Split (1)

train · 10.4M rows

date stringlengths 10 10	nb_tokens int64 60 629k	text_size int64 234 1.02M	content stringlengths 234 1.02M
2021/09/05	3,807	16,245	<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a M.Sc. in [artificial intelligence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence) (AI), and I am collaborating with a computer vision company in a [deep learning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning) (DL) research project that will eventually become my master thesis. Basically, my project is trying an approach that could, hopefully, achieve better results than the approach that is already in use in the company. (For those familiar with deep learning, I try to generate synthetic data for a task where data acquisition is expensive.) However, after a lot of time and effort spent on this approach I see that the results are terrible. This new approach gives me worse rather than better results than the existing one, which means that at this moment all the effort has been a waste of time. I feel stuck as I can't make any progress. Every single idea that I have that could potentially lead to improvements makes no difference. This is even worse than if I had worse results as in this case I could at least know what doesn't work. I feel that it is very hard to get any additional knowledge on this task as the experiments that I do don't validate any hypotheses. After months of working on this model, it still seems to me a complete black box. As a result I end up working much more hours than agreed on in the contract, only to fail in generating any relevant new information or progress that I could report to my boss/advisor. I am spending a lot of time reviewing the code thinking that there must be something wrong. Sometimes I wonder if my whole project is simply doomed to fail. Maybe this idea is simply not doable for the current task. And even though I feel that my advisor is aware of this danger, I can't help but feel that a failure of this project is a failure of me as a professional. After all, how can I be sure that I tried everything or that I correctly implemented those ideas? Before this I was sure that being a AI researcher was the career that I wanted to follow. But now I feel that I can't cope with this level of anxiety and frustration. If it is like this for a M.Sc. project, I wonder how it would be for a Ph.D. Did anyone have a similar experience in DL or even in another area? Can anyone with a Ph.D. share some thoughts whether things will continue to be like that?<issue_comment>username_1: It's no surprise that many promising ideas don't work out. Indeed > > Maybe this idea is simply not doable for the current task. > > > For a related story in mathematics, see [What to do when you spend several months working on an idea that fails in a masters thesis?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/30995/what-to-do-when-you-spend-several-months-working-on-an-idea-that-fails-in-a-mast/31082#31082) "Machine learning" is a trending topic. Lots of smart people are thinking about it, and lots of students are signing up. There will be many deadend trails in the search for the few that really lead somewhere useful. Only you can decide whether you can tolerate the frustration natural in that search. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As I wrote in [this old answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/141143/79875), "it didn't work" is not the end -- the end is knowing why it didn't work. The caveat with AI/ML is that things are moving so quickly that "nobody got time for" clever ideas that didn't work. In other fields, a negative result might still lead to a strong publication, but this is not the case in AI/ML. Even things that do work but don't outperform the state-of-the-art are unlikely to get much attention. This is the nature of the game, and it is something to accept if you move forward in this field. > > After all, how can I be sure that I tried everything or that I correctly implemented those ideas? > > > This is the main thing I would focus on. A general rule of thumb in research (at least, in fields where something is being created or calculated) is to do many "sanity checks" before running the complicated, conclusive experiment or calculation. In computer-related research, a mistake that I often see novices making is that they write hundreds or thousands of lines of code and then turn it on (often running it for several days!) and expect it to work. I always suggest the opposite: start with the simplest possible thing (e.g., 16x16 thumbnail images) and verify that that works as expected. Keep simplifying until it does the right thing (and ideally, until it runs very quickly, allowing you to run experiments in near-real time). Then you can slowly add back the complexity. In this way, you can ensure things are implemented correctly, and if it ends up not working, you'll have some intuition for why the original idea didn't work in practice. Finally, a subject-specific comment: if you are using GANs to make synthetic data, you should know that GANs are highly finicky (e.g., to the hyperparameters). You may need to run many experiments before you find the magic numbers that achieve the desired performance. This will require many GPU-hours -- all the more reason to run many "sanity checks" before unleashing all your experiments. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with everything in username_2's [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175219/70455). But I wanted to add that your own assessment may in fact be correct; "But now I feel that I can't cope with this level of anxiety and frustration." You are right, a PhD will likely be 4 more years of this. You might not enjoy that very much. That's ok, you will be more than qualified to begin a myriad of PhD's in neighbouring fields. You are actually at a great stage to be having this realisation. Off the top of my head computational biology often gets people coming in from more computational fields to transfer knowledge. Biology degrees don't always include much background in either computational modelling or big data, so there is real demand for interdisciplinary talent. Also, I suppose it should be mentioned that you could always go into industry for a year, earn a much stronger salary, then come back to this decision. That is not an uncommon route. If you do decide that on balance this is still the thing for you, then I agree with the advice in username_2's [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175219/70455). You can make this work, it just might mean a slightly different strategy. And lots and lots of persistence. On the other hand, I did a masters in physics theory. I did well in the masters, and got good PhD offers in theory, which was tempting. But in truth, doing research in theory was spoiling my enjoyment of physics. So I went and found a computational PhD and loved it. Now is the moment to work out what you want your next 4 years to be, because you are at a very unusual point in life when you are almost guaranteed to get what you chose. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In this field not many improvements are achieved with large changes. Often times, the current state of the art is very good. But that does not mean there is no room for improvement. Sometimes, these systems are not well optimized. Or in some cases there are a group of special cases that are more prone to failure. You may attack the problem from these angles. For instance, if you believe the system is not well optimized, you may try to find more optimal parameters. Start with the current system and slowly add/remove more features, adjust parameters of the current system. Change one aspect at a time to see if any of these make any difference. The difference does not need to be large; smaller improvements can lead to more smaller improvements and at the end of the day you might end up with a significantly better optimized system. For the second case, you must make carefully controlled experiments to find cases where failure is very common. Try to identify why they fail and integrate alternative detection methods to these cases. You might segment the feature space and if a sample falls into that space, you can use a different set of feature extraction or a classifier system to identify those samples. Also do not constrain yourself to deep learning approaches only. Machine learning is a vast field with many methods. Try other classifiers or combine deep learning with classical techniques. Analyzing the distribution of the data can open up interesting insights. Do not shy away from formulating data distribution to solve for optimum classifier for the case. DL approaches are quite easy to set up to work well, but often times they fall behind to carefully curated classification systems. Many practitioners in this field think that it is a silver bullet to all problems, but that is not the case. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The idea of a Masters degree in AI is a pretty large reach for a university to award. Most AI is pretty piecemeal and working on magic. The truth is, despite marketing hype like [Hadoop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Hadoop) and such, there is no general solution to unstructured data except a full-blown AI solution to correlate data with experiences in the world. Visual processing gives you structure along three dimensions (two spatial). But, much like <NAME> Abbott's [Flatland](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatland), missing a dimension can force very large errors out of your decision-making process. You can try to do your learning with more than these dimensions (adding another camera at an orthogonal angle, for example) -- that's one answer. Or, you can implement a full-blown AI model which is ready to be developed in the world and uses a multi-layered, [Markov model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_model), for tracking all probabilities on all inputs to create excellent guesses, assuming your input data is ordered (and not noise). Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It's all fine and well until > > I can't help but feel that a failure of this project is a failure of me as a professional > > > Indeed, the subtle art of being in academia is digging golden nuggets of knowledge from otherwise "failing" (well, most of the time, anyway) projects. Most of the time, if the spec is detailed enough - e.g. "achieve X with Y precision on Z dataset by time T", it is met by the virtue of the "unknown" portion of the work being already done. That is, no one claims to finish a completely novel and creative work in a given timeframe. New ideas usually don't work and often many man-months are "wasted" on them... That is, until you realize the value there is the knowledge obtained in the process. The issue is not specific to ML/AI, what changes is you don't have your expectations as high in many other fields; the level of hype around ML has research tied much closely to real world applications where people expect workable results, something that may take decades in more "traditional" fields. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Try these steps: 1. Go back to your basic assumptions (what modifications may yield improvement) and test them out one by one, not together. 2. Start with small modifications of the original state-of-the-art training process and only increase the amount (or amplitude, or sample size) of customizations gradually to see when the results start to deteriorate rather than improve. 3. Remember that when generating fully synthetic data, it may be difficult to obtain the same statistical properties as in real data - this is a common problem of data generation, and it may seriously harm the trained model performance (as measured on real data, of course). That's why it may be better to do augmentation instead: start from a real sample and disturb it in different ways, rather than create samples synthetically from scratch. With this approach, some of your ideas may still apply, and you will have a much bigger chance of actually improving the accuracy, because you can easily fine-tune how much of the perturbation is applied, going gradually from 0% to 100% and observing changes in the performance along the way. 4. Don't train on synthetic data alone, but combine a (larger) sample of synthetic data with a (smaller) sample of real data, to let the model observe and learn the less obvious real-world characteristics, ones that you didn't manage to replicate in a synthetic generation process. Optionally, you can also put a larger training weight on real samples to compensate for a smaller relative size of this subset. 5. Make sure that your evaluation setup is correct and that you're measuring what you really want to measure. Last but not least, keep in mind that "research" is all about trying many different ideas and seeing most of them fail, just to spot one that actually works. This is particularly relevant for Deep Learning, where the complexity of algorithms is very large and still growing with new advances in the field. Sometimes, the best thing you can do is accept that your idea doesn't work and proceed to the next one. :D Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Sorry to be blunt, but I am afraid your question has to nothing to do with machine learning or deep learning - or even computers at all for that matter. Once you see that what is happening to you is what happens to anybody designing/performing/interpreting experiments, you'll be halfway through figuring out what is not working as expected, and how to make it work. Most importantly, you will understand if this is what you want for your career. In fact: > > Before this I was sure that being a AI researcher was the career that > I wanted to follow. But now I feel that I can't cope with this level > of anxiety and frustration. If it is like this for a MSc project, I > wonder how it would be for a PhD. > > > Doing research is about hitting your head 90% of the time on things that do not work, and patting yourself the 10% of the time it actually works. "Hitting your head" typically means everything from questioning the underlying hypothesis being tested, to the assumptions of the test, to the experiment design, the data taking etc.etc.etc. The ability you need to grow is the methodology to systematically attack all those elemnts separately, and temper the frustration when you don't see the light at the end of the tunnel yet. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: This may not be the answer you (or other people) might want to hear, but I think the real reason is that the performance of an AI mostly depends on primarily the intelligence behind its design and secondly the resources given to it. For deep learning algorithms, this intelligence factor includes the intelligence behind the deep learning algorithm as well as the intelligence behind the heuristics used in encoding the input data in a way that the deep learning algorithms can perform well on that data. If the previous solutions used by the company had a lot of intelligence behind them, likely due to being designed by intelligent people who imbued some of their intelligence into heuristics on which those solutions are based, they would be able to easily outperform any unintelligent application of deep learning to the problem. There is no cheat for this; you cannot get artificial intelligence greater than what went into its design (after controlling for resources). So do not be afraid to try to invent your own heuristics based on your own intelligence and your current experience with the problem! Deep learning can be used to fine-tune your heuristics, or help you search for heuristics. Or you may use heuristics to adapt existing deep learning algorithms to your problem. Whatever it is, do not assume that deep learning can somehow create intelligence out from nothing. The point is, there is something very wrong if every change you make seems to have no effect on performance. It strongly suggests that the deep learning algorithm is so swamped with noise that it is producing some kind of uniformly random results. And this situation is impossible if you were using heuristics, because using your own intelligence you can work through examples of bad performance and tweak the heuristics to make improvements! Upvotes: 2
2021/09/05	839	3,580	<issue_start>username_0: I am always confused with should I capitalize something or not. Take the [talk](https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/avigad/Talks/prague.pdf) by [<NAME>](https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/avigad/) for instance, on page 8, he uses "Formal methods" and "Interactive theorem proving", but not capitalization for "verified proof" and "formal search." My understanding is that we should capitalize the first letter of the items which are sentences. If the item is just a short word, we should not capitalize it. However, my minds fail here. Could anyone give me some help with better rules about when to use capitalization? I always cannot decide on capitalization for presentation. For example, if I write something in a textbox of [PowerPoint](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_PowerPoint), should I capitalize the first letter?<issue_comment>username_1: This is virtually always completely up to you unless you've been given specific rules or a style guide by your institution or the venue. But the trend seems to be toward less capitalization generally. Consider, for example, the style on Wikipedia, where only the first word of a title is capitalized. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The only real rule is to be consistent throughout the presentation. Academics are generally pretty bad about following even this, so you will find lots of counter-examples, even from prominent researchers. The presentation you linked actually seems pretty good in this regard: * Most of the text is written in sentences, with periods at the end and normal sentence capitalization (first word + proper nouns). This is unusual for a presentation, but it's perfectly fine. * Some of these sentences have line breaks and bullets inserted, but the capitalization is not affected. * Some of the bulleted lists are lists of fragments (not sentences); these fragments have no periods and the first letter is not capitalized. But even in this presentation, there are a few minor inconsistencies: * You mention slide 8. I think this one is arguable; the "squiggly bullets" at the bottom are in a different format than the regular bullets at the top; using different capitalization schemes for these different types of bullets is defensible. Using a different capitalization scheme for the outline or prologue is similarly something I would not second-guess, even if it's not my preference. * Perhaps the bullets on slide 30 are a clearer example of a mistake. Elsewhere (e.g., page 23) the author does not capitalize the first word of list entries that are not sentences, but here he does. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: <NAME> seems to have got it right; his choices might well seem questionable from the perspective that there is something special about presentations, as compared to any other kind of text, but there is not. Unless there are house rules then broadly in any text, the exceptions to normal rules about capitalisation are titles and lists. Titles should have the same place in presentations as in books, magazines or newspapers: eg, each page or slide might have a headline. Lists are different. If the list is seen as text run-on without abnormal punctuation, made special only by its spacing, it should have normal capitals… broadly, none. Broadly, that applies when the items are separated by line spaces that would otherwise have been commas or semi-colons. If the list is seen as a collection of separate items, each item should be treated a separate sentence, with normal capitalisation. Upvotes: -1
2021/09/06	416	1,910	<issue_start>username_0: A major revision was submitted to a journal. After some days, the status changed to 'awaiting reviewer scores', but there is also the status 'awaiting decision' right next to it. How should this double status be interpreted? Is the revised manuscript with the editor or reviewers, or both?<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a possible interpretation: the paper might have received the comments of all of its reviewers. So, its status is "Awaiting Decision". But the editor, for some reason, e.g., conflicting opinions in those comments, has sent the paper to another reviewer. Thus, the status also reflects "Awaiting Reviewer Scores". Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Nobody here can tell you what is happening with your paper. However, I will give a possible interpretation that is slightly different to @Robotocist: Often people decline invitations to review papers. If an editor wants, say, two reviews for a paper, they may initially invite four or five referees. Once two have accepted they will typically cancel the other invitations. However, if they are too late to do so, they can end up with more reviewers than they really need. The system will continue to show "Awaiting reviewer scores" until all reviewers have submitted their reports. Meanwhile, the editorial management system will be configured to automatically mark the paper as 'ready for decision' once the minimum number of reviews has been submitted. However, it will still recognise that not all the reviewers who accepted have submitted a report. It is up to the editor to decide what to do - they may choose to make a decision based on the information they have, or wait for the additional report(s). Unfortunately, there is nothing you can do except wait, and you should not take this as providing any information (positive or negative) about the eventual outcome of the review process. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/06	546	2,410	<issue_start>username_0: I recently attended an interview in which my supervisor is a panel mate. After the interview, I met my mentor and asked whether I performed well and her opinion about the interview happened. She (my mentor) told, "you performed well and I think you will get hired". After a day, I shared this incident with a colleague. He (my colleague) opined that asking such a question to the mentor is unethical because it may be an obligation for her. Indeed, I cannot ask opinions about my interview with other panel members and took advantage of rapport with my mentor in asking such a question, but I am not feeling that it is unethical since I didn't ask her any favor and just asked an opinion about my performance in the interview. Is asking such a question unethical or perfectly ethical?<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a possible interpretation: the paper might have received the comments of all of its reviewers. So, its status is "Awaiting Decision". But the editor, for some reason, e.g., conflicting opinions in those comments, has sent the paper to another reviewer. Thus, the status also reflects "Awaiting Reviewer Scores". Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Nobody here can tell you what is happening with your paper. However, I will give a possible interpretation that is slightly different to @Robotocist: Often people decline invitations to review papers. If an editor wants, say, two reviews for a paper, they may initially invite four or five referees. Once two have accepted they will typically cancel the other invitations. However, if they are too late to do so, they can end up with more reviewers than they really need. The system will continue to show "Awaiting reviewer scores" until all reviewers have submitted their reports. Meanwhile, the editorial management system will be configured to automatically mark the paper as 'ready for decision' once the minimum number of reviews has been submitted. However, it will still recognise that not all the reviewers who accepted have submitted a report. It is up to the editor to decide what to do - they may choose to make a decision based on the information they have, or wait for the additional report(s). Unfortunately, there is nothing you can do except wait, and you should not take this as providing any information (positive or negative) about the eventual outcome of the review process. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/06	1,051	4,754	<issue_start>username_0: I’m interested in submitting a paper for a Student Paper Award at a conference. I’m wondering whether I can submit the same paper to a peer reviewed journal after the conference ends. Does the answer change depending on whether I win the student paper award or not? I’m a student in STEM in the US.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, simultaneous submission to different publishing venues is strongly frowned upon. After the conference ends, assuming the paper was accepted, is a different matter. The outcome would depend on the policies of the journal, but most journals might decline to publish something that has already been "published" in another venue, other than as a preprint. But, in some fields, conferences aren't publishing venues and are rather more informal that in others. But it seems doubtful that a non publishing conference would be giving "best student paper" awards. If you have a journal in mind, you could ask its editor for guidance. It might actually depend on what happens to the conference paper after the conference itself. Some are published by the sponsor of the conference in a proceedings. Note that in some STEM fields (CS, especially), conference papers are considered very important. In that case, there would be little need to also seek journal publication. If the paper is rejected, you are free, of course. Also be careful about any license you give for a conference paper. If you give a permissive license then a publisher might be less likely to want your paper, since the copyright you give them is already limited. Many would prefer to get "all rights", or nearly all. --- But to take the topline question literally, yes, you could possibly submit it. But at some point you will probably have to reveal its history and will have to mention the conference. I think it better to ask first. An editor who spends effort on something that they "can't" publish will be unhappy. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To give a perspective from the field of chemistry/materials science: Conference contributions usually are posters and talks. Posters are usually presented by PhD students or younger researchers and often show results that are not mature enough to land a paper in a journal. Talks are usually presented by more experienced researchers or advanced PhD students and often reiterate the contents of a single or several (possibly) published journal papers. So in both cases, having both a journal paper and conference contributions from the same results is perfectly within the norm, and also simultaneous submission of a journal article and a conference contribution is no problem. Note however that proper conference papers - although they exist sometimes - are rare in these cases. In my experience they are usually filled with some less important data that is of decent quality, but insufficient for a journal paper. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In addition to @Snijderfey's [excellent answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175257/), you might consult the website for the specific conference you are considering submitting to. Some directly address this issue. [Here's an example](https://amia.org/education-events/amia-2021-annual-symposium/call-participation) from a conference I am attending: > > Abstracts will not be indexed in MEDLINE, enabling authors to submit their best work that is destined for future journal publication. Contributions may also consist of abstracts based on work published in peer-reviewed journals in the last year (i.e., publication after March 2019); however, works published as proceedings for other conferences will not be accepted. Citation of the previous work is required. > > > You will typically find these statements in the instructions for authors or call for abstracts section. This answer assumes that you have selected the conference with the assistance of your mentor. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Here is a pure math perspective. It is not possible to publish the same paper in conference proceedings and a normal journal. However, it is reasonably common to have a condensed version (an "extended abstract") in a conference and still publish the full version (which is expected to have significantly more material) subsequently in a journal. Typically most of the proofs will be omitted from the condensed version (and hence a conference publication which does not ultimately produce a journal publication is essentially worthless, as the refereeing process for conferences does not verify correctness). If attempting to do this, it is sensible to ask the journal you're thinking of submitting to about their policy before submitting to the conference. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/06	846	3,388	<issue_start>username_0: Did anyone produce updates on existing published papers later on? Or is it always that when it's submitted, then "that's the way it is"?<issue_comment>username_1: Actual updates are unlikely. Subsequent work is frequent and valued. The problem is that an "update" assuming content is changed and not just form, could make citations made in the interim invalid. Some publishers will publish notes or errata on papers found to be flawed. Books get "corrected" editions published, but it isn't a general practice for papers. Even for online publication, changing the text makes some subsequent work (quoting) obsolete. It requires work that leads to as many problems as it solves, even for typos. --- Note, however, that the paper published is almost never the same as the paper submitted. It goes through a review and editing process that can result in quite a lot of changes. But once published it is pretty much cast. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While @username_1's answer holds true in most cases, it is worth noting that a number of disciplines have a system of two-stage publications that are explicitly designed around publication of an updated version. For example, in many computer science fields, papers accepted in a conference are encouraged to later send an extended version to a journal. Both enter the scientific record, and the journal version is intended to be a more authoritative and final version, citing and superseding the original, and typically with at least 30% more material than was in the original. I have seen this beginning to appear in some other fields as well, e.g., with extended abstracts in a conference being invited to publish a full paper in a journal. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There's a journal series that does exactly this - the Living Reviews series published by Springer. An example is [Living Reviews in Relativity](https://www.springer.com/journal/41114). From their description: > > Living Reviews is unique in maintaining a suite of high-quality reviews, which are kept up-to-date by the authors. This is the meaning of the word "living" in the journal's title. > > > So one can expect articles published in Living Reviews in Relativity to be up-to-date. Most other papers, however, will not have been updated and so can be old or even completely superseded by later data. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In large areas of physics and mathematics, we are reading papers on arXiv and paying little attention to their published versions. (Assuming there is a published version, which is not always the case.) When there is a correction or improvement to be made post-publication, it is often done on arXiv only, as this is much easier than sending an erratum to the journal, which nobody would notice anyway. Example: an [arXiv preprint](https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.5123) and the [published version](https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.131603). In this case the title and format differ. And the preprint has corrections post-publication. Example: [this article](https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.6737) has 9 versions on arXiv including 4 prior to publication in a journal, and 5 after publication. Between the first version post-publication (v5) and the last version (v9), 4 years have passed, and the article has grown from 36 to 55 pages. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/06	5,631	22,632	<issue_start>username_0: My question is about countries such as: * EU countries like Bulgaria, Romania or Poland and * non-EU countries like Russian Federation, Ukraine or Belarus. A PostDoc fellow might earn at most US$ 2500, say, in Poland, while they can earn $4000 at minimum, say, in Spain. The same argument is applicable to university professors. Why do highly educated/competent/qualified scientists and engineers still work in these lower income countries? Why do poorer countries in the EU and the neighboring countries not suffer a complete and decisive brain drain?<issue_comment>username_1: There are as many reasons as there are people, I'd suppose. But don't forget that salary isn't the entire financial consideration. Other places with higher salary also have higher living expenses. "Poor" may be true relative to the global economy, but not the local one. But some other reasons are: 1. Language 2. Culture (and food) 3. Family 4. A sense of service to the place you grew up in. 5. Patriotism 6. Lack of acceptance/friendliness by some in other places. 7. Sense of comfort where you are. 8. Being highly respected in the local academic culture. I'm sure there are many more. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The question seems to assume that people move to where their salary is highest. This is not true; people have lots of different reasons to live where they live. It also makes little sense to compare salaries without also considering cost of living. There are lots of ways to calculate cost of living, but just relying on one data source, the [cost of living in Spain is about 160% the cost of living in Poland](https://www.worlddata.info/cost-of-living.php). Said another way, if you have US$2500 to spend in Poland, it goes about as far as 2500 \* 1.6 = US$4000 in Spain - in other words, as long as you spend the money locally, it's exactly the same salary. People may also prefer to stay in their home country to be near family and childhood friends, to be near a spouse or their job or their family, to live in a place where people speak the language they are most familiar with. They may have a sense of national pride. And crucially, for academia, there are a very limited number of positions, period. There are more qualified applicants than there are jobs. If you are offered an academic position in Bulgaria, there is no marketplace where you can take this offer and exchange it for one in another country. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the points brought up in the other answers, not everyone is motivated by money. Here's an [article](https://www.nature.com/articles/516298a) from 2014 about political disagreements among Russian scientists. Note some people approve of what the Russian government have done (like annexing Crimea), while others disapprove. Hence we get quotes such as: > > “Any discussion about the future of Russian science is pretty much pointless when this country behaves like a bull,” said Kondrashov shortly after he stormed out of the meeting. “I love Russia, but the outlook for science here is gloomy and I’m very concerned about where that country is going.” > > > This implies Kondrashov will not work in Russia regardless of financial incentives as long as the country "behaves like a bull". Going the other way, there is: > > “I’m not a refugee, nobody treated me badly, and I am perfectly at peace with my country,” [Artem Oganov] says. “I do worry about the sanctions and the growing economic problems here, but I could never forgive myself if Russia needed me and I was not there.” > > > Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Brains themselves are a stronger attractor than money ----------------------------------------------------- IMHO academics are less motivated by money than other job hunters. Access to the right lab, the right colleagues, the right competences, the right professor can easily outweigh the monetary gain you get abroad. I have seen though, that given other kinds of resistances (racism, sexism, "class"-ism) there is a significant brain drain. Example: Women emigrating from oppressive religious regimes to further their academic progress. Also, interestingly enough, many top notch research groups are located in rather low salary countries. I would suspect that to a certain extent money can distort research. Application of research is usually the great money maker, and if you want to work theoretically, or with a different application or different idea - you might want to be somewhere else. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The question may be rephrased as: Why don't ALL people from poorer countries migrate into rich ones? The income difference is not limited to academia, most jobs in a poor country make less money than in a rich one. A poor country sometimes offers worse security, worse medical services, worse social services, worse education for children, etc, etc, ... for academics and plumbers alike. And the common answer is that the income and the expenses are not everything someone takes into account. Culture (including, but not limited to, language, food, mating partners availability, acceptable work/life balance, recreational activities available), personal ties, patriotism (in the broadest sense), reluctance to change, availability of different carrer path - all these things play a role. --- Edit: the people drain may not be complete, but it is still quite possible to be decisive. The migration is rarely representative in the political spectrum. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Visas. Depending on your nationality and the country you are moving to, you may need to expend considerable effort to get a visa, or it might take a long time to get an appropriate visa. You may not be allowed a visa (even with a job offer) depending on your history (maybe you have a criminal conviction, which can include even minor convictions ). I am not suggesting everyone is a criminal, just that visa decisions can hang on whether the visa-officer likes/or dislikes the paperwork and proof you provide. There are no guarantees in getting a visa. You may comply with all rules and regulations and then find that the destination country suddenly decided they don't want people from your country anymore (See Trump's attempted immigration bans). You may also find it difficult to bring partners or children with you as well. Of course this is not just a consideration for academics but for all people emigrating to another country (especially for people outside the EU trying to get in or anyone trying to get to the USA). Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: At least European scientific system has written and unwritten rules who can enter it, who can stay and who should go away. While it is relatively easy to enter it as a PhD student, or by getting the individual reasearch grant "without any possibility to prolong", this does not mean you will be able to stay for more than a few years. You must be smart enough to move into the industry ASAP. Depending on the area of expertise this may or may not be easy to do. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Since no one has said it yet... They kind of do. I live and work in Russia and A LOT of people graduating from top universities either land a position in top management outside of academia locally or move abroad. It is still not quite as noticeable as the fact one keeps encountering Russian surnames under research produced elsewhere; a good bunch of labs in the US and Europe has gotten a huge influx of ex-USSR researchers during the '90s. Talking to some of these people reveals that they either don't feel a particular tie to any country and go after higher quality of life or would rather stay, but given poor funding it starts impacting their research they are passionate about way too much. @username_3 points to political/ethical issues which are also definitely a thing. I'd say in most departments around me from those who stay in academia well over half move abroad (at times, going to whopping 70-80%); with these numbers being lower but still significant in "lower end" universities. If this is not a brain drain, I don't know what is. As to why the remaining stay... They either can't move, don't care or actually don't really have a reason to (like Oganov!