, and in general, as a researcher you should not take things at face value. In addition to communicating your ideas clearly, this also means trying to understand *why your supervisor proposed Y/B*. If you do not explain your reasoning to your supervisor, or understand theirs, it is difficult for the supervisor to guess you do not agree with their proposed plan. **Discussion with your supervisor is the best way to refine how clearly you express your idea, and how convincingly you can demonstrate it.**
---
As a personal anecdote, I had a similar situation during my postdoc. As I was polishing our accepted publication, we had a discussion about future directions. I wanted to do A, and my supervisor wanted to do B. We had a passionate (but polite and respectful!) discussion about the benefits and drawbacks of A and B. As I realised I still have a few weeks to finish up my current task, and the prep work that would be required for either A or B could easily take another few weeks, I agreed to get started on it and asked if we could discuss it again after this prepwork was done. The next day, my supervisor called me back to their office and said that they have thought a lot about our discussion, and told me they would support my opinion as a researcher and that he wouldn't want to force me to begin a research direction I do not agree with. Firstly -- best feeling ever, I was beaming for days. Secondly -- this never could have happened if we didn't have a detailed discussion about A and B, supported by arguments from both an extensive literature review and our past experiences in our respective fields.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Right now, you and your advisor share the same goal - produce publishable research. Since you aren't an expert in the field, the advisor's job is to guide you towards research approaches that will lead to publishable work, i.e. papers that will be accepted by reviewers. It sounds like she is trying to do this, although I cannot tell whether she is doing it well from the information given.
From your post, I got the impression that you believe you know how to research better than your supervisor. I have to wonder why you are still choosing to be advised by her when it sounds like you don't respect her advice.
>
> I didn't know it at the time, or understand it, but she had totally killed my enthusiasm, not only for the piece I was working on, but for the project.
>
>
>
>
> I wrote a paper plan for her, something that I was interested and intrigued to get on with. The same thing happened again, she wrote back and said, "this is too broad, remove this [very interesting] part and focus on this [not so interesting but practical] part". Try as I might I could not muster the enthusiasm to continue and the paper has been shelved.
>
>
>
These statements are concerning to me because as a student, it is your responsibility to produce enough research to write a dissertation. Your advisor is trying to guide you towards approaches that she believes will produce research, but it sounds like you're losing enthusiasm and not producing anything. If you don't find a way to achieve a dissertation, you will eventually fail out of the PhD.
Also, enjoy the flexibility of research. Most jobs have a direct supervisor, and while you don't have to agree with them, you usually have to follow their directions if you want to keep the job.
Overall, I see only a few paths going forward:
1. Find a new advisor whose advice you respect.
2. Learn to work with your advisor and incorporate her advice into your research.
3. Figure out how to write papers independently without your advisor's ideas. If it's good enough for a good journal, it's good enough for a dissertation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Choose one of two options:
1. Get out as fast as you can by finding a new (synergic) supervisor and, likely, a new research topic. It also may mean moving to a different department or even University.
2. Continue grinding until you get the degree done. Does not look as an enjoyable option given your experience with the current supervisor.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: This is much more of an interpersonal relations question than an Academia one. How to let another person know you would like them to behave differently? The best way is to just tell them, politely but directly! How will they take it? Can be anything, depending on what kind of a person they are, and also on how they see the situation.
But here are a few points, from her perspective:
* I don't know the country or the field, but typically she's on your side. She has invested a lot into you over these years: time, research ideas, possibly her grants, lab resources etc. If you fail, this is all wasted. Of course, as always, there's a point where she might decide that she should stop investing and write off the losses, but that threshold is fairly high.
* She is likely aware that Ph. D. studies is a marathon that can be hindered by burnout, lack of motivation leading to procrastination etc. So, I think that if you honestly admit to some of that, if she's a reasonable person, she will be oriented towards finding a solution.
* If my Ph. D. students had too many ideas of their own, that would be least of my problems!