\). Academia has adjusted - instead of keeping 10 people on staff with none of them able to do science because they have to earn a living elsewhere, sometimes living wages are kept okay and positions very restricted, immediately making it competitive with similar positions abroad. If you don't do military research (or your ethical/political stance allows for it), still get funded (which is admittedly somewhat rare) and can get equipment/pay people to do research... Doesn't have to be making great money, just enough to actually do research and live an agreeable life. Those who don't get it, move or quit academia. Those who can, commonly stay. Simple as that. \EDIT: as @username_3 has pointed out, Oganov first moved abroad and then returned to Russia. I'd still argue it's one example of having very decent and competitive working conditions; these are, of course, rare. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_9: 1. Cost of living. As a Pole I can attest that 2500 EUR can go a long way in Poland. This is especially relevant when your funding comes from abroad (e.g. a European funding agency). Even if better money abroad is tempting, it's probably not as tempting as you think. 2. Stability / availability of jobs. It's generally much easier to get a job in Poland than in Spain. When I finished my doctorate, I could have gone back to Poland and have a near-guarantee permanent position. Such opportunities didn't exist Western Europe. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Limited demand ============== Brain drainage is about attracting people that are above the average in the given discipline, no those average or anybody. In academia, professor posts are already a very scarce resource, and are highly competitive. An university in a rich country will certainly be interested to fill some posts with the champions from the abroad, but not all posts. They need to fill them with their own postdocs. Don't underestimate the language barrier. While you could reasonably expect a postdoc to be fluent in at least one vehicular language, in many cases it's fluency in reading and aided writing, not speaking. And you can't fill too many places with people not knowing the national language, because only a part of lectures are taught in a vehicular language. This limited the demand even more. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I am a drained person in the West. Many of my friends remained home, while they could have gone with me. I think the reasons to remain, in decreasing order of probability: 1. Lack of language skills. Actually talking with native speakers of a foreign language, and understanding eachother enough well to work together effectively, it is f\g hard. Particularly if your first language is out of the indogerman language family. (Resulting that all the grammar and all the words are totally different). Today this is compansated by learning English from the early childhood, but it is only today. As I was a child, lesser than 1% of the population could speak on it. 2. Family wants/needs them at home. Like wife who can divorce, resulting that she gets away your children. If this wife does not want to go with you, you will remain home. (Or the evolution will vote you down.) 3. Lucky or particularly useful people sometimes can get a salary close to what they can earn on the West. 4. Many people actually tried the West. Now emmigration into a foreign country results that the first years are f\g hard. It is absolutely not the way that you simply continue your previous life on a foreign language. The most important problem is that at home we were typically on the top of the job market. A foreign country uses different indicators to measure the usefulness of an applicant, and the language barrier will be always a huge disadvantage. People collecting too much negative experiences will likely go back, and don't try the West again. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: After seeing the excellent accepted answer by [username_8](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175292/4249) I wasn't sure whether I should just leave a comment on his, as I have found some sources which confirm what his answer mentions anecdotally. However, I think mentioning the source materials confirming the claim that there in fact exists a very decisive brain drain deserves it's own answer. I am talking about [the World Banks "Europe and Central Asia Economic Update, Fall 2019: Migration and Brain Drain"](https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/978-1-4648-1506-5). The most relevant information is summarised in Map 2.1 (on page 27) and Table 2.1 (on page 29). To pull out some data specifically relating to some of the examples you inquired about: * Out of EU countries, Bulgaria and Romania both have around 20% emigrant share (precent of emigrants of their total population) together with Latvia and Lithuania. Croatia (22%) and Malta top the charts (24%). * Among non-EU countries we can see stats such as Kazakhstan with 22%, Armenia with 32%, Moldova 24% and then a whooping 40% for Albania and 49% for Bosnia and Herzegovina. This effect then further disproportionately affects rural areas and areas further from the countries capital cities (where the life standards tend to be higher and the Universities situated), with e.g. certain municipalities in Croatia losing up to 40% of their population in 5 years (as found [here](https://www.total-croatia-news.com/lifestyle/40790-croatian-brain-drain)). All of this is happening in spite of all the possible reasons for staying many other answers mention: language barriers, family obligations, sense of national pride or a wish to give back to the community. In addition to all of these reasons, moving has a high financial cost which is an additional barrier posed to (even highly educated) workforce from low-income countries because the difference in cost of living as well as the immigration documentation required, and a high social cost to any person. In short, the ability to be mobile is a luxury some can not afford. The fact that anywhere between 20 and 50% of the population of some of the countries mentioned in your question and my answer now lives outside of their country of origin, despite the high cost of mobility, is a very strong argument that this brain drain is decisive, if not complete. Note: I've rounded the percentages from the report to the closest full percentage point. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: The premise of this question appears to be that because some countries rank lower on certain statistics of income, nobody in their right mind would live in them if they could help it. The question is then expressing confusion about why reality is not quite so. Of course, the premise is hopelessly wrong: * Money is not the only nor the most important thing for many people. Even if they would genuinely be wealthier in other countries, they may stay for other reasons that are more significant to them than wealth. * Just because a country is apparently "poor" based on some contrived statistic, such as average income, doesn't mean people are poorer. You have to adjust for purchasing power, taxes, cost of living, government services, quality of life... You are also not considering the income of the spouse, which can easily come from a non-technical field. * Immigrating is easier said than done. Presumably, for truly brilliant people it's easier, but there are still many general (eg. cumbersome immigration law) and special (eg. having a significant other that doesn't want to leave) barriers. * It's not like the best places in the "rich" countries are just letting anyone walk in. Everybody has heard they're rich, everybody wants to be there. Hiring is very competitive. Even after being hired, you are surrounded by and must now compete with other brilliant people. The natives are already very competitive, and the foreigner must deal with the additional handicap of immigration, so they are fighting a very uphill battle. Whereas as an alternative, one could stay home and be the big fish in a little pond. * Many of these so-called poor countries have also seen the Wikipedia article on "brain drain", and they offer various incentives to convince their citizens to stay. These may be in the form of rapid career advancements, more prestige, other non-monetary benefits... Stuff that won't show up in your comparison of average postdoc salaries. I think that in sum, you are confusing aggregate differences (poor vs. rich countries) with individual situations (having a good career opportunity here vs. there). This fallacy is known as [Simpson's paradox](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simpson%27s_paradox) - you are seeing a trend of smart people finding it desirable to stay in "poorer" countries, while overall it seems like the "richer" countries are much more desirable. The linked page has more details. That's not to say there aren't people that do leave. There are certainly plenty. But there are quite a few who don't, and no - they aren't crazy, not all of them anyhow - they can easily have quite sensible reasons. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Adding one more argument I haven't seen here yet... ### Not everyone is good enough As an example, Russia's education system (both on the school level and the university level) has been falling apart for three decades now with government funding drying up or getting embezzled ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union. So unfortunately for Russian citizens, its becoming harder and harder to become a highly educated/competent/qualified scientist or engineer when measured by Western standards. And if you're not highly qualified, moving abroad is exceedingly difficult unless you're willing to settle down for menial labor. Some Russian citizens take a somewhat easier path of going for a degree in a foreign university but this is likewise difficult: you need money, know-how on immigration, solid language skills, willingness to learn extra material to get on the same page as local high school graduates, etc. If they do manage to obtain a foreign diploma, they usually end up staying abroad. Otherwise their odds of successful immigration become vanishingly low unless they're the best of the best in what they do. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: This answer is based on my experience in industry and working on the recruiting platform for my current company for several years. In any case, the mere fact that someone has a certain skillset doesn't automatically mean that it's easy to secure a position in another country. For example, maybe their skills in the target language aren't very good. I'm not terribly familiar with the job market in Spain, for example, but I imagine that if you don't speak good Spanish it could make it more difficult to secure a job there (regardless of how good your other skills are). It's also often an advantage to have good English, so you could potentially be expected to effectively be trilingual (if you come from a country whose primary language is something other than English or Spanish). Many wealthier countries have highly restrictive immigration policies as well that deliberately make it difficult and expensive for employers to hire people from overseas; between that and potentially being expected to help out with relocation costs (and obviously the cost of flying someone in from a foreign country and putting them up in a hotel and providing them with meals), many companies have a strong incentive to hire local candidates where available. Obviously the immigration issues wouldn't apply to applicants moving between E.U. countries, but it would definitely apply to cases where either the candidate or the target company is outside of the E.U. Also, the relocation cost and interview cost issue would still apply. If a flight costs, for example, $300, two days of a hotel costs an additional $250, and meals cost $50, it costs $600 to interview someone from a different country (vs. $0 to interview someone locally). Multiply that by 5 candidates and you've added $3000 to your recruiting cost for that position. That's not even including relocation costs, which according to [this source](https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/15842-costs-of-employee-relocation.html#:%7E:text=How%20much%20do%20employers%20spend%20on%20employee%20relocation,by%20Worldwide%20ERC%2C%20a%20relocation%20services%20trade%20group.) at least costs, on average, $21,000 - $24,000 (in the U.S. at least). Again, the relocation cost of hiring a local candidate is $0. That being said, hiring an out-of-country candidate could cost an extra $27,000. These are obviously very rough numbers, but you get the point: it's a significant added expense. This is particularly the case for academic fields that have an oversupply of people that have a terminal degree; for example, in the U.S. at least there's an oversupply of people with law degrees and the number of law schools is decreasing, so the remaining law schools could presumably afford to be quite picky about who they select. This also particularly applies to areas, such as certain arts, where it's common for a master's degree to be considered a de facto terminal degree. In these fields, there's little incentive to hire from overseas unless the applicant has a truly exceptional record. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_16: > > Why don't poorer countries suffer a complete brain-drain? > > > Reality. There aren't enough positions to go around in the "good" countries. Also, immigration/emigration laws. If a complete brain-drain occurred then they wouldn't have been able to even study in their home country to begin with. The brain-drain would simply be referred to as existence since the country no longer produces smart people. People are motivated by more than salary, you know. If you're smart and charismatic in your home country then you will quickly realize you can gain power over the masses and make your life quite comfortable. If your home-country superiority is considered average in the "good" country then why try to move exactly? It's quite noble to always try to challenge and improve yourself but stopping to take a look around can sometimes prove fruitful. Upvotes: -1
2021/09/07	486	2,046	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing my Master in physics in the University X. Previously, I did my Bachelor in the University Y. I am applying for a PhD positions that requires two recommendation letters. The supervisor of my Master Thesis agreed to write for me a letter. For the second one, I could ask a professor with which I did a course and a seminar in my current university X, or I could ask the supervisor of my Bachelor thesis when I was in Y. Who do you think is better? I add some information: I finished my Bachelor in physics three years ago (I hope he remembers me). I worked around six months for the Bachelor thesis and at the end it was awarded the highest grade. So in principle I would ask him, but I do not know if it is okay for PhD applications to have letters from the Bachelor.<issue_comment>username_1: I'd be hesitant if you would have only recommendation letters from your Bachelor, but this is not the case. Your first recommendation letter comes from your Master Thesis supervisor, which is good. On top of that, I would prefer to hear from someone else who has worked closely with you for an extended period of time. Hence, a supervisor from another thesis would be preferable to me over someone who taught a course and a seminar you attended (although that seminar also gives quite some insight in how you function, so I wouldn't knock a recommendation letter from that person either). But look at it this way: two professors, from distinct universities, who both supervised you in a thesis process, with happy outcomes for all involved parties? I think that looks quite strong, actually. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Supervisor of BSc definitely would be a stronger option than some prof from the local university course. I don't see why wouldn't they remember you, really (it depends on the personality, of course, but most would) - on top of that, they would probably be delighted to hear from you and learn that you are on a good track towards PhD. Win/win! Upvotes: 1
2021/09/07	981	4,343	<issue_start>username_0: There have been similar questions but I believe my question is somewhat unique. I want to apply to a PhD program in Physics somewhere in North America. I have now completed both my bachelor's and my master's in Physics. Although I have gotten great grades in my master's, my bachelor's performance remains a disaster. I had to retake some classes thrice and I failed many times. Even after I did pass, my grades are unimpressive (I have an average of 5 out of 10, Indian GPA system). Question 1: I was wondering if I should explain it since my master's performance is good. Question 2: Would it have a significant impact on my application? Can I take online courses in the classes I have under-performed to have a better image overall? Important: Is there any minimum grade for bachelor's studies which would disqualify me from being considered despite my stellar master's performance?<issue_comment>username_1: Most people will naturally weigh recent work more heavily than earlier work. If you need to give an explanation, then "health problems" is better than "mental health problems" since it carries less baggage. But apparently the early work wasn't so much a "disaster" that it prevented earning a degree. The knowledge is more important than the grade. If your masters work implies that you know the essentials even though you had poor grades in those courses then you have probably sufficiently recovered that taking the courses again for the grades (not the knowledge) would be a waste of time and effort. But a couple of simple, short, phrases in a Statement of Purpose may be all you need. "Having overcome early health problems, I was able to build a strong foundation in (specialty) in the masters. ..." Don't use the SoP to apologize, however, and make it forward focused, but a few words can be expended to show that you are on the correct trajectory for success. --- Some places have a cutoff GPA, but not all. And other things that "perk someone's interest", such as an especially glowing letter might overcome that in some of those. Note that there is a lot of competition, however. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree that recommendations and your recent work weigh more heavily than bad grades in your past. I personally would not address your past grades at all- your cover letter or statement of purpose needs to be short, clear, and positive. The applications committee will read hundreds of these things, so you want to do everything you can to get thrown into the "possible candidate" pile rather than "reject" pile. Let them worry about your grades when they go over your transcript with a fine tooth comb, not as your first impression. If your letter talks about your accomplishments and preparation, and your recommenders back you up in this, then I doubt your past grades will need any explanation. If anything, you could work an apparent explanation of your grades into your cover letter without ever calling out your past explicitly. For example, "Once I discovered particle physics I knew I had found my calling." There are plenty of academics who did not have stellar grades. Different schools have different policies on grades and minimum cutoffs. I can tell you that I personally did not meet my graduate school's minimum cutoff for GRE scores (by just a few points). The admissions department swore up and down that I could never be accepted, but the admissions committee in my department thought I was a good candidate and accepted me. Your experience will vary. In general there are two kinds of people on admissions committees (or maybe, two kinds of processes). The first kind of person is looking for reasons to include candidates and pass them along to the next level. The second kind of person is looking for reasons to cut or exclude candidates from the next level. You're never going to satisfy that second kind of person unless you have perfect grades and impeccable credentials, which most all of us (including in academia) do not. Also in my experience you're not going to enjoy working for that kind of person either. When you sit down to write your application packet, think about that first person who is looking for good reasons to pass you along for the next round of consideration, and write with that person in mind. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/07	798	3,563	<issue_start>username_0: I am part of a paper with multiple authors (16). My name is unfortunately the last one. How do I mention this one my CV?<issue_comment>username_1: Most people will naturally weigh recent work more heavily than earlier work. If you need to give an explanation, then "health problems" is better than "mental health problems" since it carries less baggage. But apparently the early work wasn't so much a "disaster" that it prevented earning a degree. The knowledge is more important than the grade. If your masters work implies that you know the essentials even though you had poor grades in those courses then you have probably sufficiently recovered that taking the courses again for the grades (not the knowledge) would be a waste of time and effort. But a couple of simple, short, phrases in a Statement of Purpose may be all you need. "Having overcome early health problems, I was able to build a strong foundation in (specialty) in the masters. ..." Don't use the SoP to apologize, however, and make it forward focused, but a few words can be expended to show that you are on the correct trajectory for success. --- Some places have a cutoff GPA, but not all. And other things that "perk someone's interest", such as an especially glowing letter might overcome that in some of those. Note that there is a lot of competition, however. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree that recommendations and your recent work weigh more heavily than bad grades in your past. I personally would not address your past grades at all- your cover letter or statement of purpose needs to be short, clear, and positive. The applications committee will read hundreds of these things, so you want to do everything you can to get thrown into the "possible candidate" pile rather than "reject" pile. Let them worry about your grades when they go over your transcript with a fine tooth comb, not as your first impression. If your letter talks about your accomplishments and preparation, and your recommenders back you up in this, then I doubt your past grades will need any explanation. If anything, you could work an apparent explanation of your grades into your cover letter without ever calling out your past explicitly. For example, "Once I discovered particle physics I knew I had found my calling." There are plenty of academics who did not have stellar grades. Different schools have different policies on grades and minimum cutoffs. I can tell you that I personally did not meet my graduate school's minimum cutoff for GRE scores (by just a few points). The admissions department swore up and down that I could never be accepted, but the admissions committee in my department thought I was a good candidate and accepted me. Your experience will vary. In general there are two kinds of people on admissions committees (or maybe, two kinds of processes). The first kind of person is looking for reasons to include candidates and pass them along to the next level. The second kind of person is looking for reasons to cut or exclude candidates from the next level. You're never going to satisfy that second kind of person unless you have perfect grades and impeccable credentials, which most all of us (including in academia) do not. Also in my experience you're not going to enjoy working for that kind of person either. When you sit down to write your application packet, think about that first person who is looking for good reasons to pass you along for the next round of consideration, and write with that person in mind. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/07	814	3,138	<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc in finance and I have just developed an R package on my own as part of a research paper with three co-authors. At the moment, we have a methodological paper in review and I would like to submit my R package to CRAN. I am now wondering if I should add my coauthors as contributors to the package even though I am the only one who wrote all the code in the package ? Any help would be much appreciated !<issue_comment>username_1: The R Project core team has provided a helpful guide entitled ["Who Did What? The Roles of R Package Authors and How to Refer to Them"](https://journal.r-project.org/archive/2012/RJ-2012-009/RJ-2012-009.pdf). Like many journals these days, R package `DESCRIPTION` or `CITATION` files allow you to delineate the contributions of each individual author with three letter [MARC codes](https://www.loc.gov/marc/relators/relaterm.html). A quote from the paper linked above: > > "ths" (Thesis advisor): Thesis advisor, if the package is part of a thesis. > > > Clearly the core team intended to make it possible to list a supervisor as an author. Note that there is also a `fnd` code for funders. As you may know, R includes a [`citation()`](https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/utils/versions/3.6.2/topics/citation) function to help citing a package. Only some author roles appear when calling this function. Please refer to documentation for further information. I work in medicine, and so I try to follow the [NIH guidelines](https://oir.nih.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/sourcebook/documents/ethical_conduct/guidelines-authorship_contributions.pdf) when determining authorship. As you can see, providing financial support alone does not confer authorship. Therefore, I would probably not include your advisor if they only provided funding. During my PhD, I published an R package with a collaborator. I did not include my thesis advisor as an author. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know of an authoritative source on this question, but an anecdote: I've personally written the code for 3 projects, i.e. there were other coauthors on the papers but none worked on the code. None of the projects are on CRAN, but I've only ever listed myself as exclusive author or copyright holder. With a link to the preprint/paper in the README, of course. To me this is sufficient acknowledgement of their contribution: My co-authors contributed the ideas in the paper, but simply didn't write the code. None of my coauthors have every batted any eyelash, frankly I doubt they even noticed. For supervisors particularly, I really don't think they have any claim to the code's copyright if they didn't write any of it (unless you have a different arrangement, of course). Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes. They provided ideas and support, as evidenced by the fact that you are writing a related paper. You lose nothing by including them. Indeed, include them and also offer to show them, if they are less technical, how to properly add the line to their CVs. You gain reputation as a good actor and goodwill. Both are invaluable. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/07	481	1,916	<issue_start>username_0: I am just starting a PhD, and I have been in contact with the supervisor for about 3 months now, that means before the interview so you can assume I was SUPER polite when emailing him! Since then, I have just been addressing him as "<NAME>", while everyone else ofc just calls his first name. How does one make that transition? :) PS: I'm in the UK.<issue_comment>username_1: You could ask him, of course. Some places are less formal than others. And it isn't uniform by country/culture. During my doctoral studies I called most professors by first name, but my advisor by his title. Partly (probably mostly) that was because of his position and reputation. Some people will give you signals. If you are addressed by a title (Mr./Ms....) then reciprocate. If you are called by name you could just ask how they would prefer to be addressed. But it is probably better to default to the formal in the absence of any signal at all. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no written rule on when to make the switch (if ever). There are, however, a few factors to consider: Cultural preferences and expectations * Your own * Your advisor’s * Your university’s Past email signings * How your advisor addresses you * How your advisor signs their own emails Relationship to your advisor * Does your professor have a preference on how they are addressed with colleagues who have known them for a long time? * Do you feel comfortable lessening the formality? In addition to these factors, there are other ways that you might transition your level of formality. For example, I address professors and faculty with varying levels of formality according to their preferences, my preferences, and my relationship to them. I use all of these on a regular basis with different professors: * Dear Dr. LastName * Hi Prof. LastName * Dear FirstName * Hi FirstName Upvotes: 2
2021/09/07	1,571	6,481	<issue_start>username_0: I have an office job that should provide me solid financial base for early pensioning. I've lately developed passion for outdoor activities (mountaineering, diving etc.) when it was too late to adapt the professional career path. I wonder if it's a viable way to use the opportunity to use the outdoor experience in the archaeology research (or maybe some other discipline where outdoor skills are strongly required) and start PhD in my late (or maybe early) 50s. I know it's not [too old to start PhD](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3426), but I don't want to simply make it for hobby and feel like a tween being 60 (I'm aware I'm about to take place of someone younger) but to use it with the profit for both me and the community. I'd like to be able to help in research and share my experience with younger. Is it plausible at all? And do the various outdoor skills are strong points for PhD entry that would counter my age and missing routine in the academics? I have the Master in the social sciences, so I have a formal basis to apply.<issue_comment>username_1: It seems a bit far fetched actually, unless standing around in the heat supervising students on a dig is an "outdoor activity". I'd guess that most archaeologists spend more time in the lab, analyzing things, than in the field. And even more time trying to draw conclusions and present them. The people who will evaluate your application will be academics, not athletes. They will be looking for other indications of success. Being active in the outdoors might be a real benefit in some fields (sport...) but would have very little weight, I'd think, in anthropology. Fieldwork is, I'd assume, more intellectually stimulating than physically. But, I can think of one possible need that doesn't seem to be well covered. At the last global maximum (glaciers), the sea level was much lower. Perhaps 200 feet, IIRC. People almost certainly lived on the shore in many many places but their traces there have all been lost. I've wondered, personally, about the origin of boats sophisticated enough for over sea travel. Perhaps there is evidence somewhere (some how?) buried in ancient sea shore habitat. Not an obvious path to success, of course. Just guessing, actually, as this isn't my field, though I've done a bit of reading about the first peoples of what became the Americas. OTOH, outdoor activities are a great way to break out of a rut when stuck at a desk. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Disclaimer: I’m not an archaeologist, so this is an answer written from a general perspective of an academic. It’s certainly “plausible” for you to do a PhD if you are highly motivated and have clear goals. But you need to understand that there isn’t such a thing as a “ticket to the PhD”. The only kind of ticket is hard work, and writing a thoughtful application that convinces the people in the program that you have high potential to succeed in, and bring value to, their program. Assuming that any particular skill or set of skills that you have will be your “ticket” in would be a serious mistake in my opinion. First, the skills that you say you have are far from uncommon, and not particularly difficult to acquire (unless we’re talking seriously technical stuff like trimix diving, which I suppose may be useful in some specialized branches of marine archaeology). Second, I’m concerned that you are more focused on the PhD involving outdoor skills and activities than on what the PhD is actually about. Imagine an archaeologist reading your personal statement where you say you want to do research in archaeology “or maybe some other discipline where outdoor skills are strongly required”. Well, you could be the world’s best outdoorsman but if you don’t show a passion for the specific discipline you are applying to, I doubt your application will rank very highly (and even if you don’t write a sentence like this one that explicitly gives away your lack of attachment to the specific discipline, it will likely show in other more subtle ways). Besides, if you lack that kind of passion, I think you might want to reconsider the whole idea of a PhD. A PhD is hard enough to do for those who do have the passion for the topic they are working on — it is that passion that will get them through the hundreds or thousands of hours of boring grunt work, sitting in offices and seminar rooms, data analysis etc, that a PhD involves in addition to the “fun” field trips. If all you want are opportunities to do some fun science outdoors, you will likely be disappointed. With regards to the age issue, another issue of possible concern to me is that you say “I'm aware I'm about to take place of someone younger”. This suggests to me that you potentially view yourself as unworthy of a spot in the PhD program, possibly due to your age. That’s not a helpful mindset to have. If you have the passion and think you have something unique to contribute, then you should apply. But you should not be thinking of yourself as “taking the place” of anyone — that’s another sign to me that you may lack real drive and passion for the journey that is the PhD. Your age is what it is, and gives you a perspective on life and abilities that are different from those of someone younger, for better and for worse. The people reviewing your application will surely have their own ideas about what it means and how it factors into the context of a PhD program in their area. There’s nothing you can do to eliminate this factor, but from your end I’d encourage you to at least not sabotage yourself by explicitly making age an issue where it may not be one at all. Hope this gives you some things to think about, and good luck! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not an archaeologist, but I know a retired professor who supervises digs. Sometimes there are gaps in academic archaeology which only passionate outsiders can fill, and those outsiders may be interested in getting volunteer help. If your primary interest is in the outdoor side of archaeology, my advice to you would be to find what sort of digs are happening in your area and ask a supervisor if they'd be willing to take you on as an assistant. This type of work is where outdoor experience would come in handy. As part of taking this route, it is also important to learn the difference between archaeology and hobbyist metal-detecting, which is often destructive to historical sites. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/07	2,934	12,424	<issue_start>username_0: I have this doubt from last year. This doubt arose in me after an academic incident. --- Incident During last year, I presented my progress before a panel of four experts and it went almost well. The only issue happened when I kept a slide of "what I will do next?". In that slide, I kept the name of a proof that I want to read. I got opinions and warnings that were shocking to me at that time. The opinions and warnings exhibited by those experts in the panel are as follows: > > 1. It is impossible for you to do that in the next academic year. > 2. None of us even think about that since it is beyond our scope currently. > 3. You are overambitious. > 4. Only dozens or at most hundreds of people, on earth, have understood it till now. > 5. The world of exalted mathematicians is entirely different. Don't even try for it. It may lead to mental issues. > 6. Some aspirants I know became mentally ill after attempting such projects. > > > Although some are harsh opinions, I got them. The last two are shocking or a revelation for me. Till that time, I was confident enough that I will do. But I am slowly realizing that the opinions may be true. --- Question My question is slightly tangential to the incident I faced. I am thinking about the topmost professors who make such proofs or write great textbooks encompassing the overall literature. You can consider any domain of interest for answering this question. But the domain has to be locally saturated. I think it happens mostly with math. Since I am a beginner or in my early twenties, I may have much to read in my domain. I want to know about the (contemporary) highest people and their world in that domain, especially in the reading aspect. Suppose I spent ten years on it and completed all the available textbooks and the significant papers till that time. Should I need to read anything further in that domain except the occasional seminal research papers by peers? Should there be anything in a (say locally saturated) domain for a topmost professor to read? Note that I am not considering the option of changing the domain for this question.<issue_comment>username_1: I am going to assume based on your question that you are an undergraduate or beginning graduate student -- I apologize if this assumption is misplaced, but at least in the US this would be the appropriate level for "I am a beginner or in early 20's". There is a major transition that happens in your education as you go from being an undergraduate and beginning graduate student, to an advanced PhD student and beyond. As an undergraduate and beginning graduate student, your main job is to receive knowledge from courses, homeworks, lectures, readings, etc. In this context, it makes sense to think that there is essentially a finite amount of knowledge, with some small amount of new material being added on the cutting edge, and a professor is merely someone who has done enough reading that they know the entire field. This is really not how things work at all! The knowledge you learn in courses has been very carefully organized to present an efficient, compelling, apparently complete story. In reality, "all of human knowledge" on even apparently tiny subjects, like "integration" (just one half of "calculus"!) are really vast and sprawling landscapes of failed ideas, competing formulations, pathways into apparently unrelated areas, disagreements about fine points of key definitions... it is impossible (and probably not useful) to know everything on any subject. Additionally, as pointed out in the comments by @avid, it's not even really possible to carefully define the "boundaries" of a given subject -- often progress in Mathematics (or any field) is made by realizing that a technique from one area can be applied to an apparently completely different area. On top of that, your main job from the time you are an advanced PhD student onward in the academic world is to produce knowledge. This comes about by doing research, writing papers, disseminating that information into the scientific community, and attracting interest and funding. As a result, professors don't know everything about their field, partly because no one can, but mainly because that's not what they are trying to do. They are trying to make a lasting contribution to human knowledge in their domain. This requires an enormous amount of work in a narrow field of study to get an understanding of the most important concepts in the field, keep up with the latest developments, and develop a strong vision on where things are headed that fuels research projects. Applying this to your question, I think you are implicitly assuming a paper is interesting because it is deep, or done by someone famous, or solves a famous problem. It may be the case that results like this are "interesting" in the everyday sense -- enough that it's worth spending an hour or two reading about it. I've watched my share of youtube videos and skimmed papers about results well outside my domain that I found "interesting" but have no hope of actually understanding at a deep level. But just because something is famous doesn't mean it is interesting in the professional sense that it is worth spending a significant amount of your time studying. Most professors would classify something as interesting enough to study, only if there was a chance it could lead to something productive. It would be difficult to justify spending months reading a very difficult paper that will take a long time to fully understand and which is not closely connected with ongoing projects and therefore is unlikely to lead to producing new research on a reasonable timescale. Even if a person was interested in moving into a new area, it would probably be more fruitful to start with something easier, and build up to more complicated papers step by step. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: An answer, appropriate for a 20-year-old mathematician in academia. (This relates to points 5 and 6.) Do not start working on the Riemann Hypothesis now. Wait at least until you are tenured. Reason: it is likely you will get nowhere on the problem, and thus you will be publishing nothing, and will have no job after 10 years. Many other well-known open problems could be substituted for the Riemann Hypothesis in this advice. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Focus, for now. I am a 'topmost professor' in my field, by many measures, and I read daily outside of my 'local interests'. This is for fun. I represent it professionally as a personal quest to keep growing, and to become an expert in a larger circle of ideas I find important. Upon finishing my PhD I determined that, alongside my job, I could complete another PhD's worth of work each three years. By my own metric, I have done so. My reputation is for publishing in a number of fields simultaneously, and in their intersections. One is Mathematics. I achieved this luxury of spending so much of my time learning by first becoming a recognized expert in one thing. It is very difficult to be a polymath from the start in this moment of history. Indeed, some proofs will put you in rarefied company, and require years of study. Your committee, while a bit hyperbolic with the whole madness warning thing, is giving you good advice. My recommendation: become a master at one thing, and with it do something novel. Use the resulting reputation and resources to go after other things, chosen carefully. Have fun. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Obviously it depends on the size of their field, doesn't it? Some questions are popular and get a lot of people thinking about them. They all publish papers. If you are in such a field, you will never run out of things to read. Then there are topics that have only a handful of people around the world who are even aware of it, let alone care. Naturally you will not be getting a torrent of new paper alerts in your mailbox from watching such a topic. As for your misgivings, when you are wanting to bite a big piece, and your professors are saying to bite a small one, I think you are better off listening to them. If you conclude they are wrong but it turns out otherwise, you could easily end up getting stuck for years, wasting a lot of time, not getting anywhere, not graduating, etc. But if you listen to them, take on a smaller task, and it turns out that they were wrong and the small task really is too small for you -- well, that means you will finish it very quickly, and then you can go to the professor and tell them you want to try a bigger challenge now. You're not really losing much. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Well, all I can say is that I had an honor of seeing how <NAME> (a Fields medalist in analysis) worked. He certainly was reading a lot. In fact, if you want to become like him, the recipe is very simple. Take some research article (not too long but interesting) that slightly exceeds your current abilities and work it through (meaning try to first quickly get the idea of the general scheme from the paper but try to prove every single lemma yourself and if you fail, go over every detail of the proof and retell it in your own way). Once you finish with one paper, take another, and so on day after day for about 20 years. Increase the slight excess gradually. Spend one half of the time reading and another half doing your own research. In the end (20 years later) you'll be able to take a paper, look at it for 5 minutes, and then to explain how to improve the theorem and simplify the proof (not every single time, of course, there have been nuts even Jean failed to crack, but except for the very top things, which you'll still have to work through slowly like in the beginning, reading research articles in your field will not present any problem to you any more). This route is open to everyone, but not too many people follow it. Why? 1. You can under- or over-estimate your abilities and pick up something that is too hard or too easy. In both cases, you can detect it and switch to something else though. The best indicator of a hard thing is that you don't understand the general logic of the paper (or even most of the words on the front page). If it is so, postpone it! Don't try the proof of Fermat's theorem or Poincare conjecture. If you really want to get there, wait a few years reading relevant but simpler things and solving problems in related fields. The indicator of an easy thing is an ability to take a look at the main theorem in a paper and being able to prove it completely in a couple of weeks all by yourself. If it is the case, move up. 2. Inability to keep the reading schedule. Life is full of distractions, real or imaginary, and this route requires a lot of persistence. It is not the only way to become a decent professional, so if you strongly dislike systematic work or your life circumstances do not allow it, just choose some other way. I'm personally definitely not up to the required amount of self-discipline and I prefer talking to reading, so my way was just to talk to as many people I could and to try to understand and solve their problems. As a result, I'm no match to Jean, of course, but not completely hopeless either. 3. Not being ambitious enough (as far as mathematics is concerned). We are not all samurai and usually like to balance our priorities. That's completely normal too but it turns the required 20 years into 100, and that may be above one's productive lifespan. But by itself reading is a good thing if you approach it like running or weight lifting. Just don't try to run a marathon on the first day or lift 250 pounds on the first try. Though neither feat is impossible (and many people can do either one), both require some preliminary training. With it, you'll be there eventually. Without it, you may have a heart attack, break your arm, or, as one of the reviewers said, go insane. The whole secret is in handling the task just the right amount above your current abilities and letting time and patience to do their work. 20 years is not the exact amount of time, of course, but it is not metaphorical either: it has the right order of magnitude. Developing mathematical (or any other brain) abilities is almost universally regarded as a slower process than training your muscles. Just my 2 cents. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/08	1,422	6,040	<issue_start>username_0: I have decided to take a new job, mid tenure case. I am having trouble finding information about how to job hunt in academia at my mid-rank. Specifically: 1. How to communicate my status 2. Whether to apply for Associate or Assistant level positions 3. How to socialize my search with my department mid-tenure, and with my students, and with my sponsors 4. What considerations I might have not thought of My state university's COVID policies are unsafe, and I have sat with my family and decided to leave for the sake of our health. I am mid-tenure case (submitted in August, finished by June 2022), with success all but assured. I have read that this time is an 'opportune' time to go on the job market, and indeed within my network a number of colleagues have done it. However, they all seem to have had an 'in', and applied through a friend, etc. I am actively networking for the same. At the same time, I am (back) on the usual job sites, and wondering if sending out a round of applications might not make sense. One advantage I have: my chair and department is aware I am potentially looking for a job to get out of the state. Many of us are. That said, once I start this, word will get out. I foresee hard questions from my tenure committees, and also my students, and also sponsors... I am in the US South, at an R1. I previously worked at a top 10 university. I have a strong network, and I am well-funded. My work is multi-disciplinary, and so I could be portable across a number of department types. Questions above, but broadly: How do people ally for jobs mid-tenure case, traditionally? How does the recipe for success in this change in these non-traditional extended-pandemic times? Resolution: I have accepted an industry position which begins soon. I will conclude my classes, find new homes for my graduate students, wind down my grants, shutter my laboratory, help my postdocs and research scientists to find a next step, and begin my own new chapter. In doing so I will be leaving the university mid tenure process, forgoing millions in grant funding, and otherwise burning my bridge. That said, and although this is heartbreaking for me, and is also the least bad outcome. After an initial time away from my family I know this is not something I could do happily for any real length of time. I am deeply thankful to have options. Indeed, while I am sad to leave, my new job pays almost 4x my university job's salary, and it appears will afford me more support in my work than does the present position. This helps. I thank all of you for your thoughtful responses. In different circumstances, many might have found me a way to remain a professor.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no script for this situation, and in my view the timing is awkward as well. Let's talk about the timing first. At the moment, you are an assistant professor, and for all any other department knows, you have not gotten tenure and there is no guarantee that you will. So, universities at the same rank as your current one will not want to hire you with tenure, and they will think twice about hiring you to begin with because presumably you would insist on a short tenure clock -- which is always difficult because it does not give your future department much time to get to know you. In other words, everyone is taking risks: You have to go somewhere without tenure when you could have tenure at your current institution, and any hiring department will have to make a decision in a year or two without really knowing you well by then. As for hiring someone later in their career than as a starting assistant professor in general: These are generally all individualized processes. In many cases, the hiring department and the prospective hire already know each other, or at least someone in the hiring department knows the candidate. These sorts of cases are typically more controversial than starting assistant professor hires because (i) more money -- salary, start-up, etc. -- is involved, (ii) immediate tenure or tenure soon after is involved. As a consequence, the people who are hired later on with tenure are generally not simply as good as the "average professor", but are substantially better. If all a department is interested in is filling a position, then can cheaply and easily do that with a starting assistant professor. Hiring someone beyond that career stage is so much more difficult that the people getting hired that way are generally around the top level in the hiring department. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an outside the box suggestion, but my real intent is to suggest that you do just that; think outside the box for a solution. If you are vaccinated and, perhaps, willing to wear a mask in most situations, then you are probably pretty safe, yourself. But it can leave you family, especially children, quite vulnerable to the disease. If you have an option of sending your family to a safer place for the remainder of this year, perhaps to live with parents, or such, then they will be safer, while you continue where you are for the year and get through your tenure decision. If tenure is granted, as you suspect, then you would be in a much better position to move in '23 than currently. The above isn't a very happy solution, but other families need to live apart for various reasons and it can be made to work. But, again, the important point isn't to adopt the above "solution" but to think about other possible, not standard, things that can get your family and yourself to a better place. It occurs to me that another option, if your spouse is also employed, that you could just resign and live on a reduced income for the year. It would cause a serious disruption in your career, but one that is easily explained in a more sensible place. You wouldn't have to be inactive professionally for the year, but would just have no employer. This is likely a worse, suggestion, further outside the box, but think about all your options. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/08	474	2,030	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a master's student in computer science, doing research with one of my professors. They are a good mentor, and pay well. However, our research interests aren't quite aligned - they're related but I'm ultimately a little unsatisfied, and would like to pursue a PhD elsewhere. I also want to travel and potentially even move to Europe, so I plan on applying to PhD programs there. So, I am thinking about applying for summer research internships at European universities. I think (and I need an unbiased second opinion on this) that a summer research internship could help me find a lab that I want to join for my PhD, as well as gain a second reference for future applications. Is this a good idea, given that I could otherwise spend the summer doing (funded) research with my existing professor?<issue_comment>username_1: In your case, you're sure that you don't want to pursue PhD under this current guide and apply elsewhere. The summer internship will surely boost that chances. So I will say, go for it. And as you've already mentioned there is another benefit: the 2nd reference for future applications. That will be very handy too. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer is very very simple. YES. It is a great opportunity to enhance yourself as a scholar and a person to look at other groups, universities, experiments, theories, places, people. It is in particular great to move to different countries and learn a lot more than "just" a different supervisor. Just imagine, there are not so many profession where working bas8cally all over the world is a real and positive option. Why not make full benefit from this? If you want to stay in science, working on a global network of people you know and collaborate with is never too early. Never think about your current supervisor as a thing to hold you back. If he is a decent man, he will 100% understand and support you. Otherwise he might be selfish or short-sighted. Even more reason to leave him behind. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/08	434	1,951	<issue_start>username_0: A not uncommon occurrence for students is that they only have a few days left before an exam for a course they are taking and may still have some topics that they need to revise. (This doesn't necessarily mean lack of commitment to the course, but there may have been other, harder subjects, or personal issues that arose.) My question is if there a trick to choose the optimum number of past year question papers to optimize my score on the exams? Is there a general suggestion regarding which past year papers should I solve and which I should skip? This question is coming from the perspective of the student, but I could envisage this also being a useful question for tutors or instructors.<issue_comment>username_1: No, there is no trick. You could try to do some past year questions from as many different topics as possible, or maybe focus on the topics that show up most often, but beyond that: get studying. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Do as many problems as you can without making yourself physically and mentally unable to concentrate. (Don't pull an all nighter before the exam! And if you start feeling anxious, take a break and breathe.) It's worth doing problems both that you think you know how to solve (so you can check the solution and look for little details you may have missed), and problems you don't feel comfortable with. However, it's generally better to spend more time with the subjects you feel the least comfortable with, so you learn them. It's a good idea to set aside on exam that you will take under timed conditions to see how you perform. But while working through other exams, take your time and try to really understand all the details of the problems, especially the ones that are confusing. Understanding one difficult problem fully often gives you a good toolkit which lets you tackle other "nearby" problems. There's no substitute for hard work. Good luck! Upvotes: 2
2021/09/08	586	2,434	<issue_start>username_0: I have a Bachelor's degree in Statistics from a reputed Indian college. I struggled during my Bachelor's and failed many classes and retook exams. My CGPA is 6.18/10. My Master's grades are good though, amongst the top. I plan on applying for Biostatistics/ Statistics PhD programs in USA this fall. I do not have any publications or internship experience. My research experiences are my two dissertations for BSc and MSc and a solo project I did and presented in a well-known international conference during my Masters. There is no GRE test for Statistics. So, the question doesn't arise. My peers haven't taken any GRE test for Maths either. But since, my undergrad grades are low, will my Math Subject test score compensate for it? I was planning on taking the test till now but it is becoming too expensive for me and I don't think I'll be able to afford it. Do I still have a good chance to get into a top university without taking the subject test and with my current profile?<issue_comment>username_1: I haven't been on any applications committees, but believe the answer to your core question is that a Math Subject GRE score is unlikely to help an application to a program that does not request it. In the first instance, if a program does not request those scores they probably do not routinely parse them. The score is much more likely to be ignored than it is for someone to spend a long time figuring out how to contextualize it against their other applications. In the second instance, the Math Subject GRE is a deeply idiosyncratic examination. I know a nontrivial number of well-regarded professional mathematicians who got poor scores on it. While it is of course possible to get a particularly compelling score without specialized training for the exam, I think it is reasonable to call it generally improbable. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As highlighted in another answer, if GRE MATH isn't a pre-requisite for that particular university or college, then it won't help you much. But there is something which you can do to compensate for the low CGPA. You're from a field which has a really high demand right now, all over the world and including India. If you can get into one or two short-term internships then it will be brilliant. Not only it will boost your CV but you can also have some illustrious points in the Statement of purpose that you'll be writing. Upvotes: -1
2021/09/08	942	3,758	<issue_start>username_0: I researched an acquaintance's PhD dissertation and I saw that it doesn't qualify even as a master's degree. She sells herself as accomplished for finishing PhD in 3 years but the data is not there in the thesis, the thesis is very badly written and the whole introduction misses the references. I confronted her directly and I really want her PhD revoked. In addition, she is a co-author of a publication as an equal but in the contributions she is everything but equal. With this and that she does postdocs here and there, and claims that I only say that because I am jealous that she has a career and me not (sorry academics, my academic journey is over I had enough and as long as I see these kinds of things I don't want to re-enter).<issue_comment>username_1: Unless there is concrete evidence of actual malfeasance (plagiarism, fraud, data fabrication or falsification, violation of research ethics standards, etc.) you are out of luck. They managed to convince a doctoral committee to award the degree, that's the end of the story. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What should one do if they find that someone else has a different opinion than you about something? Usually nothing. A university decided that your acquaintance’s work merits a PhD. That’s their opinion, and their decision to make. The decision is normally irrevocable unless the work the PhD was given for involved actual fraud or serious misconduct. If it is merely mediocre, there isn’t anything anyone can or should do other than silently disapprove. Of course, [another school of thought](https://xkcd.com/386/) says that when someone disagrees with you, the right thing to do is to obsess about it and devote your life to convincing them that they’re wrong and you’re right. Given that this approach is advocated in a satirical xkcd comic, I’ll leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about whether that’s an approach you want to adopt. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: What you should do is, precisely, nothing. A university grants a degree and an individual isn't going to be successful contesting it. Unless you can prove actual academic misconduct and are willing to stand in public and demonstrate it, the only harm will be to yourself. It isn't worth making a lifelong bitter enemy of the "acquaintance" and a bunch of people at the university. It is possible, of course, that the university or some people within it have very low standards, but a complaint, which at base may be just an opinion of the value of it, isn't going to change that. I'm sorry if this isn't what you want to hear, but your anger isn't likely to be requited. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Unless you're on someone's committee, it's really none of your business why a fully accredited school might decide to award a PhD. All you need to know is that it happened. It was their decision to make and that's what they decided. So, I think it was inappropriate to confront your acquaintance the way you did. The only case I can think of where it might matter whether you think someone's dissertation was all that impressive is if you're making a hiring decision. But even then, a PhD is still a PhD even if you personally don't think their work deserved it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This happens a lot and it is partially the fault of the PI and the student's committee. This does undermine PhDs for everyone, but I am sure she didn't feel great trying to get through a PhD with what she had. What you are doing is a bit petty, however. Until you have researched a wide pool of dissertations and compared them in quality...you may find many dissertations do not meet your standards and you cannot simply 'revoke them all'. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/09	878	3,494	<issue_start>username_0: How much is "motivation" a factor in a scientist's work? I find that "motivation" is sometimes underlooked due to the perception of "being unmotivated" being a personal choice or laziness, rather than some valid mental illness or something. OTOH, "motivation" is discussed broadly in e.g. work psychology literature. And therefore it would seem as if it does play a, possibly significant, role. But is there any evidence that supports, just how significant is "motivation"?<issue_comment>username_1: Unless there is concrete evidence of actual malfeasance (plagiarism, fraud, data fabrication or falsification, violation of research ethics standards, etc.) you are out of luck. They managed to convince a doctoral committee to award the degree, that's the end of the story. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: What should one do if they find that someone else has a different opinion than you about something? Usually nothing. A university decided that your acquaintance’s work merits a PhD. That’s their opinion, and their decision to make. The decision is normally irrevocable unless the work the PhD was given for involved actual fraud or serious misconduct. If it is merely mediocre, there isn’t anything anyone can or should do other than silently disapprove. Of course, [another school of thought](https://xkcd.com/386/) says that when someone disagrees with you, the right thing to do is to obsess about it and devote your life to convincing them that they’re wrong and you’re right. Given that this approach is advocated in a satirical xkcd comic, I’ll leave it to you to draw your own conclusions about whether that’s an approach you want to adopt. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: What you should do is, precisely, nothing. A university grants a degree and an individual isn't going to be successful contesting it. Unless you can prove actual academic misconduct and are willing to stand in public and demonstrate it, the only harm will be to yourself. It isn't worth making a lifelong bitter enemy of the "acquaintance" and a bunch of people at the university. It is possible, of course, that the university or some people within it have very low standards, but a complaint, which at base may be just an opinion of the value of it, isn't going to change that. I'm sorry if this isn't what you want to hear, but your anger isn't likely to be requited. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Unless you're on someone's committee, it's really none of your business why a fully accredited school might decide to award a PhD. All you need to know is that it happened. It was their decision to make and that's what they decided. So, I think it was inappropriate to confront your acquaintance the way you did. The only case I can think of where it might matter whether you think someone's dissertation was all that impressive is if you're making a hiring decision. But even then, a PhD is still a PhD even if you personally don't think their work deserved it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This happens a lot and it is partially the fault of the PI and the student's committee. This does undermine PhDs for everyone, but I am sure she didn't feel great trying to get through a PhD with what she had. What you are doing is a bit petty, however. Until you have researched a wide pool of dissertations and compared them in quality...you may find many dissertations do not meet your standards and you cannot simply 'revoke them all'. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/09	1,060	4,300	<issue_start>username_0: Let's say a researcher has a somewhat controversial research project (such as a vaccine challenge trial). Is it considered legal to keep applying for [institutional review board](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_review_board) (IRB) until you eventually get accepted? For example, you [start from this list](https://ohrp.cit.nih.gov/search/irbsearch.aspx) of independent IRBs and go down the line until someone finally approves what you're trying to do. Would the researcher be obligated to disclose rejection from other IRB boards or could they point to the latest approval and consider the permit is given to them to start the project?<issue_comment>username_1: I think this would be difficult to do for most, and also unethical unless changes were made to the proposal after each "try". Difficult, since most researchers are associated with a university who has a single board (perhaps a few for different disciplines). The university won't like research that hasn't passed their own board. There are other boards, of course, but if one of them tells you no and points out ethical flaws in the design, it would be an ethical lapse to try to "shop the proposal" around without change. The ethical flaws remain. Better to modify the design to avoid the issues and go back to the same board. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: From the [FDA](https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda-guidance-documents/institutional-review-boards-frequently-asked-questions): > > 26. If an IRB disapproves a study submitted to it, and it is subsequently sent to another IRB for review, should the second IRB be told of the disapproval? > > > Yes. When an IRB disapproves a study, it must provide a written statement of the reasons for its decision to the investigator and the institution [21 CFR 56.109(e)]. If the study is submitted to a second IRB, a copy of this written statement should be included with the study documentation so that it can make an informed decision about the study. 21 CFR 56.109(a) requires an IRB to "... review ... all research activities [emphasis added] ...." The FDA regulations do not prohibit submission of a study to another IRB following disapproval. However, all pertinent information about the study should be provided to the second IRB. > > > So, at least for research relevant to the FDA (which would include vaccine challenge trials in support of FDA approval), subsequent IRBs would have to learn of previous rejections. It may be possible to work around a particularly stubborn IRB this way, but I doubt an IRB is going to want to approve many studies that have a track record of repeated rejection by others. For multi-site studies governed by the NIH, the new rule is that [one IRB is chosen](https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-16-094.html). It used to be that every site involved had their own IRB that had to approve the study; the new centralized scheme seems like it would be more open to choosing a permissive IRB as the single IRB, but as far as I can tell this has to be chosen ahead of time; you couldn't iterate through each of the site IRBs until you found one that was happy with the proposal. I haven't been through this process, though, so I'm not certain what the explicit protections are there. At my own institution, and I imagine at most every major US research university at least (I have far less familiarity with human subjects research protections outside the US so I can't speak to that), there is only one IRB. Having a solid institutional process for ethical review is one of the criteria that funding agencies consider when awarding grants. You can't go to an independent IRB and overrule your local IRB. There may be different people who review applications but their selection is not up to the researcher. It might be possible for a researcher to shop around at different institutions to house the study, but that's far more unusual than doing the work at their home institution (and would require finding collaborators at all of those other institutions). IRB approval is a bit of an exhausting process, and it isn't as simple as "submit your application -> approved or denied" - there can be a lot of back-and-forth with IRB over gritty details. Upvotes: 4
2021/09/09	585	2,406	<issue_start>username_0: I have attended a university in Russia, and then transferred to Italy, and in Italy they recognized many courses but said to me we can't convert grades, we only recognize courses. Is this a common practice? I find it quite bizarre.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, I have heard universities in North America doing it both ways (giving grades and not giving grades). It might even vary based on what country the grades were from. This may have consequences for what courses taken abroad can count for. Unfortunately, if your university is choosing one way or the other, you aren't likely to get an exemption. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is quite difficult to directly compare grades. For example, in the US, we use an A/B/C/D/F grading scheme, sometimes with pluses or minuses attached. In India, students are graded on a scale from 0 to 100. In Iran, on a scale from 0 to 20. In each case, there is an understanding what exactly, say, a "C" grade means and the people in that culture know how that compares to, say, a typical undergraduate student's knowledge. But it is very hard to know what precisely a 16.5 in the Iranian system means, for example. Unless you have worked there, you won't know and won't be able to judge. It would require knowing what the average in the Iranian system is, and to also know whether the average is the same at all universities, all disciplines, or whether there is a substantial difference between universities. It would also require to know which Iranian universities are good and which aren't. For all of these reasons, you have to expect that in many cases, grades can not be meaningfully translated. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Grade conversion is difficult, but it is essentially a solved problem. Conversion tables should exist, but I don't know about the situation in Italy. In Germany we usually convert all grades, but the question is more difficult than just converting the grade. Other questions are: Is there are corresponding course here? Does it have the number of credits? Coming back to the question "Is it common?": Conversion is surely possible (and is may even be standardized) but many other factors come into play. So the policy "we just accept courses" sounds reasonable. The places I know about convert as many grades as possible (but I know just a few places). Upvotes: 2