That said, she might see the things differently than you. For example, it might have been that your idea was indeed flawed, and her "this other way" was superior, it was obvious to her, and she thought it was obvious to you, but it wasn't. When you talk to her, it's a good idea to explicitly admit the possibility that her suggestions were right, but you couldn't see why, and *that* hindered your enthusiasm. So, suggest that she lets you do things your way if the difference is minor, and request that if she thinks she really need to override you, she explains in more detail why.
Of course, if her suggestions were right *and you understood it*, but it still killed your enthusiasm, that's another story altogether, and you have to learn to deal with your idea being not-so-good as it looked to you. But that is and entirely different question well covered in other answers.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: An aspect that I haven't seen addressed in the other answers is the fact that you appear to struggle to maintain motivation and are easily deflated by contrary opinions even when these are offered in a constructive manner. This could be indeed a problem that is specific to the current situation - it's very common for the relationship between students and PIs to be tense near the end of a PhD, in part due to the significant external pressure (completing your training, submitting and defending, future career decisions etc.) and in part because increased independence from your supervisor is precisely what a PhD is for, and can change your dynamic in ways that make you less accepting of micromanaging.
However, nothing you mention about your supervisor suggest to me that she is behaving in an extreme or unreasonable manner, so chances are that you might have a better long-term outcome if you work on your own response. A couple of ideas from my personal experience:
* **Try to make yourself more resilient to criticism.** Easier said than done! I have ADHD, one symptom of which is Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria, an incredibly intense and physical reaction to even very mild criticism. I am not suggesting that you suffer from the same (I hope not!), but I have found some help in trying to detach myself from the immediate response to a critical comment, and try to avoid discussing it while still overwhelmed by negative feelings ("Hmm, that's a really interesting idea. I need to sleep on it before I can give you a good answer." Optionally, follow up with "For now, do you mind if we go back to my original idea?" if you think this can be constructive). Later, when you're on your own, try to consider the idea more neutrally. You need to consciously fight the knee-jerk response to oppose any idea that is not your original one and I find this is harder when in a conversation that feels confrontational.
* **Identify and cultivate academic partnerships with people who don't make you feel deflated.** Others have pointed out that the dynamics of shooting down other people's ideas change enormously with even small differences in status. Do you get deflated if a peer tells you that they think you should work on something else? What about someone with seniority but no direct power over you, like another PI? Being able to have your ideas challenged by colleagues is incredibly important in research, both for interpersonal reasons (people who offer you well-thought-out advice are giving you their mental labour for free; even if you decide not to use it, it's important to acknowledge this graciously) and because it enhances the quality of your research (they may point out weaknesses or possibilities you hadn't though of, reveal different ways of looking at the problem, etc.). However, there will be people with whom you "click" better scientifically - try to identify what their traits are and how you can seek out these types of people for future work (the trait shouldn't be "always goes along with what I say", ideally).
* **Learn to work productively on topics that you're not that fired up about.** There's a lot of drudge work in academia. There's the project that was really promising and turned out to have a trivial solution but you still need to write up. There's the collaboration set up for networking reasons that nobody is terribly invested in. There's the half-finished project that needs quite a lot of tidying up and the main author's now left. You need to find a way to make inroads into these things that don't make you particularly excited. Excitement is a poor long-distance fuel and research, at the end of the day, is a job.
All of this comes from an assumption that you want to pursue academic research longer term. Another possibility is that perhaps you would find it easier to maintain your excitement and motivation in a less hierarchical and more bite-sized approach like science communication, which you have already started with your blog. You could do a combination of novel research (e.g. analysis and visualisation of data using freely available datasets, of which there are many these days) and reporting on new findings from others that you find exciting. My suggestion is that you try to place yourself in a role that you find rewarding and motivating, rather than try to change the behaviour of individual people, not all of whom may be able or willing to meet your needs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: As a newly graduated PhD, my advice would be to understand and follow your supervisors' advice if they are really experts in your filed. What you considered as interesting might be something not achievable for a PhD project and for a student who just started to build up their expertise in the field. Experienced supervisors have the ability to look at the forest but not the tree, and yet we as students may only look at the tree.
Upvotes: 0
|