2021/09/10	558	2,069	<issue_start>username_0: I have written Professor X (Australia) for a Ph.D. position with my CV (in June) and he asked for 3 reference names in return. I sent it. As I did not write him seeing any advertisement so I waited. Meanwhile, I got busy with my own project and published two of my articles in highly reputed journals in these last three months. I did not get any response from Professor X yet. Should I write him back asking if he's still interested in me? Is it ok if I send him the links to my recent articles?<issue_comment>username_1: > > How can I contact a professor after few months? > > > I would recommend writing a short, concise, email. There are other questions on this site where you might find advice for writing such an email. > > Meanwhile, I got busy with my own project... I did not get any response from Professor X yet. > > > It is possible that your professor has also been busy and has other things on his mind. > > Should I write him back asking if he's still interested in me? > > > If you are still interested in working with him, then yes. > > Is it ok if I send him the links to my recent articles? > > > There should be no harm in including the links, but it might be good to phrase it in a way that requires no obligation on the part of the professor. Something as a progress update ("since we last corresponded, I have published this and this...") might be okay, but I would avoid asking him to read anything in particular. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would actually turn it around a bit. > > Dear Professor X > > > We corresponded most recently a few months ago. I am still > very interested in working with you toward a PhD if it can be made to happen. I haven't been idle in the interim. Following are links to my two most recent published articles. > Please let me know if there is anything that I can do now to make this a reality. > > > Thank you ... > > > Rather than ask if they are interested, just say that you are interested as well as active. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/09/10	889	3,648	<issue_start>username_0: I just enrolled in a CS course and the instructor gave a list of readings for the course. There is a total of 4 books and each book contains around 15+ chapters and around 2 thousand pages and all the chapters of the book cover our course syllabus. But I am now pretty confused about which book to read and how can I prepare for the course? All the books are somewhat similar but I have no Idea How to decide which book to read and How to read the book for the course.<issue_comment>username_1: First, read a little bit from each book (which you borrowed from the library) and see which one you like best. Whose explanations work for you? Which book is working on the level of detail you prefer? If there is no clear cut winner, just pick one. You can also consider factors such as availability in your preferred format (e-book vs paper). Once you have chosen your primary book, read it. If you come across a concept you struggle with, consider reading the relevant part of other books. Something seeing explanations from different perspectives can help. If the lectures bring up a concept not appearing in your primary book, look for it in the others. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: > > It is ridiculous to assume there is anything of immediate value in a CS text. > > Instead, you should read all of Stack Overflow, where the real learning is at! > > > (just kidding) They undoubtedly mean you should treat the books as a reference to look up topics, not read them cover-to-cover, as might be implied, and may assign homework from select topics amongst them. I'd ask the professor to clarify whether they intend to assign specific homework assignments from the books and also ask them or your peers for more specific suggestions of relevant resources. Frequently books in scientific topics have wildly varying (sometimes comically high) prices and often little correlation between price and printing age to quality. Even though they're normally "off-topic" and eventually closed, the Stack Exchange network has dozens of threads of great books in a particular subject. * [The Definitive C Book Guide and List](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/562303/the-definitive-c-book-guide-and-list) * ... I would also personally recommend if this is your first computer science course to approach books on the subject along the lines that most are broadly * mathematically/theory-based and may deal with a very specific theoretical language that is not in common use, but very elegant for the field these tend to be extremely dense and unpleasant to understand at first, but enjoyable when you already have a good base and help with how to think about computer science and especially "formal logic" topics like lambda calculus Essentials of Programming Languages (Freidman, Wand, Haynes) [SICP](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_Interpretation_of_Computer_Programs) (Scheme Lisp) * deal with a particular language or subject (C, Python, C#, GNU/Linux, some particular database dialect) in-depth these tend to be great references, but nigh-impossible to read end-to-end because most of it is irrelevant outside of a niche situation and therefore boring and needless to subject oneself to Linux Programming Interface; Kerrisk * largely tutorials for a particular language these tend to just be a collection of challenges and are best augmented by the above to help explain topics in greater detail Automate the Boring Stuff (free Python text) <http://automatetheboringstuff.com/> The Little Schemer (Scheme Lisp and Friedman (again)) Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/09/10	874	3,956	<issue_start>username_0: I am a research software engineer for a behavioural science research group at a university, currently trying to help my academics with recruiting for and running psychology and economics experiments online. As part of this I have been reviewing the literature in the field and have come across a very useful paper. In the paper, a link is given for the source code and raw data collected by the authors, however the link is dead - it looks like the domain name registration has lapsed. After a cursory internet search, it seems that the author whose domain the materials were hosted on has left academia and now works in industry. A co-author still works in academia though. Both are listed as corresponding authors on the publication, though the latter is marked as "principal corresponding author". In a case like this, who should I approach to ask if accessing the data/source code is still possible? Should I try to contact the author who no longer appears to work in academia, but who seems to have been the one to initially host it? Or should I try to make first contact with the "principal corresponding author" who does still appear to be based at a research university?<issue_comment>username_1: I would guess that the person in academia would be the best person to contact first because 1) they are still ostensibly interested in research, 2) they are listed as the main correspondent contact, and 3) they might be more likely to be checking their email and responding to these types of queries. If they do not have access to the materials that you seek, they should be able to point you in the right direction. In the worst case scenario, you can contact the other author who now works in industry. There seems to be no risk in simply choosing a person and trying to contact them. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Always start with the principal corresponding author, that's why the authors list it. It's both common courtesy and will increase your likelihood of getting a response. That said, two more minor points: * Note that just because someone left academia does not mean they do not engage in research. I've published more since I left the university than when I was in it. * Do keep in mind that material ages quickly, and in some fields very quickly. If they have left the field it is very possible that they don't have their notes, access to original data, access to their academic email correspondence with peers, etc. Heck, their email address probably changed as well, so you may have to hunt for their new one. If the principal author has moved on I would definitely recognize that in your correspondence and be understanding if they can't help you out. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: While this is not a full answer (please convert into a comment if that's the right thing to do here), you may try checking whether the original URL has been archived by the [Internet Archive](https://archive.org). They store copies of various sites going back to the very early era of the Internet, with some possible omissions due to various technical limitations. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The other respondents have properly suggested going to the "principal corresponding author" and that person still appears to be academically active. The PCA may know the current whereabouts of the other author, that is if you need to get the code off him/her. If the PCA has lost contact with the other author, also do a publications search for that author using publication databases in your uni library and/or Google Scholar. This is to find the last known paper from that person and their then employment (affiliation of author) for him/her. Either they still work in that organization or else staff there may know where they went after that. A quick LinkedIn search for the other author using the name and likely interests might flush the party out quick enough. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/10	1,847	7,564	<issue_start>username_0: I apologize in advance for such a long and possibly bizarre question. I have tried to find an answer to this issue but could not find it anywhere. First I want to provide some context. I was a student taking an alternate high school education program to the one my area’s schoolboard offered. This program administers standardized assessments on an international scale and awards a diploma upon completion. For a report that I submitted in this program, I remember being worried that I may have violated academic integrity rules. The program punishes plagiarism sternly when proven (the guilty loses their diploma or the ability to earn it + receives a grade of 0 in the subject for which the report was submitted) and can apply punishments retroactively, although examples of this are very rare. After submission, I remember asking my teacher on several occasions about concerns I had with my paper, which, in retrospect, I should have asked before submission. Each time, the teacher said that what I had done was not a violation. I asked questions about this so often because my handling of references was so dubious in that report that I kept finding new problems with it. I was so obsessed and anxious about this issue for months. I was extremely worried and consumed by the feeling that my future was in jeopardy and this made me spend hours daily examining my report for issues, doing research about plagiarism, etc. whilst rehearsing my "defenses" for perceived infringements in the report. Eventually, I was able to move on with support from family and friends. Nothing ultimately ever came of the submission of that report; I completed the program and successfully got into university the year after and received an admissions scholarship. At the time I was happy about this and the issue of my report was not really on my mind. Currently, I’m going into my senior year of undergrad. By all measures, I have been cautious to a fault when it comes to academic integrity in all my time as a university student, so I believe I learned my lesson. However, whenever I get reminded of the report, I become very worried, like I have been for the last few weeks. The reason that I feel worried is because there were a few unresolved concerns that I never brought up, mostly because I felt regret for pestering my teacher who had been exceedingly patient. I worry about it now because there was an idea/technique used in the report that I feel I should have referenced (before, I thought that the idea I used was “obvious” and didn’t need to be referenced). I say “feel” because I am going by my fallible recollection of what I did several years ago. The program does somewhat vet these reports through graders (the teachers) and plagiarism checkers. Although I would say it is incredibly unlikely for me to be retroactively punished for that report, I feel as if I deserve to be penalized because I do not have confidence that that report was tolerable from an academic integrity standpoint. If I lost my diploma and the university was notified of it now or in the future, I fear that the university could respond in turn by expelling me, revoking my degree, depriving me of my scholarships, etc. But that is speculation on my part, I don't know what the university would do about that. That it is really unlikely that this outcome would occur is not reassuring, because I honestly cannot bear the thought that the university I attend would boot me if it was ever notified that I had been stripped of my diploma, which is perhaps what I deserve. I feel terrible because I just want to earn my degree with a clear conscience and I feel that that is not possible given what happened in the past. Frankly, this whole issue makes me feel like there’s no point in working hard anymore because I may not even deserve to attend my university to begin with. Whenever I get reminded about this issue I worry about it for weeks at a time until I'm too busy to worry about it. I cannot take this anymore; I really need some help and insight if anyone could offer that.<issue_comment>username_1: You are suffering from an irrational fear. From an academic perspective, I can only tell you that the point to move on from the referencing in your report was somewhere between submitting it and the first few questions you asked your teacher. I suppose you already know this, although a part of your mind is refusing to accept it. As the issue is ultimately not an academic one, an academic mentor is not the qualified person to help you. Please seek support from a mental health counsellor, a therapist or a doctor. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: tl;dr 1. We will not be able to know with certainty whether or not what you have done constitutes an academic integrity violation; however, it seems as though you did not commit a violation. 2. Seeking professional help from a doctor, therapist, or mental health counselor might help you in this situation. --- Let's walk through your story step by step: > > Each time, the teacher said that what I had done was not a violation. > > > Strangers on the internet will not be able to confirm whether or not your past actions constituted plagiarism, however it seems as though you have taken measures to figure this out (with positive results). > > By all measures, I have been cautious to a fault when it comes to academic integrity in all my time as a university student, so I believe I learned my lesson. > > > This is, in my opinion, the most important outcome of your situation. Academic integrity is important, and plagiarism is plagiarism whether or not it is intentional. However, students (especially those in high school) make honest mistakes. The important thing is to learn good practices and use them moving forward. It looks like you've done this part very well. > > I worry about it now because there was an idea/technique used in the report that I feel I should have referenced (before, I thought that the idea I used was “obvious” and didn’t need to be referenced). > > > Again, strangers on the internet will not be able to tell you whether or not this lack of reference constitutes plagiarism. But according to what you say next > > The program does somewhat vet these reports through graders (the teachers) and plagiarism checkers. > > > it seems like you have not committed any academic integrity issues because your submission has met the standards of your program. > > I feel terrible because I just want to earn my degree with a clear conscience and I feel that that is not possible given what happened in the past. > > > It is your high school's job to judge what occurred during your tenure there. They have judged your performance to be adequate. It is your university's job to judge what happens during your tenure there. Given that you are in your senior year, they have been judging your performance to be adequate. Moreover, you have learned from your experience in high school and you are taking extra measures to ensure that your performance is good. > > I cannot take this anymore; I really need some help and insight if anyone could offer that. > > > I hope that this answer has offered insight. I think that help should come from a licensed doctor, therapist, or mental health counselor (which I am not). But from an academic perspective, it seems as though your situation is fine. > > Would these be adequate grounds for severe reprimand from my undergraduate program? > > > No. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/10	535	2,378	<issue_start>username_0: I did my Masters (by Research) from a premier institute in India. I had taken 6 courses and the rest of the time was dedicated to research. All the research and collaboration was done only with my advisor. Now, almost all the universities ask for 3 recommendation letters for PhD applications. But I have only worked with my advisor and published a paper too. So my advisor would be able to write me a good recommendation letter based on his experience with me. How do I manage to get the other two recommendation letters? I have done only courses with other faculties and no small projects. I am aware that based on just courses and grades, these professors might not be able to write good recommendation letters.<issue_comment>username_1: It doesn't have to be only people who've observed your research work. Pick instructors who know you from classes where you did well. Best if it was a small upper division class with especially relevant content and where the instructor got to know you well, e.g., in office hours, and can report some detailed observations of your work and ability. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Good PhD candidates aren’t necessarily the ones who have lots of research experience. What you want are referees who will not repeat information that you already supply on your CV or that is already supplied in your transcript. Given that you are early in your career, nobody expects you will necessarily have 3 referees that will speak to your research activity. Presumably there are others who can speak to your work ethics, industry, autonomy, punctuality, resourcefulness, tenacity and other qualities that would make you a good PhD student. Such people might include professors from which you took courses (especially if you did projects or term papers in a course), your department chair, even people with whom you recently worked outside of academia. Remember: supervisors don’t necessarily look for “machines”, but for humans who will interact constructively with others. Maybe you had a chance to do some marking in a course, or ran a tutorial or a lab section in a course; the instructor for this course can function as a referee. Maybe you worked part time in a shop and the manager can speak to your ability to deal with people or customers politely, correctly and efficiently. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/10	2,381	10,252	<issue_start>username_0: I have been on the faculty of a liberal arts college for over 20 years and have the rank of full professor. I have started to look for other academic jobs because of my college's financial problems, which are well known locally. I'm fortunate to be in a field closely related to computer science, so the academic (and industry) job market is good in my metropolitan area, which is where I'm limiting my search to. The only positions I've seen advertised in my field are at the assistant professor level. I would be willing to work at that rank, if the conditions (pay, course load, environment, etc.) are otherwise attractive. (I've been underpaid and over-stressed in my current job.) Of course, I would rather be hired at a higher rank and closer to tenure evaluation. Should I mention my hope of being hired at a higher level in my cover letter or wait until I am asked about it or given an offer? I have also reached out to faculty at local institutions. While some of encouraged me to apply for advertised positions, none has offered to create a position for me. EDIT My question is not: * Am I likely to succeed at being hired at a higher rank? * What other positions should I apply for? * What should I do besides applying directly for positions? I am asking, given my goals, what should I say, if anything, in my cover letter about being willing to consider an assistant professor position 6 years from tenure, as advertised, but preferring to be hired at a higher rank?<issue_comment>username_1: I think your plan as written is (nearly) infeasible. I doubt that you will find such an accommodation. And you won't find a suitable salary even if someone wanted to take you on. The market is insane at the moment. Instead, I would try to seek a position, with a short tenure clock (2 years, say). I'd suggest that you "offer" to drop in rank to Associate, but no further, and only if necessary. I would, instead of applying through the normal system initially, write directly to department heads, explaining the fact that your current place is likely to fail. Write as a colleague, one professor to another. Ask what might be possible. They will have to make some exceptions to hire you in any case. But to make even this possible, you would need to look fairly broadly and be willing and able to move. Don't limit it to just liberal arts colleges, though research universities might be out of reach unless you have an exceptional research record. If you have kept up your connections through, say, conferences, collaborations, and such, try to exploit those connections to find some allies who can work on your behalf. If your own department head is an ally, ask them for help in introducing you to other heads. Don't sell yourself short. Sell yourself as a potentially valuable member of the faculty. If your current institution is primarily a teaching college, note that some very top institution (Duke, Stanford, ...) have a special faculty category, sometimes called Professor of the Practice" that focuses on undergraduate teaching. They do a lot of that and want to free up the research faculty. The positions I know of aren't tenured but, rather, long term contracts that can be very stable. They expect a very high standard as you would expect. --- Edited to add. The main problem I see is that a regular application for assistant professor is so "odd" or "off the wall" that nothing you could say in the cover letter is likely to overcome the strangeness of it. Offers for junior faculty are usually governed by rules that would make this idea preposterous. They are looking for "fresh" faces just out of grad school, not experienced people - either teachers or scholars. A few adverts are more open that the rank is negotiable, but if it specifies Assistant Professor level, they almost certainly want someone at the beginning of their career. You on the other hand, can fill in a different sort of need for some as a mid-career experienced person, likely focused more on teaching than research. In any case, I hope you find success, however you arrange it. --- Thinking again, overnight: You may have considered this also, of course, but you are at the perfect time in your career to move in to administration at some level. Many large universities, even (or especially) R1 universities might have a position like "Associate Chair for Undergraduate Instruction". Math and CS departments tend to be rather large and have lots of courses taught by TAs, for example. Someone with 20 years experience at a Liberal Arts college knows a lot about the curriculum requirements and, I suspect, quality teaching. There might even be some opportunities at the level of Assistant Dean for an experienced academic. A couple of the "Professor of Practice" people that I know have actually wound up with oversight of the undergraduate program. Some people at the "chair" level even get to (or are required to) teach a course or two, if that is especially appealing to you. Furthermore, accepting such a position would probably leave your academic rank unchanged, though tenure rules for administrators might be different. Often, though, administrators retain tenure "as faculty", even if not "as administrators". Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your plan seems to me to be related to the general debate around hiring employees who are overqualified. There is a [strong belief](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/q/30544/71681) among employers that being overqualified for a position is an undesirable trait in a job candidate, and that hiring such employees is generally not a good idea. The good news for you is that from a legal point of view, there [appears to be no justification](https://www.ere.net/refusing-to-hire-overqualified-candidates-a-myth-that-can-hurt-your-firm/) for rejecting a job candidate on the grounds of their being overqualified. Thus, in an ideal world, a law-abiding institution will want to treat your assistant professor application just like any other and evaluate you based on merit. The bad news is that in academia very few people know or care about this legal issue. The general stigma against overqualified employees translates in the academic context to a strong resistance to “hiring down”, and to many rationalizations that people bring up to support why they think hiring an already tenured professor for an untenured position is a terrible idea. And, in all honesty, I think that while some of the arguments supporting this are invalid, there is some legitimate room to argue that a less experienced candidate for an assistant professor position may be more qualified than one with a higher level of experience to satisfy the department’s long term needs. The point is that academic faculty jobs are filled for a much longer time than other sorts of jobs; thus the definition of who counts as “overqualified” is much more tricky to pin down, and the legal situation I mentioned may not be obviously applicable. The bottom line is, I think your plan is very unlikely to work. You will almost certainly not be offered an assistant professor position. In the unlikely event that you are offered one, it will be for a much lower salary than your current one (which given what you said about wanting the pay to be attractive, sounds like a non-starter). And you will not be offered a position for a rank that is different than what the department advertised, since nowadays that is considered in most places to be a legally fraught practice, and since departments generally mean what they say when they advertise that they are looking to fill a specific type of position. Sorry for this somewhat pessimistic answer. Good luck in any case. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Based on my experience going through many, many rounds of recruiting and hiring Computer Science faculty at liberal arts colleges, I do have some thoughts to share. * As I'm sure you are aware, there are some job postings that are listing a desire for candidates at "all levels", but if it doesn't list that, it doesn't mean that there is no possibility of them being interested in your application. We occasionally had such language in job postings, but since experienced applicants are generally few and most people on the (CS) faculty market are relatively junior, it was easier to get the standard wording approved for posting. * When applying, be sure to explain why you are thinking of leaving a tenured position at a possible peer institution. I have unfortunately seen people downgrade an application because they thought that the candidate wasn't serious about the application -- probably was assuming that they were looking for an outside offer to push for a raise in their current institution. * Every hire requires negotiation with the administration, especially around salary and tenure clock. In your case, it might be a bigger ask for salary and include a title change. But what is flexible or not is different at each institution and during each hiring cycle. You can't really know what the limits are in advance. Now in terms of your specific question "Should I mention my hope of being hired at a higher level in my cover letter or wait until I am asked about it or given an offer?" Based on your comments, I would say that you should not. I think that you should do so only if you are unwilling to accept any position other than what you specify. I.e., they should not consider you unless they get approval to hire at the level/salary you are requesting. Otherwise, that will be something that can be discussed during the phone interview, etc. and likely would be one of the first questions asked. I have seen many different models where senior candidates start at a new institution. Some come in with tenure, some with a couple years before going up for tenure, etc. I have even seen one senior hire where they came in at full Professor level and were immediately put up for tenure. I'm more optimistic about your prospects than the answer from username_1, but I do agree with many of their suggestions in their answer in terms of being open to alternate opportunities. Best of luck to you in your search. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
2021/09/11	622	2,623	<issue_start>username_0: I applied for a post doc position in the USA. My interview was done with the PI and I had one-on-one interactions with all the lab members ten days ago. He then unofficially offered me the position and discussed the salary. I sent him a thanks reply the next day, but I got no reply from him. Later I asked him for a meeting because he wanted to interact one more time, but he said “Everything is in the hand of HR, and I have no additional information. If you want to ask questions about our group or work we can certainly arrange a meeting”. I want to know: how much time does HR take usually? He had said (before my interview) that he was taking interviews of other candidates too. Do PIs usually submit a list of multiple candidates to HR? Does priority based selection occur in these cases? Please enlighten me.<issue_comment>username_1: PIs decide what candidate to hire and will tell HR to continue the process with only one candidate. It's up to the PI to decide, not to HR Good luck Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: * It would be very dishonest for a PI to tell a candidate that they have the job while actually offering the job to somebody else. There's no reason to assume that the PI is dishonest, so you can assume that you have a job. * In my experience it's quite common for the administrative process to take a few weeks (even more), I wouldn't worry too much about it. Congrats :) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: HR isn't involved in choosing between candidates. That decision is made mainly by the PI, though it may also need the agreement of some other official such as a department chair, dean, etc. But once the academic personnel have made their decision, HR is only responsible for the bureaucratic process of hiring the selected candidate. So if your name has gone to HR, it means they want you and nobody else. HR can in principle veto a candidate if they find some reason why they should not be hired at all (ineligible for work visa, criminal record, lied on CV, etc) but they have nothing to do with evaluating academic or technical qualifications. The time needed for this process may vary depending on the university's internal processes, HR workload and staffing levels, general bureaucratic efficiency, etc. I would say that if you haven't received an offer letter within 2-3 weeks of when they said your file was with HR, then ask for an update. In some cases this letter might be sent by postal mail, so make sure that mail sent to the address on your application will reach you (or give the university an updated address if needed). Upvotes: 3
2021/09/12	2,128	8,394	<issue_start>username_0: I will probably not be accepted to the Master of Cognitive Sciences program this year at a university in my country, but I don't want to lose my passion for learning and waste my time. So, I made an announcement on a website as a volunteer advertisement, as shown below: > > I will probably not be accepted in the Master of Cognitive Sciences > this year, so I made this announcement so that I can be aware of the > courses and the educational path of this field and not miss the > pleasure of learning and new job opportunities in this field. > > > If you are accepted in this field and want to accompany an interested > person, please send me a message on the way to learning the first and > second semester courses of this field. > > > Also, I have a Telegram group in which there are some people who are interested in learning and connecting with students from foreign universities in various fields, like the below chat ([link](https://t.me/joinchat/CKfLihBFpO0yr44CvxicJA)) : [enter image description here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/R3KEA.jpg) How do I better advertise my intent to find a community for accessing the courses (without paying tuition) in my desired field of study? What is the probability of actually finding and accessing these courses without being a student of the university? Are there any rules to be kept in mind? Update 1: Based of [this question answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5008/about-saving-one-question-for-others-access-google-index-and), I am trying to add more details and will answer to the below question: > > 1. What is your plan for after the program finishes? Will you apply to > the program again? Will you try to get jobs by claiming that you've > done all this self-study? > 2. Why do you need to follow along with a particular course at all? Why > not just buy some textbooks? > 3. If you succeed in connecting with a student who got admitted to a > university in your field, what do you want them to do for you? > > > So : 1- I am working as a freelancer and studied the M.Sc. at Biomedical engineer which like continuing my academic education with is related to my job field, so I will apply for University entrance exam in the Cognitive science with my new trained wights (or will apply for another academic field exam. The reason for this action is online academic opportunity and my eagerness to be updated and connected with university and its connection (teachers, students, facilities like labs and ...). 2- As I described, the connections and facilities of university and being in an academic environment is important for me (One of our masters had said every 4 year engineering science fundamentally would change, and I have seen this in my 10 years Absenting and not being in academic programs). 3- In this connection I Hope to have access to : * accessing to public and predefined program contents, like course syllabus, references, power points. * Also, if they don't have copyright problem or ... accessing to class video recorded, but we could cover the course information on the internet source from online course equivalents like said at the `<NAME>` answer (Coursera, EDx, or ...). * And be in connection with them for team working on their exams and course experiment by our more desired field of study and courses, this features give us more access to the teachers and academic facilities and help us to newer connection and networks. * Also, if possible, I like to have some connection with them for reviewing the course or asking about the misunderstanding parts of courses by creating some online group like skype for some meeting at the end of weekends. Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: Sadly, I think your chances are not good for finding individuals to work with you. At least in the way you seem to be suggesting. You would need to be able to offer something in return. And you might just be a distraction for someone actually taking courses. It might also be breaking rules for a student to collaborate with an outsider on some things. But, self study is always possible at low cost. You can purchase used text books, for example, and work through them. Many universities have online lists of the curriculum and online syllabus for each course, perhaps including suggested/required books. Note that the exercises in the books are, perhaps, more important than the text, so focus on those, especially, though I don't know if that is possible in your field. A carefully tailored YouTube search for topic keywords might turn up some videos/lectures for some things. You don't say why you can't be admitted "this year". If it is a larger problem, then you need to spend effort on rethinking your career overall. But for a short term problem you might consider trying to work in one of the (many) fields covered by your main topic, gaining some experience. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: > > If you are accepted in this field and want to accompany an interested > person, please send me a message on the way to learning the first and > second semester courses of this field. > > > Take inspiration from <NAME> who did something similar with MIT. A student from MIT did give him access to the extra materials he needed, but that was never a major concern for Scott. <https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/myprojects/mit-challenge-2/> I think you should emulate some of what he did. Target a good school with lots of publicly available materials already. Keep a blog (or a vlog or a wiki), to document your progress and keep yourself accountable. Cultivate your own ecosystem of like-minded individuals, as you're already doing with your group on Telegram. If you're missing some materials that first week, ask for what you need, but don't ask a perfect stranger for a commitment of two semesters. That's asking for a lot. Give anyone who helps you the option to leave you if they get too busy. In other words, use a broadcast medium like Twitter, a blog, or a Discord server to broadcast your progress and talk about the materials you're missing. Also, don't depend entirely on someone else's access to achieve your goals. That's leaving too much to chance. I mean you'll probably find a registered student who is going to help you, but you should plan to keep your momentum going -- even if that doesn't happen. Here is someone else's take Scott's MIT challenge. He even has some step by step instructions for doing something similar. > > How do do the Learning Challenge (the MIT Challenge adapted for MOOCs > and 21st century) > > > 1. Degree and syllabus discovery > > > Find a particular area that is closely > related to an MIT undergraduate or graduate course. > > > 2. Define your learning goals > > > Understand and define clearly why you are > trying to learn this area; define clear goals and projects to be > executed related to it, in order to successfully complete the > challenge. > > > 3. Build your own syllabus > > > Based on these projects, look into the > Departmental Program requirements for acquiring a major in this area > from MIT. You do not need to do the entire course, just look into the > recommended readings, videos, and assignments you are interested in, > and complement those with content from other universities/courses. > Unless you feel uncomfortable doing so, skip the General Institute > Requirements entirely, as well as any communication-intensive > requirements (CI-M). > > > 4. Get your courses > > > Find online course equivalents from each subject you > are interested in for acquiring this “virtual major”; these can be > found in the MIT OCW itself, Coursera, EDx, or another equivalent. The > course can come from any university, not just from MIT. > > > 5. Enjoy your journey > > > Execute all the courses, interact as much as > possible with peers, and complete all your defined projects. Compare > your performance with official solutions (if available) and ask for > peers to review them (if they are available). > > > [...] > > > <https://thelearningtab.com/en/the-mit-challenge-my-own-take/> > > > Also, I'd suggest you take a look at this blog post and scroll down. She found several other examples of people who created their own degree. <https://vocal.media/education/polyinnovator> Upvotes: 2
2021/09/12	1,276	5,799	<issue_start>username_0: My colleague is an expert in biology. Using his data, I have developed a new algorithm that could change the way we explore data in general (not only in biology). I wrote a manuscript explaining the algorithm and submitted it to a highly ranked computer sciences-related journal. Later, I got comments from peer-reviewers asking for a major revision. Basically, they ask to test my algorithm on benchmark data, other than those related to biology. This is apparently important to compare my results with those obtained from similar algorithms. At this point, I think of changing the way the paper has been written so that it doesn't focus much (or not at all) on the biologic data since they were only used to test the algorithm. To this end, I also think of removing the name of my co-author (the biologist) - he essentially helped describing/interpreting a bit the results, nothing more. We discussed the eventuality that I remove his name already but he doesn't care too much if I do so as I am already involved in another project with him (biology-oriented). Can I remove the name of someone when re-submitting a manuscript? I planned to contact the main editor directly about it prior to re-submitting.<issue_comment>username_1: Given what you say, it seems acceptable to remove them provided that you assure yourselves that the resulting paper has no fundamental intellectual contributions from the other person remaining. That might be easy or hard to do, but seems possible here. A supporting point is that they are both comfortable with it and also willing to continue collaboration with you on future projects. The paper sounds sufficiently different that their contribution may not rise to the level of authorship. I do, strongly, suggest that you write a nice acknowledgement section, thanking them for help on earlier versions of the paper. You will probably (both) need to assure the editor that this is the appropriate path. If they strongly object, then re-think it. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As @username_1's answer says, it is probably acceptable, given that it seems you are intending to revise into a fundamentally different paper, where your colleague's contribution is no longer really present. However: are you sure you are correctly interpreting the feedback given? We can't know the specifics here, but in general testing a novel algorithm against benchmark data as well as using it in a real-life application should both be interesting. So I would perhaps even test with the editor whether they do really seek a revision that replaces the biological data or would merely prefer adding the benchmark data. In the latter case, I assume your colleague would stay a co-author noncontroversially. Of course, perhaps the feedback is already clear on this point. Finally, I've been lucky that I've worked in fields and with employers who haven't applied absurd algorithms to judge research productivity and given only "partial credit" for co-authors. So I've been free to be generous with co-authorships. In particular, in interdisciplinary work, I've routinely worked with people in other fields where we've co-authored (with permuted order, perhaps) multiple articles each adapted to the priorities and writing conventions of our respective disciplines. We've included each other as coauthors since we actively intellectually collaborated on doing the research as a whole, irrespective of precisely whose data or written words were front and centre in each article. So I would put the bar pretty high to remove a collaborator as coauthor -- basically, you have to feel you did the real work for the article without them, merely inspired by your previous collaboration. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A couple of considerations in addition to what has been posted so far: * Many journals do not allow for changes in the author list during the revision process, with or without the co-author's approval. It is prudent to have a conversation with the Editor-in-Chief about your plan first. * It is possible that the Editor-in-Chief sees the changes you plan to make as so significant that the paper should be withdrawn and re-submitted as a new manuscript. If you don't want this to happen you are kind of walking a fine line - you want to convince the EiC that your changes are sufficient to make the biology co-author unnecessary, but not so significant that the earlier reviews you have already received are invalidated (one of the assumptions of peer review is that revisions are indeed revisions of the same idea / paper, not a completely different paper with different framing and different goals - and your description sounds dangerously close to the latter). Personally, I would be a bit concerned about this discussion backfiring on you in unexpected ways. It's not unusual for peer review to inspire you with new and better ways to do the same kind of work, or give you ideas how to achieve your original goals in a much better way. However, what one typically does then is to finish the current iteration of the work, and then start working on the improvement afterwards and submit it as a new paper (e.g., as a generalisation that builds on your earlier biology case, in your example). This is particularly true since the editor asked for a revision (rather than a rejection), which indicates that they do see value in the current iteration of the work. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I wouldn't do that. That coauthorship doesn't look granted for free, considering the history of the manuscript. Unless the paper was rejected, but it does not seem to be the case. And personally, even resubmitting what would look a different paper I would likely maintain that person in the coauthor list. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/12	500	2,037	<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently working on adapting my statement of purpose from the 2020-2021 admissions cycle for use in the current cycle. Since the last cycle, much has changed. As a result of a severe ulnar nerve impingement (which randomly flared up), I had limited use of my dominant hand for the last few months. I left a job (which was related to my field) and didn't take classes over the summer. Currently, I'm enrolled in 2 courses (graded S/U, since I cannot even use my dominant hand at all) and auditing 1, all of which are relevant to my field. I've since had an operation to repair this, which has put my dominant hand in even more inoperable condition temporarily. Clearly, I need to address this in my admissions packet somewhere, but I'm not quite sure where or how. Should it figure prominently into my statement of purpose? Should it be a bullet point on my resume? I feel that if written well, this could even potentially help me build a good narrative. Any advice is appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: The Statement of Purpose is not the best place for that. Make the SoP about the future: plans and goals. The CV is about the past. If there is a cover letter, then it might be mentioned there. But if the job you left is on the CV, then you might mention there that you had to leave for medical reasons. But the SoP is not best used to explain any deficiencies. It needs to project that you have a plan for the future, both the degree and thereafter. If you mention it anywhere, and it may not be necessary for a short break, be prepared for questions about it. At most, a short phrase introducing how you were a fantastic success in xyzzy in spite of dealing with nerve damage in the hand. But just a phrase. Elsewhere is better, however and not the focus of the SoP. No one will accept you because they are sorry for you. They accept you if they can predict your future success. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It can go into a personal statement, not a statement of purpose. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/13	922	3,794	<issue_start>username_0: So I'm interested in a PhD in math, and my research area is in set theory. Kind of a niche place to be. Forcing, large cardinals, determinacy, etc. I know that the biggest schools (Carnegie Mellon, Ivies, MIT, etc.) have these researchers, but I'm not sure where to start searching for these programs? Is there any place to search for PhD programs by the fields of mathematics they sponsor? If you know anything about contemporary set theory, you could chime in, but even if not, let me know what the best ways to search for faculty are.<issue_comment>username_1: The American Math Society does publish something about recent PhD's, but I'd be mildly surprised if it were searchable. The math genealogy project has an "advanced search" that can indeed search with many different filters. I'd look for "set theory" PhD's in the last 5 years (or so), and see where they were granted. Then filter those places on "exclusiveness" if that is a concern... which is entirely reasonable, after all. Faculty at your current place should have some idea about that exclusivity, even if they don't know current events in set theory. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are two basic approaches that I think might yield good results for you. My first suggestion would be to try and find some relatively recent publications in the field of study you are interested in pursuing. This would give you some specific faculty to consider/contact. Even more importantly, these faculty are active researchers in the field and if they have grad student co-authors, that bodes well for the students who study under them. The second is that research areas tend to be small communities. If you happen to have a contact in that field, perhaps one of your professors at your current institution or one identified from publications as described above, they likely can give you names of others to contact. Most educators are interested in helping out students and would be willing to share their expertise, but do spend some time doing research on your own beforehand that you could share. E.g., "I saw publications by Dr. X at School A and Dr. Y at School B, but do you know of anyone else I should be considering?" Keep in mind that not all professors are taking on new graduate students and not all "big names" in the field are active researchers. I'm sure there are a number of other questions on here that talk about how to pick an advisor. But that's a problem to tackle once you know what your options might be. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. If you want to find top schools, US News and World report ranks graduate programs in math, and it lists top schools by discipline. In particular, one of the disciplines it has is Logic: <https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-science-schools/logic-rankings> These rankings don't necessarily match too closely with expert opinions, but it gives you one place to start looking. 2. For finding more schools, Math Departments often have Faculty Research Interests pages, so can just do a web search for something like > > mathematics departments faculty research interests "set theory" > > > My search engine of choice results in a lot of different schools/faculty. 3. If you know active faculty in the area, ask them for suggestions. Or if you don't, you can look websites of recent conferences in Set Theory and see where people are from. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: The AMS has a "Find a Graduate Program" website that lets you search by very broad categories. See <https://www.ams.org/find-graduate-programs?prog_type=PHD> Unfortunately, the categories are relatively broad and none of them mention Set Theory. This says something about the current level of interest in Set Theory. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/13	4,268	17,454	<issue_start>username_0: Background: I am a Math Ph.D. student in the U.S. (originally from a developing nation) in partial differential equations (PDEs) but on the theoretical side of PDEs (no simulation, no numerical). I am starting my 7th year, and my advisor is expecting me to graduate this year. I am on the job market now for a postdoc. I have 5 publications so far, 2 arxiv preprints, and 3 peer-reviewed in okay-ish journals (not high impact). I am an international student as well. Summarize the problem Academic jobs are hard to find and I want to stay in the U.S. After a while of looking into the industry without any results, I am now losing both motivation and hope for academia as well as an industry job. 6 months ago when talking about jobs (we all know how hard it is for jobs in academia), my advisor has been very pessimistic. I am advised to apply to all countries, around the world, for any postdoc listing I find. Through the conversation, I did not feel I can make it, therefore I started to lose my motivation and hope. I want to stay in the U.S., for the following reasons: * I could go back to be a lecturer in my home country with very low pay and a high teaching load. However, if it is the case, I think getting a postdoc, having more experience and connections for later collaborations when I am back is much better. I mentioned this to my advisor but I did not feel being supported. * I can make more money going to the industry here (if I am lucky to find a job), at least for a couple of years. My family is dirt poor and as a Ph.D., I was not able to support them at all for the last 10 years (undergrad + Ph.D. salary). What I have tried: So I started to look into the industry, as it is a natural thing to do. I first did a Bootcamp in Data Science and I bombed it hard, the pace was too fast and I fairly lost. I believe I can learn them, but not quickly enough in 3 weeks (the span of the Bootcamp). I then tried Software Developer, taught myself using online courses and open sources projects. I have been trying to apply to some internships but have not been successful. I found myself panic every time looking at the job posting and see how under-qualified I am. Back to Academia: I recently sort of having a verbal offer for a postdoc. However, after a couple of months of losing motivation in research and academia, I cannot seem to pick myself up again imaging I can be good at a postdoc. At the moment I just want to be out, but I am not sure if it is a good idea or I am just hate everything due to burnt out. I am extremely scared of making a big mistake and regret it later in life. I do not feel confident that I can land a TT position with this mindset and this level of motivation (assuming I can do 2 postdocs). Somewhere inside me, I am still having fun doing some of the projects I have left unfinished, but I am not sure if it is just a comfort zone, doing something I am comfortable doing to avoid looking at real life. I want to comment that, I do not feel the work I do, while they are fun to me, are of interest or that helpful to many fellow mathematicians. I do not have a sense of fulfillment. However, I had a naive "dream" that given I have a permanent job, I can learn anything and make significant achievements in some related areas of Math. I realize this is a fantasy. Resentments I hate being poor and lonely. I am approaching 30 without any relationship (even friendships). Throughout my life, I kept thinking about publishing and publishing, people will treat me better. I always have the sense of being worse than people, it really messes me up when trying to socialize and make friends. So, just like many other mathematicians I know, I followed them and isolate myself in the office, trying to write more and more papers, and thinking this is what defines me. I am sad. Questions Do you have any advice for me to figure out what do I really want? Or just to lessen the tremendous stress I am having, which causes "analysis paralysis" to me?<issue_comment>username_1: Let me just comment on what you say towards the end, wich I believe is the root of your predicament. > > I hate being poor and lonely. I am approaching 30 without any relationship (even friendships). Throughout my life, I kept thinking about publishing and publishing, people will treat me better. ... [I kept] thinking this is what defines me. I am sad. > > > People can thrive without a great job, but they wither in isolation. You're revealing an important insight here, which is: No amount of publication and hardwork has brought you closer to positive and nourishing relations (people who "treat you better"). Now is a good time to reconsider your actions and future "life decisions" in view of this insight. Your academic accolades (or perceived lack thereof) are not what defines you. Relationships are much more important in this regard for most people. It can be hard to get a broader perspective on what matters for you from within the thicket of everyday academic bustle. When was the last time you got on a bike or swam in a river? When was the last time you talked the night away with someone who doesn't speak math? If these examples strike a chord with you, I encourage you to take care of these human needs first, because it sounds like you haven't in a while. Perhaps this is incompatible with your larger career plans and you may decide to put them aside for a while. But maybe not. The happier I am with my life, the more curious I get about my work. YMMV. Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Maybe you could consider to look for a job that combines both math and social interaction, something like school teacher? you could stay some time there and go back to academia in the future, or switch to the industry later. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: A lot of years ago I worked with man-in-the-loop and hardware-in-the-loop simulators as a real-time computer vendor helping customers make use of the platform and tools. Two hard problems which were unsolved at the time - flight near the ground (take off and landing, generally altitude below the wing-span of the aircraft) and pot-holes (specifically simulating anti-lock breaking systems). These both involve numerical heuristics derived from PDE because of a lot of features that are not solvable analytically. The arena of simulation has not contracted, just the computers and tools are no longer "special" and I've moved on to other modalities. To my mind, having a theoretical understanding of PDEs might provide insights into providing better numerical estimates for simulations. Certainly there is a way to find a field of simulation that needs improved modelling. Anything involving turbulence in fluids comes to mind. Most programming is aimed at the bottom of the math capabilities, but there are computing environments that work at a higher level, such as Mathematica. Don't do programming from the bottom-up, but from the top-down, where your experience and skills are more appropriate. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Just focus on getting your PhD submitted and successfully defended. It's clearly high time you had a talk with your supervisor. He's allowed a 4 year program to advance to 7 years and that alone reflects very badly on him/her. If this supervisor doesn't display enough urgency about your situation, go straight to the Head of Department: this thing can't be allowed to drag on and on. Your PhD must be your priority. But mosey on down to the campus careers office some day and have a conversation with the adviser for your department as they will know all the avenues for people with your type of experience. EDIT I incorrectly suggested USA PhD programs were typically 4 years long. In fact it is 4 - 6 years usually. But still and all, it's time to finish at year 7. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm a current software engineer in the bay area, and have a similar background (without the phd) as you. I've wanted to do physics since I was 8, but after graduating with my bachelors I felt there isn't much future and definitely no money in academia. My friend's internship pay as an undergrad software engineer for 12 weeks is higher than my expected annual income fresh out of PhD. I then spent a few years working in different academic research labs while doing a masters in CS and preparing for and interviewing for jobs, before landing one. First, I will not depend on what your professor says or recommends. The way I see it, the kind of person who will become a professor is not the kind who thinks about money, or a profitable career. Many academics are also dismissive towards money and folks earning a high salary. The fact that your prof allows you to do a 7 year phd program without a career plan suggests to me they don't give a shit about your career, or about what you want, since you raising this question suggests you don't want an academic career by this stage. Second, you mis-interpret what a bootcamp is nowadays. A bootcamp is not only time for learning, 8 weeks don't make an app developer. A bootcamp, for the reputable ones, is an assessment centre, for someone who have spent 1-2+ years polishing their skills to have someone assess them so they can use that qualification to sell themselves, their ideas, and apply for jobs. The less reputable ones are not helpful, not because they don't teach you anything, but because the value of the bootcamp comes from their prestige and connections with potential employers. Hone your skills before spending your time and money going in, otherwise it's a waste of the latter and a stressful use of the former. Third, as people have said, definitely finish your phd. Fourth, in my opinion, there are 2 goals you can aim for. First, a generic software engineering ("swe") position. Your selling point will be your quantitative skills. I would keep this as a backup option. If you have only a bachelors in maths, sure, phd you can probably aim for something more relevant, especially since yours is pretty applied and relevant. But I have seen it work. Second, data or research scientist positions. Brush up on your software engineering skills, tech companies generally still want these roles to have decent coding skills, though the bar is definitely lower than for pure software engineering. Get a job similar to software engineering and then gradually transition there in your daily work if that's your inclination. I've seen maths or engin post-docs reach pretty high positions at a similar pace to what a computer science software engineer would have, so it is viable. I would advertise myself as a data scientist with very solid background in quantitative skills and problem solving and capable-if-untested engineering skills. Another path is to leverage more on the PDE work and apply to hedge funds as a "quant" (quantitative analyst), those will work out too and pay a lot better, if you can get it. It's definitely more competitive however, reach out to headhunters on linkedin or through career centre or friends, I would cold email and message and be aggressive, but it is do-able. Next, to provide some context on salaries and career progression. To aid discussion, I'm going to use google's L3 (junior swe) to L5 (senior swe) levelling scale. It typically takes 2-3 years to go from L3 -> L4, and 3-5 years to go for L4 -> L5. As a post-doc, you'll join as L4+, meaning it should take 1/2 the amount of time from a L4->L5 jump for you to hit L5. So as compared to someone starting with a bachelors in CS, you have a lead of around 4 years. For pay, you're looking at (again google, check levels.fyi) ~300-350k starting, to hit around 400k in 2 years. So you'll be fine. For the quant path, the variance is much higher, but I would expect 200-300k (base+bonus) for your first year, and you should expect to hit 500k in 3-5 years, and 1m+ if you manage to survive that long in 8-10+years. Look at some of the quant forums to see the salaries people are posting. Downgrade their values by a bit since only successful examples will post their inflated values there. For your isolation. I felt exactly the same when I was grinding to get my current job too, and although my team back then is great, I hate the work since I don't feel it impacts anything, or pays well. I realize in retrospect that this has knock-on effects on my social life. Essentially, because I feel my current position in life is shit, I don't feel like going out that much or being socially active. I don't feel I deserve to be spending time out there, and that I should be grinding and doing something with my life instead. I'm not saying that life gets better when you get a high paying job. But that assuredness with my career and my life made me feel more confident going out and spending time trying to make new friends. That disposable income helps in subtle ways too, I can go out and spend without feeling guilty or indeed caring much for it, and that made me appear more outgoing and sociable. Maybe. So I will not think too much about the isolation part and focus on getting a decent job offer first. Next, on what I would do if I were you now. First, I would create some application that leverages and advertises my strengths. Based on your bootcamp experience, I might do something like build a aws-hosted server that retrieves nyse stock data once every day automatically, derive some basic trading metrics, and post them on some website with some good-enough plots and graphics. Clean up the project, add a nice readme and some snapshots, and post on your github. Second, interview prep. Leetcode, CTCI, elements of programming interviews, do all of them. Get good enough to confidently solve LC-medium questions you have never seen before, around 70% of the time. This should take around 3-6 months fulltime, but you can apply while preparing, since you only need to be ready come interview and not application time. Third, get that interview. Clean up your resume, reach out to friends or folks currently in swe roles to ask them to review, get multiple data points since some opinions may be inaccurate. Reach out to career centre, I would take their resources and connections, but usually ignore their advice. Cold email and linkedin message amazon recruiters, apply to google/whatever's phd internships, for the last point you need to finish the internship before you graduate so do it early. Ask for referrals on teamblind or friend-of-friends or whoever you can find. Be aggressive and shameless in your search. Finally, your situation is more common than what you might expect, so do reach out to other folks in potentially similar situations, for advice perhaps but more to have people to rant and talk to. It's a marathon, but like a marathon so long as you keep moving, you should be fine. Mentors are invaluable, have a few so you can diversify the rant load and get more considered opinions. Caveat emptor. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: ### Consider applying for academic positions in your home country. Generally, there's a rule of thumb that academics tend to work at institutions less prestigious than the institutions that they went to school at. As a result, you may want to consider applying for academic jobs in your home country, since you say that you're from a developing country. While there may be exceptions for specific institutions in specific fields, generally a university in a developing nation will have less prestige than one in a developed country. Additionally, since it's your home country, you would presumably be a citizen, and not need to deal with visa issues, and your cultural familiarity may help you with the feelings of social anxiety and alienation you mention. While I expect that such a job would likely pay less than one in a developed nation, it's also likely that the cost of living would also be significantly lower; depending on the ratio of pay to cost of living, it might even be possible that you'd be relatively wealthier working in your home country, compared to getting an academic job in America. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Not sure if it helps, but where I live (Europe) just being able to do, and not being afraid of, high school math is already a selling point for software developers. So it's not like you have nothing special to offer, even if your field of specialization may have little overlap with the field a company works in. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: You write: > > I want to comment that, I do not feel the work I do, while they are fun to me, are of interest or that helpful to many fellow mathematicians. I do not have a sense of fulfillment. > > > When considering what you can contribute to mathematics and what others may value, try reading <NAME>'s article [What is good mathematics?](https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0702396). I can't do his article justice by merely summarizing it, but note that he lists problem-solving, technique, theory, insight, discovery, application, exposition, pedagogy, vision, taste, public relations, meta-mathematics, rigor, beauty, elegance, creativity, usefulness, strength, depth, intuition, definitiveness, etc. You may be able to contribute in at least one of the above areas and perhaps you have been focusing on just a few of them, not realizing that the others also have merit. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/13	508	2,223	<issue_start>username_0: I saw that various postdoctoral fellowships have different lengths. they are anywhere between 1 to 4 years. Which one is more important to get a tenureship: number of fellowship positions, or length, or the variety of research?<issue_comment>username_1: If you try to base a decision on that alone you are making a mistake. What matters is what you do in your early career - papers produced, collaborations established, visibility, ... A long post-doc provides some stability. It is possible to be productive in such a situation, or to be stuck in a rut. The stability might make it possible to spend more effort in seeking a permanent position. Note: "might make it possible..." A sequence of short ones offers variety, but you have a shorter time in each to actually produce something. And you are spending more time seeking the next opportunity. And, few have the luxury of juggling a lot of offers with different characteristics. You want one (or several) with a PI that is likely to help you advance your career. That is independent of length. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you seek a tenured position, you will be judged on your publications, reputation, and reputation of your employers. Number and duration of postdoctoral positions has low importance. In many fields, zero is no longer an acceptable number or duration. Long duration postdoctoral positions are good because they reduce the amount of time you spend looking for your next job. But that does not really answer your question. Judge your employers based on their histories, not their advertisements. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Positions that are advertised for one year often in practice still run for three years or so. Nobody wants to kick someone who has just learned the ropes out again after a year, but there may be legal reasons to advertise a position for one year, or maybe funding is not secure yet beyond the first year. But in practice, the majority of postdocs hired for one year actually stay longer. In other words: Talk about this issue with the person who would hire you, but don't make decisions based on the advertised length of the position. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/14	3,887	16,727	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student and I'm getting started in the field I want to work on after I finish my PhD. There were some very important works done by a very experienced researcher and collaborators that I've been trying to understand for a while. In fact there was claim in the beginning of one of the papers that was central to all that followed but I wasn't able to understand why such a claim is true. Some weeks ago that experienced researcher gave a talk on the subject and he stated the same claim that's on the papers. Still, I didn't have the courage to ask about it because I really don't know yet whether it is something extremely basic that I'm missing or if it's really non-trivial. I was thinking about sending an e-mail asking about it. But can that damage my reputation? I mean, if it is something really basic and obvious, and I'm missing it, won't it damage my reputation with him if I ask it? The reason I'm worried is that I really hope to be able to collaborate with him one day.<issue_comment>username_1: There is the "philosophically obvious" answer, namely, that if the big-shot is upset with your asking any sort of (sincere) question, you'd really not want to be involved with them. So, srsly, ask. Or, if you want to go on some sort of long march through a desert, ... don't ask... That's the real choice, I think. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, asking reasonable questions won't damage your reputation -- and even a few unreasonable ones won't do any real damage, especially as a young grad student. Still, I recommend that you start by asking your advisor, or someone else at your host institution, rather than jumping straight to asking this expert. If this is a basic result that everyone in your subfield knows, then helping you understand it is part of your host institution's responsibility. If no one at your institution can help, then the claim is probably sufficiently non-obvious that asking the expert is altogether appropriate. Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: "It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt." - <NAME> That said, if you never ask you will remain a fool forever. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: This is only anecdotal, but it applied over my quite long "career" as a student (undergraduate through doctorate). I was always happy to interrupt a lecture (small classes) to ask questions. Some of them were because the instructor had made a mistake in a proof (math). Some were just because I didn't catch the flow from one step to the next. My fellow students thought I was much smarter than I actually was because of this. I don't know what the faculty thought, but I never got "put down" for my interruptions. Sometimes a question that you have actually needs to be asked, and others in the class have the same question or difficulty, but aren't brave enough to bring it up. So, by asking questions you can also help others to learn. As a kid, I was always asking my mother "why...?". She was less appreciative of my actions, I think. There is an apocryphal story of a professor of math who made the statement in the middle of a proof that "such and such follows trivially". A student questioned it. The prof went into abstract mode, making small marks on the board and muttering a bit. He then wandered down to his office, with students following, and started pulling books off the shelf and looking things up. After half an hour or so, he returned to the classroom, students still following, and announced "yes, it is trivial". Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Asking easy questions doesn't portray you as dumb. What mostly annoys people is when you take a habit of asking easy questions instead of spending 10 minutes looking the answer up online or in a book. To make it short, don't ask other people what you could have asked Google. Lectures and talks are different still. The audience is expected to follow the train of thought, and if you can't, you're just wasting your own time staying there. If a fair share of the audience doesn't follow, they are also wasting the time of the lecturer. If you're expected to follow, it's best to ask any question right away, no matter how basic, to get back on track. Clarifications after a lecture don't have the urgency of a question during a lecture, so the usual advice applies: ask about things you can't easily look up yourself. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Asking questions is almost never wrong. What would be more harmful is other people realizing you don´t understand a subject while you have been pretending that you do. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: My suggestion is to ask questions early. It's better to look uninformed as a neophyte than look uninformed after you've been in the field a few years. When you are a new PhD student, faculty don't expect you to have much knowledge or experience. They likely won't think less of you for asking questions about basic things and will usually be very willing to help. When you are talking with a colleague outside your field, they won't be surprised by basic questions and will also typically be generous with their time to help you understand. However, if you've been working in a field for years and then reveal that you don't understand the fundamentals of that field, this may indeed reflect poorly on you. People may have less patience to explain something to you if they feel like you should have already learned it. For example, I am happy to explain enhanced sampling techniques to new graduate students in molecular simulation. However, I recently came across a graduate student who was 5 years into PhD research based entirely on molecular simulation. They asked some questions that revealed that they had little knowledge of enhanced sampling. After probing farther, I found that they had almost no knowledge at all of enhanced sampling and had never used any of the techniques after 5 years in the field. This demonstrated to me that something went terribly wrong in their graduate education. I try to be understanding, but it reflects poorly on both them and their advisor. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: The standard ethics norm in academia is that an author of a paper must answer all questions related to the paper and should be grateful to everybody who asks questions. Thus there are no "naïve" questions. In your particular example clearly you found a problem with the paper: it contains a statement which is not completely justified. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Most likely you should not be worried. But as always there are exceptions to this general rule -- if your question is about something truly basic in the field, yeah it's going to raise some eyebrows and may cause some lasting damage. For example, if you are in a math PhD and can't follow a basic username_9ilon delta proof of the limit, it's certainly not going to look great since that is something anybody with basic experience in intermediate math should know like the back of their hand. It's sort of like the imposter syndrome. The vast majority of the time feeling like an imposter is all in your head, but there's certainly (rare) examples of people who got in over their head and the feeling is reality. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: On a slight corollary. I was asked to be an "audience" member for someone practicing a PhD viva. He got about three minutes into it, and had made a basic error in his assumptions - I asked a pointed question and he stood there like a gaffed fish not realising we were in the same field. It took him six months to patch over that error and another three rewriting it. The error came from something that his supervisor had glossed over and gotten wrong and he hadn't bothered to follow up and query. You MUST ask. if you are not sure — ask.... If you want ask without asking - say that you are not sure how X works and Y follows from X - could the expert please help you work though it to understand properly. Some questions can be asked like that some can't - but regardless if you don't know - ask now. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: I'm going to go against the grain of most of the answers and say in my experience "yes, asking dumb questions CAN hurt your reputation". As much as everybody wants to say people aren't judged for bad questions, they are. Now most people aren't insanely judgmental, so they will likely forgive one or two obvious questions, and likely their impression of you will be the summation of their interactions with you. If you pair that one dumb question with 6 insightful questions that show you do understand highly difficult subjects/topics they will think you're knowledgable/smart. And if you ask 6 obvious questions and no insightful questions it will imply you don't have any high level understanding (with high probability). And if you have 4-5 obvious questions, and maybe 1-2 high level questions it might suggest you have some insight but not complete understanding. As for my practical recommendation, give it your best effort to try to make sense and due your due diligence before asking a question just to be sure you're not just being careless, but after that just ask because there's no real point trying to hide your knowledge/intelligence level. Eventually it's going to be figured out over a long time of interacting with people. So just try your best and then over time people will likely understand your true talent and knowledge level anyway. Hope that helps! Goodluck Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Since this point has not been explicitly brought up I will say asking "basic" questions has a hidden benefit. There may be many others with the exact same thoughts who will be grateful you've asked the question. I am in industry, not academia, but on many occasions I have asked these "stupid" questions in a public forum. Never has anyone thought less of me for asking them and I have on occasion had individuals afterwards inform me they were afraid to ask the same question but glad I did in their stead. Knowledge is something to be openly spread and socialized, not some exclusive resource reserved for those willing to dive into the esoteric. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Emailing a question is very unlikely to damage your reputation. If it's truly as basic as you think, he will probably assume you are someone from an unrelated field or an undergrad. That's if he even reads your email. As a student, I also often indulged into all manner of fantasies about all the very positive and very negative consequences my emails might have, only to discover that 99% of them have no consequence at all, because the recipient doesn't read them. Your average professor logs into their mailbox and stares down a 4 digit unread mail count, if an email is not to their liking, they will just ignore it. As for asking questions generally, people tend to overestimate how simple and stupid their question is. Even very basic questions can be valuable because they highlight some fundamental aspect that the speaker failed to communicate well. I have often wrestled with my embarrassment to ask "stupid" questions, only to have other people later thank me for asking them because they were confused about the same thing. Out of context, if you ask an extremely stupid question in a very focused meeting (so not a place where undergrads and laypeople can attend) where everyone knows you, you might raise an eyebrow or two. But only the one time. If you make a habit of asking questions, people will just think of you as "the guy who ask questions" and nobody will care that here and there you ask one that was a bit superficial. Of course you don't want to ask 100 questions such that all 100 are totally naive. So it's a good idea to do your homework, make sure you pay attention to the talk/paper so that you don't miss something that was already clearly stated, and make sure you at least spend a moment thinking about an answer. It also helps to phrase the question in such a way as to emphasize why it matters. Even extremely simple matters are worth explaining in depth if they are critical to the point being made. If you do these things, far less than 100% of your questions will be truly stupid, and nobody will be counting the handful of ones that are. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: The purpose of giving a talk or a lecture is to transfer knowledge/understanding from one brain to another (hopefully more than one). If asking questions leads to better transfer, then the speaker/lecturer ought to be grateful that someone asked. The transfer is more effective if both transmitter and receiver take an active part. I've always taken the approach that there is no such thing as a stupid question\, if only because I don't want to do anything to stop people asking me questions if they don't understand something. If the audience are not going to ask questions or interact, then they may as well be watching a video of my talk. \there really isn't. I was asked once whether it mattered which order the statements in a computer program were written down. Now to me (as I understand computer architecture) the answer is obvious, but it made it very clear that the student didn't understand something fundamental about programming, and asking the question meant they got their mental model of programming rapidly improved. Kudos to the student! Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: Ask it and damage your reputation? Don't ask it and damage your understanding? Which is more important to you? Which should be more important to you? Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_16: There are a lot of good answers here, but I wanted to add some information that might be helpful. As a professor, when I'm giving a seminar, teaching a class, or even talking to one of my students I have to make a guess about the knowledge of the audience. If I guess that the audience has very basic knowledge then I waste a lot of time talking about things that they know already. If I assume that they are experts, then they might not understand anything that I'm saying. So, I do my best to estimate the the level of the audience, but feedback can substantially improve the quality of communication. The audience does a speaker a great service by asking clarifying questions during a talk (or class or conversation) because it is impossible for the speaker to know that the audience does and doesn't know. Rather than seeming dumb, the person asking a question shows that they are engaged and interested in the content. That's far better than remaining silent and missing the point and leaving the speaker wondering whether or not they are understood. I specify clarifying questions because it is not helpful or recommended to ask a question which is only tangentially related to the material (but that is not what the OP was about). Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_17: Personal experience here: * it took me 6-9 months to barely understand the main assumption and claim from my supervisor works; * it took me 1-1.5 year to understand the advisor was "wrong", or at least that the claim was central but not necessarily true in all cases, plus the work following from the assumption/claim was a kind of dead branch (the advisor was scooping up all the low-hanging fruits, only "menial" tasks were left to do for PhDs and PostDocs); * it took me 6 years into the PhD to finally give up on my PhD with my advisor, because by following my way, a way perpendicular to advisor's claim and assumptions, I found out plenty of positions in the Academia, including one that liked me so much to hire me as an Assistant Professor and to support for my defense with said supervisor. What did I earn by asking the advisor "why do you make that claim?" after 2 months of working in that group? I got an unsatisfactory answer, and I embarked in a long bibliographic journey where it turned out that the central claim was just the approximation of some results from someone else 30 years before. (spoiler: even with such a slow PhD, I then went on having a decent career in the academia, until I found a better life/balance work in the industry. That's also the reason I stick so long with the first advisor: very liveable place, plenty of life opportunities besides work AKA research and academic life) So go ahead, ask the question, but be ready to find yourself the rationale behind that claim, because it is a central piece of your advisor work, and you need to understand it even without having the possibility of talking directly with your advisor. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/14	602	2,694	<issue_start>username_0: I recently got one paper accepted. Then I added one paragraph given the reviewers' comments and run more experiments for this section. The problem is that I don't have much time to run the experiments so I did not fully understand the phenomenon behind the experiments. And I used a set of parameters that makes the baselines perform fairly low. After submission, I realized one baseline could perform much better if I use another set of parameters. I re-run the experiments and found that my concern is true. Now I plan to release the code. I believe that someone would find out this problem if they take some time to run the experiments and tune the parameters. The deadline for camera-ready has passed already. What could I do to fix this? I don't want to be criticized that I intentionally make the baseline perform low by selecting hyperparameters. Could I correct this through arxiv? For example, I upload an updated version of this work on arxiv? This section even has nothing to do with the paper's acceptance because it is added after the paper got accepted. I just want to make the paper more solid while making new mistakes. Really appreciate the opinions.<issue_comment>username_1: Contact the publisher immediately. Your odds of making changes to an accepted paper decrease drastically once the publisher starts typesetting it. Unless you are a famous author which the publisher is especially incentivized to please, it is extremely unlikely you'll be able to make changes on the scale you describe after you receive the first proofs. Beyond that, you'll just have to work with the publisher over what to do next. You could for example ask them to send it back to the editor if you're concerned about the changes you made - but no matter what happens, the first step (contact the publisher) is time sensitive, and you must do it anyway. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, you should take this as a lesson not to hastily add things to papers. Second, as username_1 says, you can contact the editor, and see if it is still possible to fix a mistake. It might or might not be. If it is, you're in luck. If not, here are a few other options: * If you think the mistake's important enough to fix, publish an corrigendum later. * You can always post a corrected version/corrigendum on the arXiv or your website, assuming you are in a field covered by the arXiv. Depending on the culture in your field, the arXiv version may or may not be more commonly viewed than the published version, so this may or may not be effective. * When you give talks or have discussions about the relevant work, you can point out the error. Upvotes: 4
2021/09/14	580	1,832	<issue_start>username_0: I'm having a hard time with a writing issue. I'm trying to write a paper on time-frequency transforms. These typically have a well-known abbreviation/acronym, and also a reference for their origin, e.g.: * Constant-Q Transform (CQT), (Brown 1991) * sliCQ Transform (sliCQT), (Holighaus et. al 2013) * Nonstationary Gabor Transform (NSGT), (Balazs et. al 2011) I can't figure out the best way to include both the reference and acronym in a paragraph, especially when I need to mention more than one in the same sentence. For example: > > The Nonstationary Gabor Transform (NSGT) (Balazs et. al 2011) can be used to implement the Constant-Q Transform (CQT) (Brown 1991). > > > > > Balazs et. al 2011's Nonstationary Gabor Transform (NSGT) can be used to implement Brown 1991's Constant-Q Transform (CQT) > > ><issue_comment>username_1: I think that these sentences are most readable by leaving the abbreviations and their parentheses out entirely: > > The Nonstationary Gabor Transform (Balazs et. al 2011) can be used to implement the Constant-Q Transform (Brown 1991). > > > You could consider adding a single phrase to the introduction where you introduce all transforms and their abbreviation, and afterwards refer to them only by their full name (usually most readable) or abbreviation (if this is preferred for a good reason) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I write, as given by APA style: > > The Nonstationary Gabor Transform (NSGT; Balazs et. al 2011) can be used to implement the Constant-Q Transform (CQT; Brown 1991). > > > From [APA style](https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/abbreviations/definition): > > *Narrative format*: Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5; Weathers et al., 2018) > > > Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2021/09/14	340	1,537	<issue_start>username_0: This year, I submitted a research paper (case study) of a technology implementation to a peer reviewed journal. I waited approx. 2 months and the decision of the reviewer was to decline, because she considered it not to have the correct writing style for the journal. What can be done, when is not the science and analysis being questioned, but rather the author's writing style ?<issue_comment>username_1: Likely you need to yield. I suspect that either the style is too informal or too pedantic. Readers of scientific paper have some expectations that you need to respect when possible. The editor, of course, has the final say, and may agree or disagree with the reviewer. But the reviewer is probably familiar with the "expected" style of that journal. Ask the editor how much the style needs to be changed. And, of course, examine some papers from that journal to get a sense of what the prefer to publish. Pioneers often get shot. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Team up with an experienced researcher. Many researchers are involved in the training of PhD students and, consequently, are used to working with people who lack experience in the writing of academic publications. For some, getting sub-optimal writing into shape might even come quite natural, and can lead to a win-win situation where both you and the researcher derive a benefit from a joint publication. Your best bet are researchers with a background in the specific research area in which your paper is situated. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/14	850	3,698	<issue_start>username_0: I am a first-time PI of a large multi-year grant (specifically an R01, which is a 4-5 year research grant from the National Institutes of Health). I am looking for resources (e.g., books, detailed blog posts, papers, etc.) that would explain the details of successfully managing my grant, such as: * How should I track expenses and manage the budget (e.g., a personal finance software or something else)? * How should I track personnel hiring? * How should I allocate papers to aims? * What do I need to know about communications with the sponsor, such as progress reports? * What do I need to know about renewals? * What do I need to know that I don't even realize? (I hope this question is not too broad for Academia Stack Exchange. I considered posting each of the above questions separately, but I'm hoping that the current format might lead me to a one-stop resource like the fictitious Managing Your First R01 For Dummies.)<issue_comment>username_1: You need to be sure to take any training your university offers for grant management. That is almost certainly mandatory, and probably will cover many of these things. I know the program guide for the NSF has a huge section called "Grant Administration" that covers things like the requirements to post PDF/A preprints in a central database. You can write your program officer and ask where the corresponding documentation is for NIH. There are probably specific annual reports you need to file, so find out that is needed for those. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your institution almost certainly should be handling the finances, talk to your department grants administrator. One of the criteria for NIH grants is that you have an institution supporting you and ensuring compliance with all the rules - that's what they're there for. I have a hard time imagining NIH giving R01 money to someone at an institution that doesn't provide that support. Papers aren't "allocated" to aims, you'll credit the whole grant when you publish papers. In any event, haven't you already written your research plan for how you are going to approach those aims? Your papers will come out of that plan (and the necessary deviations from plan), not from any optimized allocation strategy. Future grants will depend on your ability to write a comprehensive forward-looking proposal and your overall output from previous funding; they won't go through and see that you've completed each and every aim exactly the way you said you would, but they expect you to make progress overall. It's often impossible to actually plan for an entire multi-year research program ahead of time. Progress reports aren't competitive and won't affect the funds you have, just make sure you do them, and don't lie. NIH has an extensive website at <https://grants.nih.gov/grants/oer.htm> all about grants [this page specifically for post-award documentation](https://grants.nih.gov/grants/post-award-monitoring-and-reporting.htm); it's probably worth doing quite a bit of reading there. I'd be wary about depending on books and blog posts because these can quickly become outdated: go to the NIH itself, they aren't hiding their rules to be dodgy and catch you making a mistake, they have rules for a purpose (sometimes more of a legislative/political purpose rather than scientific) and want people to comply with them. It's your institution's job to keep up to date on this stuff (and a bit yours, too, but it's probably a waste of time for every PI to become familiar with every aspect of NIH grant administration - that's why institutions provide the support and why NIH considers this support crucial). Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2021/09/14	1,053	4,265	<issue_start>username_0: I was writing answers for my assignment about corruption, I put an example I took from an article from the web and cited it in APA format. I found out that my reference has been tagged as plagiarism. The title of the article which I wrote in my references was flagged as plagiarism because they found the title in the news site I used in my reference and other sites which uses it as a reference. I have tried excluding bibliography, with no success. Is there a way to not get flagged as plagiarism for this? They found the news title on the site I referenced and flagged it as plagiarism: notice that in the reference I put the site's name (`Kompas.com`) and the plagiarized site is `Kompas.com` and other news site who refers to the article ![](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gJYDa.png)<issue_comment>username_1: Automated plagiarism checkers make a lot of mistakes. They yield both false positives (your case) and false negatives (the more important case, actually). You can't stop it, but you can talk to your professor. These programs just look for common word patterns between a submission and the test base. Maybe a bit more sophisticated than that but not much. I hope and suspect that the professor would require a lot more evidence that you had copied the ideas of others than just what you indicate here. The outcome should be that you both get a good laugh out of it, but I don't know the person so can't predict. --- The implication of the "rule" in force here is that every properly formatted, correct, citation is plagiarism. Absurd. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You obviously did not commit plagiarism. The phrase “flagged as plagiarism” is meaningless techno-babble that gives the appearance that you did something wrong, when you didn’t. Explain the situation to the professor. If the professor is sane, he or she will override the automated check that “flagged” your submission for plagiarism. If the professor is unconvinced and still decides to penalize you, follow the procedures at your university for complaining about unfair treatment by a professor. If that still doesn’t work, you have my sympathies. Your institution in such a scenario would not be worthy of the name “university”. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is how me and my colleagues use plagiarism checkers: we get a list of submission and their "plagiarism score": * Anything scoring below a certain threshold, we don't even bother. After all, we expect references, titles, and some definitions to get flagged. * If your score is high, we will look at the report. Often, it is someone with many references, or a properly quoted paragraph, which are both examples of false positives. Plagiarism checkers are dumb as a box of owls. Their number means nothing, and needs to be inspected. They usually don't understand the context well enough to distinguish plagiarism from quotes, more so in languages other than English. Literal copies, aka copy and paste (c&p) plagiarism or blatant copyright infringement, or modestly disguised plagiarism cases can be detected with high accuracy by current external plagiarism detection software if the source is accessible to the software. And frankly, they are not that hard to defeat, even for a lazy student (for example, Google Translate back and forth through an intermediate language); but even without the checker, when a paragraph is written in a different "voice" it stands out a lot. For example, the previous paragraph, was copied from [the Wikpedia page on plagiarism detection,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_similarity_detection) and I think will jump to most people: it both has a different style, and the content doesn't exactly fit with the rest of the flow. (In case it wasn't obvious: I am not very impressed with the performance of plagiarism checkers). Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: These automated tools only flag similarity to other sources; they cannot determine whether such similarity constitutes plagiarism, since they take no account of how the material is presented. Provided that you have referenced all sources properly and made it clear when you are quoting content or paraphrasing ideas from them, it is not plagiarism. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/15	1,016	4,444	<issue_start>username_0: Google Scholar notified me this morning that I had a new paper in my profile, which I was not expecting. The work in question was published by a collection of former colleagues and regards work done a few years ago. I participated in the early stages of the work, but I have no recollection of having seen the manuscript before it was submitted or at any time during the revision process. Additional relevant facts: * The journal shows the paper as having been submitted over two years ago, when I was still working for the research group the authors belong to. Two years is a long time, and I no longer have access to my email from that institution. So, if I pursue the matter the first step is obviously to ask the corresponding author if they have any record of my having approved the manuscript before submission. Note, however, that the paper has a contributor roles taxonomy (CRediT) statement, and I am not listed as having any writing, review, or editing role, which would be highly irregular if I had agreed to be on the paper. * I left the group over a year ago due to a hostile and abusive work environment created largely by some, but not all, of the authors on the paper. At the time, I informed them and the management of the host institution that I did not wish to be included on any further papers coming from that research group. * A few months ago I received an enquiry about a paper that in retrospect must have been this one. The enquiry was from a colleague that I have remained on good terms with (and who isn't one of the authors of the paper). They informed me that some former coworkers were revising a paper that I was a coauthor on and wanted to know what my current affiliation was. I reiterated my request not to appear on any further papers from the group (the go-between did not mention that the paper had been submitted before I left). I also reminded them that listing someone as a coauthor without their approval is highly unethical. * The journal shows the paper as having been revised and accepted earlier this month. My name appears with my new institutional affiliation, which suggests to me that they were aware of my conversation with the go-between, though they could have tracked it down from other publications. I am torn on whether I should try to get this rectified. On the one hand, making someone a coauthor without their approval is not ok, and the group shouldn't be allowed to get away with such cavalier disregard for the rules. On the other hand, having my name on the paper isn't really causing me any material harm, and making an issue of it will likely dredge up old animosities that, frankly, took a long time to properly bury, so maybe it's best to drop it. With all of this in mind, my question is, should I pursue this matter, or just let it go. If the former, how should I go about it (assuming I don't get a satisfactory response from the corresponding author)? If the latter, is there any potential for harm (i.e., from having my name on the paper) that I'm not seeing?<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible that the paper can only be published ethically with you as author. This would depend on whether you made clear intellectual contributions to it. I suggest that you first get a copy of the paper and look for your own contributions. I suspect you may find them. If you do, I'd let it go, even though you don't want to be associated with them anymore. It would seem odd if they gave you "gift authorship" under these circumstances. Of course, if you think the paper itself does harm then you need to disassociate yourself from it and you can object to its publication under the circumstances you list. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would first read the paper. If it is a reasonable paper and you would be happy to be a co-author on the paper then it might be easier in your situation to let it go. I wouldn't normally suggest that, but sometimes it's better to take to the easy path (if it's not causing you harm). If you think it's a bad paper and you would not have approved it, had you been asked, then I would first contact the other authors. If they refuse to help or explain the situation (maybe they thought you had agreed), then contact the journal. At the end of the day only the journal can actually remove your name, but asking the author's first gives them a chance to explain any possible misunderstandings Upvotes: 2
2021/09/15	1,238	5,089	<issue_start>username_0: I have symptoms of a mental health disorder not registered in the DSM-5 called 'maladaptive daydreaming disorder'. In order for this to be able to get into the DSM-5, more research needs to be done on it, by more researchers. I want to do research on maladaptive daydreaming disorder, but I'm not sure if I am allowed to considering that I personally experience it. Would my research be considered biased, and therefore not be considered accurate?<issue_comment>username_1: You can do research on anything you like, for any reason. That your own acknowledged experience motivates you will not surprise anyone. A web search for your topic produces many links to what seem to be respectable sources, so any useful contribution you can make will probably be recognized by that community. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Whether or not a disease is listed in some manual is irrelevant for whether or not one can or should do research about it. For example, COVID-19 wasn't listed in any general medicine equivalent of the DSM (specifically, the International Classification of Diseases or ICD) -- because it was a new disease --, but it is a disease alright and research on it is both welcome and has proven to be quite useful. Similarly, whether or not a disease is listed in a manual does not affect the ethical guidelines that govern what research is permissible and if it is, how it has to be conducted. That leaves the question of whether someone who has a disease is well positioned to do research on it. That fundamentally comes down to whether the person believes that they can be impartial about what they find. Not everything you will find will please you, for example: medications or other treatment plans you are investigating may fail to have an effect, or may actually be detrimental. Or it may turn out to be difficult to obtain sufficient statistical information about whether something works. In such cases, it may be difficult to separate your wishes and desires from what the data tell you. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The methodological processes in scientific fields exist precisely to give researchers an objective method they can follow to answer questions, without contaminating the research with personal bias. Presumably, the kinds of psychological research leading to listings in the DSM involves some objective scientific work based on systematic empirical observation of patients or other members of the public, and it ought to be possible to do this research even if you personally suffer from a mental disorder or have some source of bias on the topic. Psychology is a discipline that has had some difficulties with methodological rigour and practice over the years, and there are various subfields (particularly social psychology) where there is a general view that methodological processes have been poor and substantial amounts of research bias has crept into the field. If you are interested in this, I recommend reading some papers looking at methodological issues in psychology (e.g., [Jussim et al 2016](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022103115300032), [Jussim et al 2019](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6743032/), [Clark et al 2021](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cory-Clark-2/publication/347993627_Replicability_and_the_Psychology_of_Science/links/601c0c9aa6fdcc37a8022ca8/Replicability-and-the-Psychology-of-Science.pdf)). In any case, there is certainly no rule that would make your condition a disqualifying condition for being allowed to conduct research on this topic. As to whether there will be a perception of bias, that will largely depend on the quality of your methods and the degree to which your conclusions are supported by objective analysis. The mere fact that you suffer from the condition you want to study would not strike me as a disqualifying condition. Indeed, I would be highly surprised if there are not already many examples of previous psychological research undertaken by practitioners who suffer from the conditions they are researching. (As an aside, there is a long-standing speculative theory that the discipline of psychology tends to attract students who have mental problems or disorders; it is one of the major stereotypes of psychology majors. I'm not sure if it's true, but if it does have an empirical basis then your situation might not be very unusual.) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There is no problem in researching something that isn’t in the DSM, other than possible funding issues. Researching a disease that you suffer from might create a conflict of interest — that doesn’t mean you can’t do the research, it just means you need to report the conflict so that others can give your research extra scrutiny. Research shouldn’t be rejected because it’s biased, but rather because the methodology is flawed or fraudulent. All research is biased in some way or another, bias is inescapable, science is in part about making bias irrelevant, by making the results repeatable and/or explicable. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/15	1,411	5,900	<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for some PhD programs, and I don't know if I should mention my country's situation in those letters, like the difficulty in being a female scientist without having a friend at court or free speech problems in my country.<issue_comment>username_1: It’s generally okay to mention it, and any person with a heart is going to feel sympathy for your situation. But it’s important that you understand that this will have zero effect on your chances of getting admitted to most PhD programs. The only possible exception is in disciplines where your background of being from a country where there is a lack of free speech and women aren’t treated well is relevant for the discipline you want to study. For example, if you applying for a PhD in political science or human rights law and want to cite your background to explain why you have the passion to study those topics, this would be a helpful narrative that could actually make an impression on the admissions committee. But for most topics, admission is based on merit and potential to succeed in the program. If you are applying for a PhD in math, say, I suggest focusing on why you have the passion and talents to succeed in your studies in this area rather than on why you want to move to a different country, which, although it is obviously important to you, would have no relevance to your ability to succeed in a PhD program. Good luck! Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @DanRomik's answer and would like to add one exception: One case in which mentioning it would be advisable is if you apply to work with a particular advisor (which is generally the case in Europe), and that advisor indicates an interest in working with students that come from challenging background. That indication could be a statement on their website, a membership in a particular mentorship cycle, relevant tweets, or likewise. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This ultimately hinges on whether there is some aspect of the application where this information would be relevant. Some application processes will ask you to write a personal statement, or ask what attracts you to the institution you are applying for, or ask you to specify if you have encountered hardships in your previous work. In all these cases the culture and professional limitations in your home country might potentially be relevant and you could mention them. Ultimately, you will need to judge whether those details are germane to any part of the application process for the position in question. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think it is good to mention it. I have never seen such statements in PhD applications (I am in math and in the USA) but I would, as a member of hiring committee, consider such applications favorably. I think that just mentioning the name of the country is not enough. It is important that you personally care about these issues. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: (Decided to upgrade this from a comment to answer) Whenever you bring up political/ideological issues like what you describe, you need to be careful, because if you reach someone with the opposite politics/ideology it can backfire. For example: > > female scientist without having a friend at court > > > If you're applying to an Afghan university, this will not work well. Note what looks uncontroversial to you might still be controversial to people you've never met. For example, > > free speech problems > > > As I mentioned in the comments, I know people who think free speech is a bad idea and semifree speech is the right thing. For example, they support the national security law in Hong Kong because Hong Kong is part of China and it is natural to restrict speech that promotes secession; furthermore Hong Kong will become a full part of China in 28 years, so gradual restrictions are sensible. If you live in Hong Kong and write about free speech in your PhD application, and you reach someone who believes this, it can backfire. To [quote](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/105464/) a more loaded example: > > in most left-leaning universities arguing that you would really like to move to the US because the US, unlike your European home, allows you to buy a semi-automatic weapon with relative ease, is neither a convincing reason for a move nor will it strike brownie points on an emotional level with many faculty members. > > > Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: You need to be careful in how you phrase it. In some ways, a PhD application is similar to a job application. You need to convince people that you are the best person for the position. After reading your application, you want the application committee to remember you as "the super-qualified candidate whom we'd love to have in our PhD program, because it will be pure pleasure to do research with them", not as "the poor person who'd take any position just to get out of their terrible country". I'm not saying that the latter is the case, I'm just warning that you might create this impression if you get the wording wrong. If possible, present it as a hardship you overcame (and which, therefore, speaks for your character), not as a reason to have pity with you. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: There are motivated, intelligent people in every country of the world. There are many countries, though, in which it's much harder to study and travel abroad if you're a woman. It's stupid and counter-productive, but that's the way it is. This fact can be used by recruiters from other countries: if you're a woman coming from a misogynistic culture and you apply for a PhD, it means that you probably have faced adversity, but did not give up. You don't need to explicitly mention the difficulty in being a female scientist in your country, but you can hope that recruiters will connect the dots. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/15	449	1,864	<issue_start>username_0: I have a prepint paper uploaded with open access on arxiv.org. My university also has an open access repository and we are encouraged to upload our prepints also there. Now my question is whether it is allowed to upload the paper from arxiv.org (with the arxiv title page) also to another repository? Do you have any idea? I'd appreciate every comment.<issue_comment>username_1: You still hold copyright to things uploaded to arXiv. You have granted them a non-exclusive license only. You retain all other rights. So, yes, the paper is yours to use as you wish. However, you can't terminate the license you have already given since it is perpetual, so you can't now give an "exclusive" license to someone else. If you transfer copyright to another (such as publishing in a journal) you need to inform them of any license(s) you have already granted, since the new holder will also be bound by them. But, the simple answer is yes. You can do that. --- You need to ask arXiv about the title page since they created that. It might be easier to omit that and provide a different one if needed. (Thanks to user Arno for reminding me of this.) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Of course, there is absolutely no harm in that. The idea is to get the attention of other researchers. And using multiple platforms will help materialise that better. > > In the traditional system, a submitted manuscript receives feedback from 2 or 3 peer reviewers before publication. With a preprint, other researchers can discover your work sooner, potentially pointing out critical flaws or errors, suggest new studies or data that strengthen your argument or even recommend a collaboration that could lead to publication in a more prestigious journal. > > > [Read this.](https://www.aje.com/arc/benefits-of-preprints-for-researchers/) Upvotes: 1
2021/09/15	3,337	13,985	<issue_start>username_0: A group of researchers work in a problem that no one else works on, hence these researchers are cited only by themselves. They cite other papers, too. How does the academia consider these cases? Important update: From the answers received, I noticed that I have wrongly formulated the question. I don't care if that group of researchers cite other papers. My concern is what if they are cited only by themselves.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, it depends more on the work itself than the fact that it is only self-cited. But every truly new topic could have that characteristic for a while. If others are interested in the future, that will change. But if a small subfield over a relatively long (whatever that means) time period fails to attract interest it will just disappear. Someone may resurrect it, of course. Thinking about mathematics in particular, if someone came up with a new idea that depended only on "common knowledge", say, as published in text books, then there would be no need for citation to early work. If no one cites you, it is, perhaps, harder to find your work since chasing backward citation links is an important way to discover things. If you are publishing in good (highly visible) journals, that may not be an issue in the short term. But even things that make a clean break with the past (Einstein/Relativity) tend to cite things pointing out the differences and why the new thing is correct. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One can see this from a philosophical perspective ("If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, did it fall?") and one can also approach this from a perspective of "All research is useful, it may just not be useful right now (as @username_1 has in their answer). But the reality is that if nobody cares about a certain research direction, then that is a statement about the work as well: It is, truly, irrelevant for all practical purposes. Of course, it is possible that at some point in the future someone might start to care, but the likelihood of that happening is rather small even if I am sure that we can come up with examples. In many parts of academia, one measures the influence of researchers by their number of citations. It is certainly debatable whether that is an accurate metric, but it is a useful metric for sure and if someone's work does not receive any outside citations, that is a meaningful statement as well. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I am of the opinion that no problem really exists in isolation. For every problem, one can identify at least three areas of interaction: * The problem itself * The methods that are being used on the problem * The potential areas impacted by solving the problem (intellectual or practical) Even if only a small community cares about the problem per se, the tools available to address the problem are changing, as is the context of the environment in which the problem is being solved. Even for highly theoretical mathematics, the problem does not exist in a vacuum: something caused the researchers to become interested, they are working on it in a world full of evolving potentially relevant methods, and something is causing them to stay interested despite the fact that they haven't solved it yet. As such, I would be highly suspicious of a group of researchers who only engage in self-citation. They may have come to that point honestly, but it would still indicate a severe level of intellectual detachment from the rest of the scientific community. Bottom line: even if nobody else cares about their work, they should care about other people's work enough to cite them. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It is not unusual for some researchers to receive few or no outside citations, but it would be strange for a researcher or research team to give no outside citations. That is because it is always possible to place one's own work in some academic context based on existing published literature. To not give any citations outside one's own group would suggest that the group is not very good at doing a good literature review of their topic area (and it would probably lead their papers to get rejected from journals, so it is unlikely to show up in published literature). The remainder of my answer pertains to the more common case where a researcher receives no outside citations. One would ideally wish that the relevance of an academic paper is determined purely by the topic, substance and quality of the work. However, as a practical matter, literature that has fewer citations (particularly fewer external citations) is harder to find/notice when searching for papers, and literature that only has self-citations does not show up in outside papers by other authors in the literature review. This makes it less likely you will find the paper with a search engine, or using a "track-back" search where you start from existing known papers and then expand out via the citations. Consequently, certain papers can get caught in the academic equivalent of a black-hole. There is of course nothing inherently wrong with self-citations, and they are a natural part of what happens when researchers write multiple papers with overlapping topics. A lack of outside citations means that a work has not generated interest from other publishing researchers, and this is unfortunate. It can have the practical effect that a paper essentially gets forgotten, particularly if the journal is not highly visible. Some high-quality papers do not get outside citations because people just don't notice them initially, and they end up being "forgotten" (i.e., not showing up easily in literature searches) and become more remote as the journal issue they were published in ages. To respond to your title question, while it is possible that papers may essentially be forgotten if they fail to generate outside citations (and therefore become irrelevant in terms of influencing the profession), *that does not mean that the researcher* is "irrelevant"*. Academics perform teaching and service duties to the profession beyond our research, which are valuable professional outputs. We are also people with lives, families, etc., making us highly valuable and relevant to many people. If an academic is not successful at generating outside interest in their research, they are not "irrelevant". Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: To reiterate an important point already made in other answers, but, I think, deserving emphasis: it's not so bad to cite oneself, considering that (duh!) one's prior work could easily be background for one's current work, but to not* cite anyone else is crazy... probably wildly inaccurate, etc. At the very least, setting the context by mention of prior art is a significant part of the interest of a new idea for me. To implicitly claim that there was no prior art is implausible, doubt-generating, and, at least, unhelpful. I do confess that I did not understand any necessity of acknowledging prior art in my earlier years... Somehow the idea I'd gotten was to pretend to have the least indebtedness possible to other people. Well, this turns out to be ridiculous, in many ways. So, again, the most silly/stupid aspect of only self-references is that it's surely just not accurate at all. Then, beyond that, ... (So if I see a paper/preprint with all references to the authors or a limited circle of buddies, I am immediately suspicious...) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Definitely not. The fact remains that, as long as you cite yourself and the citations are all relevant, you are not just ok, but you are progressing. And it also happens that you may be doing research on a topic where not many people are active, except of course you yourself. In that case, it is but natural that your work will be full of self-citations. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: These days, when people judge researchers (especially hiring/grant committees, tenure boards, etc.) it is common to place much emphasis on impact. Impact is measured in a couple different ways, but all of them share the common idea that more people citing you is better. If you only ever cite yourself, your citation count is 1. That is only one step up from the worst possible count, 0. So the debate of you citing your papers vs. the one other guy in the world who cares, is kind of dwarfed by the elephant in the room - namely that you're at the bottom. What difference does it make if you finish 99th or 100th, when only top 3 get a medal? But given the obvious perverse incentive, usually self citations are not even counted as a full citation. Obviously you citing yourself is less interesting than a stranger citing you. In most modern citation metrics, self-citations are either scaled back with a factor, or disregarded entirely. When humans calculate an "informal impact factor" by Googling your papers, their brain will naturally apply such a factor as well. So it's like not only did you finish 99th, but you're tied for it as well. In sum, I don't think anyone will care about whether you were cited by yourself or not, they will have already stopped caring when there is only 1 person citing you. Incidentally, if you are the only one talking about your work, then you truly are irrelevant in the literal sense - nobody is finding you relevant to what they do. But I feel like that's putting it a bit harshly. Just because nobody has found your research relevant yet, doesn't necessarily imply that your research is inherently worthless and cannot possibly have bearing on anything else. It's just a heuristic after all. But that said, the academic community appears to be invested heavily in citation metrics for the time being, and as a result, having only self-citations will not impress many strangers. There are some exceptional cases where I think a situation like you describe might be understandable: * A very junior researcher for whom just publishing a paper at all is an accomplishment * The self-cited paper is in a very prestigious journal (although such journals tend to try very hard to eliminate papers that aren't likely to get cited) * The paper itself has extraordinarily impressive content, despite the few citations * The person evaluating you is himself in such a "thin" field, himself has few cites that are non-self, and himself appreciates the difficulty of having a high citation count in your field * The paper is very recent ( But in my opinion, the effective solution here is not to split hairs, but instead to either broaden your work to have more relevance to people outside your narrow field, or start thinking about moving on to an allied field with broader appeal. That, or just accept that the world is not yet ready for your ideas, I suppose... Such is life. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: In our tech-enabled, Alice-through-the-Looking-Glass Red Queen [running faster and faster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Queen%27s_race) world, we keep on focusing on "impact" within a shorter and shorter timeframe. How many downloads did my paper have last week? How many citations did we get in the year since our last annual evaluation? It's easy for genuine knowledge accomplishments to take their own sweet time, to sit on the shelf for quite a while before someone else integrates them or applies them to something else. Conversely, other ideas may flash in the pan, have tons of citations straight away, and then decades later be passé or just obviated since some other train of thought is more useful or broader in applicability. My dissertation in the 1990s made integral use of a result from the 1950s that had only one other citation, of the throwaway dead-end form "Somewhat similarly, X has shown that ..." (that nevertheless led me to it). And then my dissertation result was obviated by a more general approach by someone else a decade later. So I would make no value judgment on a body of research that is ping-ponging in a very small enclosed room, even among its authors only, for even a number of years. I would make a value judgment on researchers who can't articulate why it could/should be of any interest to anyone at some yet-unknown point in the future -- even though I respect some purists would argue academic independence should allow "but I [researcher] find it interesting" should be reason enough. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: The Nihilist Take Your question seems to imply that relevance is absolute. It's meaningless to ask whether something is relevant without asking to whom it's relevant. To answer your question directly, an isolated group of researchers whose work is never cited by anyone outside their circle is irrelevant to the rest of academia. But this is just a microcosm of academia as a whole. To non-academics, academia is irrelevant until their research has some practical application. On a cosmic scale, the endeavors of the entire human species are irrelevant. Ultimately, nothing matters. Look inward for justification and meaning, not outward. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: Citation counts and origins are a poor measure of relevance. If you are the only academic working on the history of basket weaving in northern elvish communities, you’re unlikely to be cited by academics working on dwarvish basketweaving, and unlikely to get lots of citation for that work, even if it’s highly relevant to northern elvish communities. Contrarywise, if you publish a controversial theory - say old elvish basketweaving resulted in basket of greater strengths than dwarvish or hobbit baskets - you might get cited quite a bit, even if your work is irrelevant and possibly even wrong. There is also the problem of timescale. The work of <NAME> (of [the inequality fame](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_theorem)) was treated as “irrelevant” for a long while before it’s importance was recongnized. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/15	1,208	5,520	<issue_start>username_0: I am having a discussion with a colleague to define the metadata for data management protocol. The problem is that I cannot define the difference between data and metadata. For example, if I take the measurement of the size of a seagrass plant in a location, in that location I would also take the water depth. So, is water depth a metadatum or a datum? And why?<issue_comment>username_1: No, the water depth would also be data and you can look for correlations, for example, between the size and the depth. But all descriptive statistics are metadata: mean, mode, quartiles, standard deviations, and all the rest. They are data that summarize the basic data. Correlations between size and depth would also be metadata. If you take a lot of samples, then you get the potential for a lot of metadata and it can be analyzed as well. Understanding this is fundamental to the understanding of making predictions with statistics; statistical inference. You can, of course, make up additional metadata to fit your study if needed. --- But in general, metadata is just data that is "about" other more fundamental data or depends in some way on that data. It isn't independent data. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: No, the water depth measurements are data. Metadata is data about the data. That would include things like the units of the numbers (e.g. cm for length), the equipment you used, the date and time of day when you took the measurements. The location where you measured the sea grass might be metadata or data - depending on whether you want to compare results from different locations or just document the data from this spot. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata> Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Metadata depends on the context, or the kind of research being done. As the term suggests, it lies outside the primary data of a study. It consists of data, but of a different sort or type. From the American Heritage Dictionary: "Data that describes other data, as in describing the origin, structure, or characteristics of computer files, webpages, databases, or other digital resources." For a clinical trial, metadata would include the trial design, including background, definitions of terms, measurement methods, schedule of data collection, analysis, outcomes, etc. as well as some results such as participation rates, dropout rates, etc. This includes anything that others might need to understand the implications of the results. For a survey, metadata includes the sample and interview design, data linkages, background, definitions of terms, measurement methods, schedule of data collection, analysis, etc, as well as some results, eg, contact rates, refusal rates, etc. Anything that others need to understand the implications. Think about giving your data to someone else to use for further analysis. You want them to have information that keeps them on track regarding effective analysis. If you don't give them something critical, eg, "80% of the subjects came from one medical center and the rest were spread across 27 centers." This is very different than "the percent of subjects from 28 centers ranged from 3% to 6%." The analyses they do should be different in each case. In short, any documentation you hand them with the data itself is metadata. Some items of metadata are recorded as data, eg, withdrawal "time" relative to the data collected and missing. It might not be just a time observation. These items can indicate the quality of the execution of a study and might influence the analysis, but they are not directly related to the goals of a study. Metadata includes a lot of stuff that isn't data and can include stuff that is collected and recorded as data. The latter might be part of your confusion. There is no simple conceptual test as to whether specific information about respondents is data or metadata but it probably doesn't matter a lot if you call some items both data and metadata. Metadata is not made up to fit a study. It is accurate information about the design and execution of a study. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't think there's a general answer to this question (hence the lack of any consensus over the past month). Metadata by definition is "data about the data", but what that means is probably more of a field-dependent convention rather than any deep truth that can be derived from first principles. Two examples: * In the experiments at CERN (at least, the ones I worked on), we didn't really have any concept of "metadata." Everything the machine recorded was data, even timestamps and "environmental" conditions. We had simulated data, and results, but we certainly never considered these "metadata." * When it comes to image processing, pretty much only the images are considered "data." Maybe the labels as well, though I would normally call the labels "labels" rather than trying to group them under data or metadata. Anything else (e.g., the time, location, type of camera, camera settings) would be considered "metadata." In your case, I think you will have to define what you mean by metadata and then answer your question from there. For example, if you are using an underwater gizmo, you could define "data" to be "records from the gizmo" and everything else to be metadata. Or, you could define metadata to be "the gizmo's operating parameters", and everything else is data. Any reasonable choice should be fine so long as you state it clearly and are consistent. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/16	1,468	6,413	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a student in an Integrated Ph.D. course in Physical Science (Physics). Currently, I'm in the first year of this course where I'm taking core courses. I'm doing this course on Fundamentals of Astrophysics which is my first formal exposure to this area of physics. I find several problems with this class. First, I'm not able to synchronize with the professor. I'm not able to follow his English speaking accent either, I suspect because he comes from a different region of the country. I don't understand anything and get nothing out of this class. Moreover, his class bores me, and makes the subject boring for me. The classes are online so it make it worse still. Due to network glitches, its breaks at points. And now not everyone can ask him to repeat again and again. But when I read a book, I find the subject to be interesting. I don't find any difficulty. But the problem is, we are loaded with work. I can afford to read one book but it looks like he gives assignments and teaches from various places (even from topics he didn't cover.). Sometimes he goes outside the prerequisites of the course. If I go about reading different sections of different books, I find it hard because directly jumping to some section is not possible, since the authors then talk about previous sections or previous chapters. I didn't find the suggested books to be useful for his assignment. I don't care about marks very much but due to reasons, I have to obtain decent marks. Can I just explain to him my situation and ask him for a solution? I think it's hard to make changes with the speaking accent or even the teaching style. I can request him to suggest a text from where I can do problems to follow his assignment and can continue to make the subject interesting. Is it alright to ask this? --- Edit : The suggestion is based on a friend, Is this sound constructive? To me, it is. Dear Sir, (I am ....intro) and I am taking your "Fundamental of Astrophysics" course this semester. I am writing this to inform you about the difficulties I am facing in following the course and lectures, especially the topics that I have not read anytime before. Sir, there are several topics you cover that I did not found in the prescribed book i.e. 'Astrophysics for physicist'. Like you taught about the neutrino oscillation . It is not in this book. In a different textbook, it talks about two-level neutrino oscillation, I got the fact but I feel like this only adds to my knowledge but does not add anything to my understanding, as I cannot answer any related question or can even ask. There are several topics that I could not follow due to which the assignments are seeming difficult, I follow another book but directly jumping in between doesn't much help and the following two books would be pretty loaded, as we always have assignments lined up. Sir, Please let me know what should I do when I am unable to understand problems in assignments? Also, it is a request to please provide the references of the lectures and topics that are not in the prescribed book, it will be helpful in following up with the course, understand and do the assignment problems. Thank you<issue_comment>username_1: It sounds like your complaints are * A physics professor has poor English skills. * A graduate level course covers a lot of material and requires a lot of background study. These are normal things. While they are uncomfortable, you should not complain about them. You can ask for help. Try to be specific about what you need help with. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Caveat I am from the US, so some advice may not transfer perfectly to India. I think it's a good idea to meet, but it's important to think about what you want to say, and manage your expectations about what the outcomes will be. Things not to say (because they aren't things the professor can or should change) * I need a good grade in this course. * Your accent is hard to understand. * The books are better than the lectures. * The homework is too hard. Things you could say * There are frequent network problems when I watch the lectures online. Can these be fixed or can you help me find someone to talk to about fixing this? * I am having difficulty relating the homework problems to the lectures and suggested texts. Do you have time to discuss the problems in office hours? Can you suggest resources that are more appropriate for the problems, or help me understand how to use the resources you recommended in the syllabus? * I don't have a strong background in astronomy. Can you suggest some more basic resources to help me fill in any gaps? Expectations * You shouldn't expect the professor to change the way they are teaching or grading the course. A good professor will take feedback to heart and adjust their teaching style based on feedback from students, but you shouldn't expect everyone will do this. * You shouldn't expect the homeworks to get easier. However, you can hopefully expect that you can get guidance on how to get started on the problems so you aren't wasting a lot of time getting started. * You should expect some reasonable attempt can be made to fix glaring technical problems with online lectures. However, it might not lead to a perfect solution. Even if the technical problem can't be fixed, the professor can at least be aware it is happening and account for it in their presentation style, for example if the lecture is broadcast live, they could take breaks to ask if any content was missed due to a technical issue. * Most importantly, you can expect that going to a professor and talking through your issues with the course in a professional way will mean the professor will remember you, and if they are a good professor they will appreciate that you were professional and communicative before major problems arose. In addition to being the right thing to do in some abstract sense, this can help you later on in "soft" ways. If you do poorly on an assignment, for example, it gives you more latitude to go into the professor and talk over what you can do better next time; I think people tend not to like it when someone shows up to their office only after failing an exam, but if you have been making an effort and underperform on a key assignment or exam, they may be more willing to try to help you figure out how to do better. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/16	720	3,186	<issue_start>username_0: Background: CS Undergrad applying to CS PhD Programs in the US. I have multiple posters published along with some mid tier conference papers. Along with these, I have 6 journal papers under review. Few of them got rejected earlier and now I have re-submitted them with significant changes. They should be accepted this time but will take time and will not be "accepted" before I send out my applications. Question 1: Is having too many paper's under-review a bad sign? *I do not want to show the panel that I am simply sending out papers to fill the CV.* Note: 1. Every paper under review will be spoken about in my SOP and my LORs (all the journal papers are part of my various internships). 2. I will be attaching the drafts on my CV for every paper so they can be viewed by the panel. Question 2: Should I not mention about a few papers under review? For all the programs I am applying for, the papers are highly relevant to the prof's works. Hence the question. I am aware of similar questions on the forum but this question is quite specific to me and hence I am asking this as a separate question.<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, no, there is nothing wrong with having many papers under review at a given time. This situation is quite common for practicing academics; some papers find a home reasonably quickly and others sometimes need to be shopped around a bit before finding a home for them. Papers can take several years to be accepted for publication, and academics are well aware of this, so there is no expectation that your papers should be published or even accepted prior to submitting your application. Even in the unfortunate event that one or more of these papers is of insufficient value to ever be published, that just means it is not a positive, rather than being a negative. Since you are applying for PhD programs, the papers you presently have under submission are relevant for your application. A potential supervisor is probably going to be interested in these --- a fortiori if they are in the field of work of that academic. I see no reason why you would omit mentioning these papers in your application. The only thing that could potentially be a (very mild) negative is if the panel reads one of your papers and decides that it is of insufficient substance or value to warrant journal submission. Even then, at most that would show that you require a bit of guidance on the matter, which is something provided in a PhD program. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The fact of the matter is that it is somewhat useless to mention in your CV that you have papers that have been submitted, communicated or are under review. You should include only those papers in your CV that have either been published or have been accepted for publication. Note that including papers that have not been accepted may make you look impulsive and an academic fop, and that is definitely not good. It is likely going to do you worse than any good. Having many papers under review is not bad. But including unaccepted papers in CV is likely to be considered bad if not objectionable. Upvotes: -1
2021/09/16	817	3,540	<issue_start>username_0: I am completing my M.Sc thesis from a Russel group university. I am applying for the PhD in US universities. I wanted a recommendation from my supervisor, but he had set up some unrealistic expectations for me and told me he can't give me "most enthusiastic" recommendation. Other professors whom I told the whole story suggested me to contact my internal examiner, since he is the one who has read my thesis and knows all about it. Now, when I asked him, he immediately agreed to give me. He told me that he believes I am a bright student and he realized that I have understood the topic really well, and that he realized it more during my viva. I have the intellectual capability to do a PhD. However, he told me that he would mention that I need to improve my writing considerably over the course of the PhD. According to him, the letter will be broadly positive, but he will mention this also. Now, I am wondering: will it be then considered a good recommendation letter or a bad recommendation letter?<issue_comment>username_1: If I got such a letter, I would interpret it positively. The comment about improving your writing actually supports the main, overall, view, since it is obviously an honest appraisal. If this person can predict success for you overall, that is likely to be heard. Sometimes an "overly" positive letter might be discounted as a sort of boilerplate that doesn't seem honest. It is a problem of interpretation, of course, and others might/will interpret it differently. But the most important thing is the prediction of success. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It depends on the person who reads the letter, that is mostly, your potential advisor. Some advisors have a rather "hands-off" approach and prefer to work with students who get up to speed fairly independently - such an advisor might not want to work with you on your writing. Some advisors have more of a "hands-on" approach and like to actively work with the student to help them improve their skills (given that they see potential in the student). The letter in this case might leave a more positive impression to "hands-on" advisors---and that's a good thing, because if your writing skills indeed need work, you will probably have a better experience with that type of advisor. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You don't mention if English is your first language. I agree very much with username_1's answer -- but if English isn't your first language, you might ask if the recommender can attest to having no problems communicating with you. This isn't a tremendous issue, as you've just completed a degree in an English-speaking country, which allays many concerns, but if a written communication issue is being brought up, it might be a good idea to put a fence around it so it doesn't get generalized to all communication. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: From what you have told us, you have been promised a good academic recommendation with reservations regarding your writing skills. This will be considered a good letter, with one bad aspect. Looking at your four previous questions in this forum, I see two things. You appear to be of Indian origin. And your written English, though pretty good for a second language, is far from perfect. In academia, you are what you write. Is there a course you could take to improve your written English? You can't be the only student with this issue. In what way were your supervisor's expectations of you 'unrealistic'? Upvotes: 2
2021/09/16	468	2,073	<issue_start>username_0: I have a PhD in pure mathematics and completed a couple of postdocs in complex analysis. I left academia a year ago. Now I realise that I would be interested in returning to research, but in fundamental physics rather than math. Naturally, I would choose a research problem where my math background could be relevant. The "usual advice" is to slowly shift my existing research toward physics. But I have not been doing research for some time now, so this isn't really an option; I would need to make a "cold start" in this new area. Does this sort of thing happen occasionally in academia? If so, what is the path? Should I contact professors about doing projects under their supervision? Reapply to grad school? Try to publish independently? Something else?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are near a large university, especially the one at which you earned your degree, go visit the physics department there and try to meet a few people who might value a collaboration with a mathematician. It might take a while to make contact and get something going. It might also take suggestions about people elsewhere who might be interested. But blind emails are much less likely to result in anything unless they are sent to someone who has somehow already expressed the need. But, you already seem to recognize that it will be through collaborations that you meet your goal. And if you are a bit flexible about the precise sub-field it would increase your chances. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Why not stay in Math and do something physics-related, such as working on the theoretical and numerical aspects of partial differential equations? Many such equations come from physics, and your complex analysis background is quite useful for doing PDEs. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me add to username_1's answer that, if you're near a university, you could attend some seminars in (or near) the area(s) you're interested in. Even if you're not physically near a university, there might be zoom seminars you could join. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/17	1,561	7,085	<issue_start>username_0: So this happened to me multiple times. Scenario 1: I'm sitting in a lecture or listening to a talk (STEM related) which is more or less aligned with my background (so I know the big picture), and then half way through, the lecturer or the presenter asks a question. At this point, I haven't even really figured out the meaning of various symbols and there seems to be a lot of ambiguity (even undefined symbols) in what has been presented, but almost every time another student is able to provide the answer on the spot. How is the student able to tear through all these ambiguities and absorb all these information in such a short amount of time? Note that by "another student", I don't mean just a particular student, but this happens in every class across my entire (graduate) life. Scenario 2: The presenter is presenting and midway someone jumps in with a very intricate question about the material just presented. We are all seeing this for the first time, so why is it that some people are able to see the edge cases so much faster? Maybe I have a study/listen/notetaking habit or concentration problems which are not conducive to learning and I would like to hear your thoughts.<issue_comment>username_1: How many students are in these classes? The student that gives the answer or asks the question, is the first student in the group to come up with a reasonable answer or question. There can be only one student who is the first to do so. So if you're in a class of 100 students, and they're all equally talented and equally likely to come up with a clever idea at any point in time, you would expect to be the asker or answerer once in a hundred times. Most often by far, someone else will ask the question, by simple probability. Beyond that, not all people are created equal. Some people have a real quick intuitive style of processing new information that allows them to react quickly, while others need to digest the information for a while. There is nothing wrong with either personality type. Don't worry about it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Different people learn in different ways. Some people can pick things up in the lecture, others need time to go home after and reconstruct everything for themselves. While it's certainly impressive that some people can "get it" in the moment, it's by no means required for success in STEM, especially as a grad student. You should try to avoid comparing yourself to others, since you may have different areas where you excel. You should also keep in mind that you only see what other people project about themselves to the outside world and you don't have access to their inner monologue; because of this, I think many grad students tend to overestimate the abilities of their peers and underestimate their own. In the end, there's a certain rate at which you can absorb technical information, and there's no point in simply wishing the rate was higher. While you can increase this rate with lots of hard work and experience, that's not something you should expect to happen magically or quickly. Having said that, if your goal is to be able to ask questions in lecture, here are some thoughts on various strategies to try: * most lectures start relatively easy and then ramp up in difficulty. Try to listen carefully and follow the logical steps of the lecture, see if you can identify the first spot where you start feeling confused. Take a moment and try to pin down exactly what you are confused about as precisely as possible (is it an undefined word; a new concept; an old concept being used in an unfamiliar way...) and ask a question about this. * don't be afraid to ask about ambiguous or undefined symbols; it could well be that simply getting over this "mathematical language barrier" will make the content a lot clearer to you and you can spot tricky steps more easily. * review the material at your pace beforehand so you know what the confusing parts are in advance. * do a lot of problems in this subject so you become more familiar with standard notation and the ways of thinking about it, which in turn will increase the rate at which you can absorb information in this area. * don't try to follow and absorb every detail in the moment, but only try to follow the logical outline of the lecture, since you will be able to fill in details later. If you don't see how the lecture logically flows from one part to the next at a high level, it's probably work asking a question to clarify the logic. * if the lecture is covering a general case of something, try reducing various statements to a special case you understand well and see if you can follow the details there. For example, if a derivation is being done in three dimensions, see if you can follow how the arguments work if you project out one of the coordinates. * try to explain tricky concepts out loud to yourself and to other people. While doing this, try to think of ways you could explain the material that weren't the way that was done in the lecture. This may either lead you to a better explanation, or to a realization of why the material was structured a certain way. Getting a feel for how your lecturer likes to think about and explain things, can give you some intuition for which aspects of what they are talking about are the most important. To summarize: (a) definitely speak up to clarify unambiguous or undefined notation, since you will have no chance of following anything if the symbols are not defined, (b) working hard outside of class can help you follow things more quickly in class, and (c) try to identify the most important points and focus on those, leaving more detailed calculations or proofs to understand later. This frees your brain up to think about the material at a higher level; it is much easier to ask questions if you are following the structure of the lecture rather than trying to follow every step line-by-line. Note: "higher level" here is not a value judgment that some material is "better" or "more intrinsically interesting," but essentially a kind of coarse-graining of the material where you assume certain calculations / proofs work out and see if you can follow the logical implications of the results that are derived. You want to aim to be able to (a) identify the key results in the lecture and (b) for each result, understand what all the inputs are (and why they are needed), what all the outputs are (and what outputs you'd like to get that you can't get), and what you can do with the result. You do need to understand the details eventually, but you don't need to understand them in the moment, especially if you feel it is hurting your ability to understand the overall lecture. I suspect that many questions you perceive as being very intricate or detailed, are really coming from someone following at this kind of higher level finding that two results don't seem to fit together or making a connection with another subject they know well (again keep in mind you don't know the internal monologue of other people). Upvotes: 1
2021/09/17	682	2,923	<issue_start>username_0: While looking for literature relevant to my research topic, I came across a number of papers in Russian. Russian is Greek to me. What should I do? Is there an online platform that may help me? What about Google Translate? How effective is it?<issue_comment>username_1: First, ask an academic librarian to help you find a translation. You can also ask the authors, assuming they are still alive, if they know of a translation into a language you are more comfortable with. For some fields, though not so much for technical ones, Google Translate does an adequate job. But technical translation is still very difficult due to specialized vocabulary and such. If you can't read the paper, see if you can read some of the papers that it cites. Or try to read other papers that cite it. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Obviously, the best options are for you to get a friend who knows the language or learn the language yourself. But in the meantime, try this: 1. Download the paper as a PDF file. 2. If the paper is a little bit old or is composed of scanned images, use a good software to do Optical Character Recognition (Adobe Acrobat should do the trick). 3. While the PDF file is open, copy a few paragraphs of text (3 or 4 should be ok) 4. Open an Internet browser such as Chrome. 5. Paste the text (Ctrl-V) into the address bar (yes, the address bar!) This will collapse all of the lines into a single, unbroken section of text. Note: this step is actually quite important. It is sometimes the case that when you copy a few lines of text from a PDF into Google Translate, the pasted text will appear as broken sentences (i.e., broken at the line break points), and as a result Google Translate will only translate each of the fragmented, incomplete sentences instead of reading the fragments as a single continuous sentence. This will negatively affect translation quality, which is already not that great to begin with. 6. Select the whole text from the address bar (Ctrl-A) 7. Cut or copy the text (Ctrl-X or Ctrl-C) 8. Paste the text into Google Translate. 9. If necessary, print each translated section as a PDF file so that you can reference it later. 10. Repeat the process until you've read the whole thing. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Did you consider paying for a translation? If the research is done on behalf of a company, then providing a translation for hundred or so pages would be pennies for them. If it's for a university, maybe the grant could cover it. This advice won't be applicable for all circumstances, but for others it would be the most straightforward and error-proof method. Just imagine how many misunderstanding you can create by relying on Google Translate alone. I use it often for lyric translation and there were numerous times, when I completely misunderstood a song because of the broken translation. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/17	283	1,206	<issue_start>username_0: I have received an offer from a university and I want to accept that. In their email they have sent a cc email to another person who is probably the head of HR. In my response, I want to know whether I reply to the sender or reply to all?<issue_comment>username_1: In such cases, it is clear that those people are cc-ed to be kept in the loop. So yes, reply to everyone. (Unless you are very sure they have been cc-ed for some other reason, related to the making of the offer, but not it's acceptance, which is hard to imagine, and would require knowledge of the inner workings of the university.) Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Reply-all. The others in the cc are being cc-ed because they are involved in the hiring process and need to know what you decide for their work. Having said that, the cost of hitting reply instead of reply-all in this scenario is probably basically nothing except someone maybe thinking "I wonder why they didn't hit reply-all" for a few minutes; what will almost certainly happen is that the person who you sent the response to will immediately forward it to everyone else. My main point is, don't over think it. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/17	3,186	13,738	<issue_start>username_0: For example, in a classroom, if a group of students score 45%, the teacher tries to help these students by allowing them to take a second attempt exam. At the same time, a student with 70% can't increase their score (can't attempt the exam again because they have already passed). This also happens when correcting tests. For example, some teachers try to give more notes in case the student fails his test, or give less notes if the grade of the test is too good. The grading criteria is not based just on the exercises, and the grades are given according to conditions outside of the exercise ("3 questions wrong, so maybe I need to give better grades for this only one exercise that the student solved"). I hated this behaviour in my time as a student and now I am correcting a test and see myself behaving in a similar way. I only want to know if this bias, "human" behaviour or "brain" behaviour, has a name and if it has been identified in the academy, or am I the only one who has had this type of teacher?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know a name for this common human phenomenon. As a teacher many considerations enter into my grade calculations - so much so that "calculation" does not seem to describe my process. A grade (on an exam or in a course) is never just a direct measure of correct answers or knowledge gained. I often found that grades on exams reflected at least as much on the quality of the questions I asked as on what the students learned. My goal has always been to manage a course so that each student in it gets as much as possible out of it. But what each student needs or wants or is capable of varies. So effort and intent and progress always matter even if they are hard to quantify and may seem unfair or arbitrary. Welcome to the profession. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt you are the only person feeling this way, although I don't know a name for it. However, I think there are different issues present in the examples you give. 1. When it comes to grading exams and allowing or not allowing retakes, I think a policy that only a subset of students is allowed to take the exam based only on their grade is fundamentally unfair, and I would question whether such a scenario would really be allowed by typical University policies. This is pretty cut and dry and I don't see why there should be any wiggle room allowed based purely on the grade, without some extenuating circumstance. 2. When it comes to feedback on homework, I think there's a general bias in grading to give more feedback on wrong answers than right ones. I think this is fairly easy to explain... grading takes time, and the goal of a homework problem is to check if a student can produce a correct and well-articulated solution. If the student can, then that's that. If not, then feedback is intended to help struggling students reach the expected level of performance. In an ideal world, maybe we should attempt to give the strong student more feedback, like "you should consider this alternative argument" or "this part could be better explained" or "why don't you think about this more challenging problem," but everyone is busy and students end up getting this kind of feedback when they move into capstone projects, internships, research problems, etc. 3. More broadly speaking, I think there's a tendency (which I think is a good thing) to value not just the absolute value of performance, but the derivative of performance. In other words, I would tend to have respect for someone who did poorly on the first exam, but makes a dedicated effort to improve their grade by studying hard, coming to office hours, etc -- even if their final marks were not the strongest. I might even have more respect for such a student, than one who knew most of the material before the course, so was able to achieve top marks with very little effort. Now, for better or worse, there's no "respect" mark given in a course, and I don't think exams should be graded with "respect" in mind. However, there are "soft" ways that a person who has made an effort can receive extra help -- for example, it might be possible to write a more personalized letter of recommendation, or "respect" can enter into deciding the final grade in a borderline case, or getting the benefit of the doubt in some situations... etc. I don't think this kind of "soft" recognition is a bad thing at all; it acknowledges that a person is made of more than the answers they give on an exam and success takes many different factors; in my experience, grit is often more important than raw intelligence for achieving success. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: What’s happening here is that university administrations are very worried about retention, and want faculty to go to lengths to prevent students from failing because that prevents them from graduating on time. By contrast a low but passing grade does not cause the same problems and there’s less focus on it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Perhaps I'd call it "attention to the individual". Though "mercy" might also be not too far from the mark. I think that what you are doing is fine, helping struggling students along. This is based on a general philosophy that you might consider adopting and also on a few ethical principles: First the philosophy. I feel, when teaching, that I am responsible for every student. Not just the best, or not just the average, but every student. I can't control student actions, of course, but I can make it possible for every student to succeed - to their own standard - by adopting some practices that derive from the principles. But, I can't neglect anyone. I can't teach to the level of the uninterested and ignore the top students, nor the opposite. I need, in fact, to find a way to challenge everyone and to assist them in meeting the challenge. No "sink or swim" in my classes, and I hope no "boring boring boring" either. Any student willing to put in effort (that isn't everyone, of course) can succeed, though perhaps not in exactly the same way. Some ideas to guide teaching: * Every student is different. They learn differently and they need different kinds of support. One lecture does not fit all. * I'm not perfect. I make some mistakes. Sometimes I don't state things perfectly, in lecture or on exams. Sometimes I grade more harshly or leniently than is really good. * You can't assume that your students conform to some hypothetical statistical distribution. They are but a small sample from a large population and small samples can differ widely from the general case. This is especially true given the selection mechanism that gets students to your course in the first place. It isn't random selection. * You can't assume that all the students know how to learn. Some of the quite good students hit a wall when they hit their natural ability level, never having had to work very hard. Two lessons I needed to teach were how to take notes effectively, capturing the key ideas, and asking questions. * Take the fundamental position that you are a teacher, not a grader. Grading is not the core of your job. And some ethical principles: * I must treat every student fairly. But that doesn't mean that I must treat them identically. * The grade assigned to a student should depend on the work of that student only and should not be influenced or affected by the grades given to others. * It must be possible, if not easy, for every student to succeed. Analysis of the question at hand. The OP's willingness to grade some students more leniently doesn't seem to me to be against the philosophy or the ethical rules as above. No other student is negatively impacted if a weaker student gets a slightly higher grade than the rubric suggests. But this rules out "grading on the curve" which is competitive grading, where one student must suffer if another benefits. I find all forms of competitive grading unethical. Not that all competition is bad, and I often encouraged competition between teams, but it didn't affect grading. I don't find the OP's "leniency" to be ideal, however. But some of the practices described below have somewhat the same effect. If a student wants to put in the work, they can succeed, so no grade is a "gift" in the sense that it is unearned. Some other strange, but ethical practices: * I could, in principle, make a separate contract with every student and every student could have their own unique tasks. This is hard to arrange and grade, of course, but is exactly what happens when "grades" are given for theses and dissertations. The difficulty of the tasks might be part of the negotiation. The student needs to know at the start, of course, what all the conditions are in order to preserve fairness. * Teamwork needs to fit the ethical principles. The main issue is avoiding free-riders, but also dominant personalities who refuse to let others contribute. My solution to that was to use peer evaluation, which is not peer grading. Every student in a team provided a private report detailing their own main contribution and the main contributions of at least some of their teammates. I required positive contributions, not grousing. For a pair, an evaluation of their teammate. For a large team, perhaps evaluations of their three most productive teammates. You learn something from these and it can be very unexpected. I've had good teams praise one member that I didn't think was contributing much. But their work took place outside my view, of course. Some practices I found useful: * Cumulative grading: The course is "worth" 1000 points. Those pants are distributed over various activities such as projects and exams. Each activity has a known number of points (max) that will contribute to the final total grade. The breaks between grades is known in advance, say 900 points = A, etc. But the implication is that if you get 800 points you do "no worse" than B and might get a bit higher (B+) depending on other factors. But every student knows their worst case grade. Students got feedback on their work, mostly pointing out where it was lacking in some way. Note that a student could decide that all they wanted was a C and essentially abandon future work once they had passed that milestone. I don't think that is an advantage here, but some students had different priorities than a high grade in my course. * Rework for regrading. If an assignment is worth 200 points and a student earns less than that in my initial grading. They can redo the assignment and I'll regrade it. They can earn back up to 90% of the lost points, but not all. So, if they get 180 on the first grading, rework will get them back up to 18 points. To make this reasonable for the grader, students turn in prior work with the new and mark changes (highlighter) in the new work. Note that the high performing students had the same opportunity for rework, but seldom found it necessary. Late work was covered under this rule, so work turned in late can still earn 90% of the total for the assignment. * Exams were a bit deprecated. The usual breakdown was about 30% of the grade based on exams and the rest on projects. Late exams, etc. was never an issue. Only the final could have a serious negative effect on the grade. Some students who had very high marks prior to the final might be excused from it, receiving the grade earned up to that point. * Different exercises for different students. On a couple of occasions, not frequently, I'd offer two versions of an assignment, worth the same points. One was much harder than the other. Students could choose which to do prior to starting. I'd warn them about the difficulty difference and suggest that some of them would likely be bored with the easy one. Unsurprisingly, the really good students would accept the challenge. Example: Build a binary search tree or build a B-tree both with various requirements (insert, delete, find). * Fuzzy boundaries between grades. Generally at the end of the course, if 700 was required for a C grade then a student earning 695 (or thereabouts) would get the higher grade. (Recognizes that my grading isn't perfect.) * Final sanity check. At the end of the course I look at the distribution. If it matches what my intuition tells me that the class as a whole learned and earned, then I let it stand. I would adjust upwards a bit if it felt that I'd been too harsh overall. --- Notes: The scale of my courses was reasonable. I seldom had more than 30 in a class. I provided round the clock communication systems so that students could ask questions whenever they arose. Every other student saw all questions and all answers. A simple email list works, with the entire class subscribed. I was trusted by the administration, and had tenure. Complaints about me were more "too much work" rather than "unfair grading". I may return to this as thoughts arise, but it is done, for now. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I would call this tendency "a desire to educate"! The primary goal is education; "evaluation" is secondary. If students fail an exam, then letting them retake it will probably lead them to go back and study the material and learn it better. To avoid the bad habit of not taking exams seriously, you can cap the re-take grade at the passing mark. (This is the policy in my University.) Similarly, if a student is clearly confused, then giving them significant feedback will hopefully clarify the material. The student who understands the material already doesn't need that kind of feedback. You could give them feedback to further challenge them: "This is correct, but can you think of a more direct approach?" etc. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/17	3,162	13,661	<issue_start>username_0: I'm aware that academic editorial work is to a good extent a voluntary service to the community. Peer reviewing, to my knowledge, is always a voluntary service, for a whole number of good reasons, e.g. to remain independent and impartial, or to avoid scientific misconduct. Anyway, because of the different task profile and responsibilities of editors in chief (EiCs), associate editors, guest editors, and other academic editorial staffs, I wonder about types of journals, which pay these roles for their services? I'm aware that some less known/traditional/established publishers pay parts of their academic editorial staffs. (I am not referring to paid full-time employees of publishers, such as management staffs and members of production teams.) I also wonder how much in terms of a full-time equivalent salary that would typically be? Ranges or percentages by country, discipline, or even publisher would already shed light on this.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know a name for this common human phenomenon. As a teacher many considerations enter into my grade calculations - so much so that "calculation" does not seem to describe my process. A grade (on an exam or in a course) is never just a direct measure of correct answers or knowledge gained. I often found that grades on exams reflected at least as much on the quality of the questions I asked as on what the students learned. My goal has always been to manage a course so that each student in it gets as much as possible out of it. But what each student needs or wants or is capable of varies. So effort and intent and progress always matter even if they are hard to quantify and may seem unfair or arbitrary. Welcome to the profession. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I doubt you are the only person feeling this way, although I don't know a name for it. However, I think there are different issues present in the examples you give. 1. When it comes to grading exams and allowing or not allowing retakes, I think a policy that only a subset of students is allowed to take the exam based only on their grade is fundamentally unfair, and I would question whether such a scenario would really be allowed by typical University policies. This is pretty cut and dry and I don't see why there should be any wiggle room allowed based purely on the grade, without some extenuating circumstance. 2. When it comes to feedback on homework, I think there's a general bias in grading to give more feedback on wrong answers than right ones. I think this is fairly easy to explain... grading takes time, and the goal of a homework problem is to check if a student can produce a correct and well-articulated solution. If the student can, then that's that. If not, then feedback is intended to help struggling students reach the expected level of performance. In an ideal world, maybe we should attempt to give the strong student more feedback, like "you should consider this alternative argument" or "this part could be better explained" or "why don't you think about this more challenging problem," but everyone is busy and students end up getting this kind of feedback when they move into capstone projects, internships, research problems, etc. 3. More broadly speaking, I think there's a tendency (which I think is a good thing) to value not just the absolute value of performance, but the derivative of performance. In other words, I would tend to have respect for someone who did poorly on the first exam, but makes a dedicated effort to improve their grade by studying hard, coming to office hours, etc -- even if their final marks were not the strongest. I might even have more respect for such a student, than one who knew most of the material before the course, so was able to achieve top marks with very little effort. Now, for better or worse, there's no "respect" mark given in a course, and I don't think exams should be graded with "respect" in mind. However, there are "soft" ways that a person who has made an effort can receive extra help -- for example, it might be possible to write a more personalized letter of recommendation, or "respect" can enter into deciding the final grade in a borderline case, or getting the benefit of the doubt in some situations... etc. I don't think this kind of "soft" recognition is a bad thing at all; it acknowledges that a person is made of more than the answers they give on an exam and success takes many different factors; in my experience, grit is often more important than raw intelligence for achieving success. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: What’s happening here is that university administrations are very worried about retention, and want faculty to go to lengths to prevent students from failing because that prevents them from graduating on time. By contrast a low but passing grade does not cause the same problems and there’s less focus on it. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Perhaps I'd call it "attention to the individual". Though "mercy" might also be not too far from the mark. I think that what you are doing is fine, helping struggling students along. This is based on a general philosophy that you might consider adopting and also on a few ethical principles: First the philosophy. I feel, when teaching, that I am responsible for every student. Not just the best, or not just the average, but every student. I can't control student actions, of course, but I can make it possible for every student to succeed - to their own standard - by adopting some practices that derive from the principles. But, I can't neglect anyone. I can't teach to the level of the uninterested and ignore the top students, nor the opposite. I need, in fact, to find a way to challenge everyone and to assist them in meeting the challenge. No "sink or swim" in my classes, and I hope no "boring boring boring" either. Any student willing to put in effort (that isn't everyone, of course) can succeed, though perhaps not in exactly the same way. Some ideas to guide teaching: * Every student is different. They learn differently and they need different kinds of support. One lecture does not fit all. * I'm not perfect. I make some mistakes. Sometimes I don't state things perfectly, in lecture or on exams. Sometimes I grade more harshly or leniently than is really good. * You can't assume that your students conform to some hypothetical statistical distribution. They are but a small sample from a large population and small samples can differ widely from the general case. This is especially true given the selection mechanism that gets students to your course in the first place. It isn't random selection. * You can't assume that all the students know how to learn. Some of the quite good students hit a wall when they hit their natural ability level, never having had to work very hard. Two lessons I needed to teach were how to take notes effectively, capturing the key ideas, and asking questions. * Take the fundamental position that you are a teacher, not a grader. Grading is not the core of your job. And some ethical principles: * I must treat every student fairly. But that doesn't mean that I must treat them identically. * The grade assigned to a student should depend on the work of that student only and should not be influenced or affected by the grades given to others. * It must be possible, if not easy, for every student to succeed. Analysis of the question at hand. The OP's willingness to grade some students more leniently doesn't seem to me to be against the philosophy or the ethical rules as above. No other student is negatively impacted if a weaker student gets a slightly higher grade than the rubric suggests. But this rules out "grading on the curve" which is competitive grading, where one student must suffer if another benefits. I find all forms of competitive grading unethical. Not that all competition is bad, and I often encouraged competition between teams, but it didn't affect grading. I don't find the OP's "leniency" to be ideal, however. But some of the practices described below have somewhat the same effect. If a student wants to put in the work, they can succeed, so no grade is a "gift" in the sense that it is unearned. Some other strange, but ethical practices: * I could, in principle, make a separate contract with every student and every student could have their own unique tasks. This is hard to arrange and grade, of course, but is exactly what happens when "grades" are given for theses and dissertations. The difficulty of the tasks might be part of the negotiation. The student needs to know at the start, of course, what all the conditions are in order to preserve fairness. * Teamwork needs to fit the ethical principles. The main issue is avoiding free-riders, but also dominant personalities who refuse to let others contribute. My solution to that was to use peer evaluation, which is not peer grading. Every student in a team provided a private report detailing their own main contribution and the main contributions of at least some of their teammates. I required positive contributions, not grousing. For a pair, an evaluation of their teammate. For a large team, perhaps evaluations of their three most productive teammates. You learn something from these and it can be very unexpected. I've had good teams praise one member that I didn't think was contributing much. But their work took place outside my view, of course. Some practices I found useful: * Cumulative grading: The course is "worth" 1000 points. Those pants are distributed over various activities such as projects and exams. Each activity has a known number of points (max) that will contribute to the final total grade. The breaks between grades is known in advance, say 900 points = A, etc. But the implication is that if you get 800 points you do "no worse" than B and might get a bit higher (B+) depending on other factors. But every student knows their worst case grade. Students got feedback on their work, mostly pointing out where it was lacking in some way. Note that a student could decide that all they wanted was a C and essentially abandon future work once they had passed that milestone. I don't think that is an advantage here, but some students had different priorities than a high grade in my course. * Rework for regrading. If an assignment is worth 200 points and a student earns less than that in my initial grading. They can redo the assignment and I'll regrade it. They can earn back up to 90% of the lost points, but not all. So, if they get 180 on the first grading, rework will get them back up to 18 points. To make this reasonable for the grader, students turn in prior work with the new and mark changes (highlighter) in the new work. Note that the high performing students had the same opportunity for rework, but seldom found it necessary. Late work was covered under this rule, so work turned in late can still earn 90% of the total for the assignment. * Exams were a bit deprecated. The usual breakdown was about 30% of the grade based on exams and the rest on projects. Late exams, etc. was never an issue. Only the final could have a serious negative effect on the grade. Some students who had very high marks prior to the final might be excused from it, receiving the grade earned up to that point. * Different exercises for different students. On a couple of occasions, not frequently, I'd offer two versions of an assignment, worth the same points. One was much harder than the other. Students could choose which to do prior to starting. I'd warn them about the difficulty difference and suggest that some of them would likely be bored with the easy one. Unsurprisingly, the really good students would accept the challenge. Example: Build a binary search tree or build a B-tree both with various requirements (insert, delete, find). * Fuzzy boundaries between grades. Generally at the end of the course, if 700 was required for a C grade then a student earning 695 (or thereabouts) would get the higher grade. (Recognizes that my grading isn't perfect.) * Final sanity check. At the end of the course I look at the distribution. If it matches what my intuition tells me that the class as a whole learned and earned, then I let it stand. I would adjust upwards a bit if it felt that I'd been too harsh overall. --- Notes: The scale of my courses was reasonable. I seldom had more than 30 in a class. I provided round the clock communication systems so that students could ask questions whenever they arose. Every other student saw all questions and all answers. A simple email list works, with the entire class subscribed. I was trusted by the administration, and had tenure. Complaints about me were more "too much work" rather than "unfair grading". I may return to this as thoughts arise, but it is done, for now. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I would call this tendency "a desire to educate"! The primary goal is education; "evaluation" is secondary. If students fail an exam, then letting them retake it will probably lead them to go back and study the material and learn it better. To avoid the bad habit of not taking exams seriously, you can cap the re-take grade at the passing mark. (This is the policy in my University.) Similarly, if a student is clearly confused, then giving them significant feedback will hopefully clarify the material. The student who understands the material already doesn't need that kind of feedback. You could give them feedback to further challenge them: "This is correct, but can you think of a more direct approach?" etc. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/17	1,475	6,548	<issue_start>username_0: I am a foreigner that learnt English as his third language. And I make mistakes all the time as a result. In general I like it when people correct me because I get to improve my English, which is crucial for paper writing and communicating with colleagues/students/anyone. I find that at my university, there are plenty of people that come with relatively weak English skills, they can communicate and get their ideas across, but in terms of composition, conjugation, spelling... They have very malformed sentences (when writing), which sometimes makes it a little harder for me to understand what they are saying. My gut feeling, based on my own experience, is to tell the student something along the lines of "your English is very good, but here's a mistake you made." And pick one or two errors out of all the ones they made to try to help them a little without making them feel like they cannot speak English. But maybe this is likely to come bite me in the ass later if students perceive it as harassment or bullying.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you are looking at this problem a bit ass-backwards. As a general premise, in an educational context, there is nothing inherently offensive about letting someone know that their English is poor, if their English is poor. Rather than starting with the premise that this might be perceived as bullying or harassment, start with the premise that it is a valid educational diagnosis, and think about when it is a good idea to raise this, and the best way to deliver this diagnosis and corresponding instructions. University students in an English-speaking university are learning both the subject matter of their degree program, and the language of instruction. It is perfectly appropriate for lecturers to assist them with both of these things, and this assistance ought to include honest diagnosis of their present level of ability in both. You will need to exercise discretion for how often you think it is useful to raise issues of English competence, bearing in mind that learning a language takes time and practice. In any case, in situations where a diagnosis is appropriate, there are certainly ways you can have these conversations that take the "sting" out of them, just as you can with subject-matter discussions in technical disciplines. However, the desirability of softening the blow from a diagnosis does not over-ride the importance of communicating that diagnosis in an honest and measured way. In my own experience, students for whom English is a second language ---who have not yet become fluent--- are usually aware that they are not yet fluent. It should be possible for you to communicate the fact that their English is at a level where they can communicate, and you can understand what they are saying, but it has problems in composition, spelling, etc. Most universities have some kind of Language Centre with specialists in English-language teaching, so if your university has one of these, you can refer students there for a diagnostic assessment or for broader assistance. (These centres are also useful for students for whom English is a first language, who nevertheless have abominable composition and grammar). I have also noticed that this problem is far from being limited to ESL students. I have had many experiences lecturing where the quality of English writing from non-ESL students was extremely poor. (I would say it is "shockingly bad" but I am actually quite used to it by now.) The same basic principles of diagnosis and instruction apply in this case. (And if you think it might be insulting to an ESL student to be told that their English is poor, just bear a thought for non-ESL students who are told that their competence in their first language is poor!) In terms of the specifics of how to communicate this matter, it is a good idea to think how you can "soften" the adverse diagnosis, but you shouldn't go so far as to mislead the student about their present abilities. Consequently, I think your gut feeling of what to say is wrong in the other direction from which you are worried --- i.e., if the student does not, in fact, have "very good English", you should not blow smoke up their ass by telling them they do. Simply let them know that their English is clear enough to get across their ideas in a basic fashion, but they need to improve their composition, spelling, and grammar. You can then go into details on specific problems you noticed, and also refer them to the Language Centre at your university. Now, in our especially sensitive age, it is perhaps possible that a student might take such offence to this that they accuse you of "bullying" or "harassment". Neither charge is likely to have any serious merit in an educational context, where your job is to diagnose skill deficiencies and assist students to remedy these. If such an unpleasant thing happens, I recommend you cease one-on-one instuction to the student, seek an alternative lecturer to instruct them in those matters, and proceed with the complaint with the expectation that the university will back you against a non-meritorious allegation. Contrary to what some people seem to think, the concepts of bullying and harassment do actually have some substantive meaning in workplace law and university policy, and they do not encompass everything that a person subjectively perceives as bullying and harrassment. Finally, I will just note that English is a difficult language, in part because it is huge, it gradually absorbs words from other languages, and it has a substantial number of [idioms](https://www.ef.com/wwen/english-resources/english-idioms/) (e.g., bite me in the ass, ass-backwards, blow smoke up their ass). Fluent English-speakers tend to use idioms commonly without realising it, and for people still learning the language, if they haven't heard these expressions before they can sound very strange indeed. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If a student needs to improve his or her writing skills, there is nothing wrong in stating just that: “You will need to improve your writing skills”. No need to say “Your writing skills are bad”. You can even “soften” the suggestion by acknowledging that “Most people who learn English as a second language need to work on the writing skills, and you will need to improve as well.” It is important to point out that improvement is required in this or that area — it’s part of the learning process — but no need to insert an explicitly critical comment. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/18	676	2,909	<issue_start>username_0: I have some contacts on a social networking site who are much more knowledgeable than me. Some are PhDs/professors and some work in big tech companies (Google, Facebook, etc.). Every now and then, I would have some questions to ask, and often times I cannot get the (timely) answers from Q and A sites like StackExchange or Quora. Every time I attempt to turn to them for help, I would hesitate because they have not replied to my last message. In such messages, I just describe my questions and ask if they would give me some suggestions or directions. I wonder how to network to find more support from "friends"? I don't know how others socialize for help, and others don't ask me for help with specific technique questions. Often others ask me for recommendations like books or courses and I would try my best to help. How do you deal with specific questions when you feel that it's time to find someone to discuss or ask?<issue_comment>username_1: Often the people you are approaching for help as you describe, have plenty of deadlines to keep up with and along with maintaining personal life and other chores, there is no room for tending to questions like yours, that too over social media. This is not because they are unfriendly towards you, but it's just life. You can of course still get help from them and have a discussion in your favour by helping them with structuring your questions. So: 1. Ask questions focussed on the specifics - like what, when, where and so on - on the said topic. Like if you are asking for which course to take to learn about machine learning, list a few options that are available to you. This shows that you have done some research and are truly interested in learning a new skill. 2. Different people have different preferred modes of communication. For me it is email. You can ask what their preferences are. 3. Often, a quick call is better than long walls of text, in which case, you should take notes while on call to stick to the details of the discussion. 4. Leave a "thank you" message for them later, this shows that they contributed to your career/personality growth. 5. I find it weird when completely unknown people ask for help on a career. So build on your networks for a while, instead of dropping random questions in the chatbox. Nobody (and in future, you) appreciates that. 6. Remember that it is you getting help from them, they don't gain anything from such a discussion, so make it enjoyable for them too - by being polite and humane. Hope these help. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: sometimes, we should be just humans and help each other if we have the heart to. one could find time one could stop and listen one could just get his head out of this glittering reality and be aware of others. but if one loves himself that much, then he will allmost never find time for others. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/18	4,933	20,739	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a teaching assistant at a US university for a calculus class. My major duties are to write worksheets and then grade them along with the homework. I have been a TA long enough (5 years now) to understand the usual responsibilities of one. I have also worked with a variety of instructors with different working styles. All of this, is to say that my current instructor is severely micromanaging me. So far, I've managed to do all of the miscellaneous and often questionable as necessary tasks they've given me. But as the semester is progressing, they're continuing to give me additional tasks. By way of example, they'd started questioning why I took a point from a students assignment. Now they also want me to write down a detailed rubric of how I grade an assignment, down to every possible scenario of how a student may lose a point. There are other examples. Their tone of emails is very disrespectful and I get several emails a week (on top of a weekly meeting) of that nature. I've considered talking to my research advisor, but they've got a lot on their plate right now and so I would like to call on the vast experience of this community to help me with the following questions: 1. Am I allowed to use the word 'micromanage' in an email, or would it be considered unprofessional or inappropriate? I wish to let the instructor know that I would like to be treated like an adult. 2. Do math departments at US universities have some kind of support system for TAs? If a TA such as I is distressed with their instructor, who would they go talk to? 3. As a TA, am I allowed to say no to a task given by the instructor? Or must I do whatever they say? Edit: I. Clarification: I am not unhappy that the instructor requires a rubric. Rubrics have always been created and used. They however, want me to write down in great detailed how many ways there are a student can get a problem incorrect, and how I'd mark them down. The point is, there are infinitely many ways and no rubric detailed enough can account for every contingency. I am also not unhappy that the instructor is handing me more tasks as the semester progresses. I am unhappy, however, that they're relinquishing many of the responsibilities of an instructor (that they started the semester, agreeing to do) onto me. This is creating logistical challenges for me (since we are not teaching in person). An earlier clarification that included a detail about the instructor has been removed, please keep it that way. II. Update: Thank you all for your comments and answers. I took the advice of approaching the instructor and the department chair (separately) and putting my concerns in front of them. I also spoke to fellow TAs who had worked with the instructor in the past. Following is a brief summary: 1. The instructor seem to not agree that their tone of communication with me had been disrespectful. I showed them some examples and explained my perspective and after a dialogue, they seem to cave in and indirectly admitted by saying that their language was a bit too harsh. The instructor did not agree that they're passing their work onto me, so I decided to take it to the chair. 2. The chair agreed that many of the tasks I was performing were not to be handled by TAs. They told me they'd speak to the instructor. 3. Apparently, a couple TAs I spoke to, who've worked with them in the past, had similar experiences. They said they got into arguments with the instructor often. III) Conclusion: I'm grateful for a lot of good advice given to me here. The situation seems to have gotten a lot better with the instructor now and I hope to finish the semester on a positive note.<issue_comment>username_1: Taking your questions in reverse order: As a TA it is very unlikely that you have any independent authority at all. The course is assigned to the professor who is responsible for it and for managing any support staff. There are likely rules on what it is appropriate for them to require and certainly limits on the time you are required to work. At some institutions the TAs might have a union or a support organization, and students normally have somewhere they can appeal to. You can say "micromanage" or any other terms you like and whether they are unprofessional or not, if you push people's buttons, especially intentionally, then it probably works against you. It is also possible that the "disrespect" you are feeling is a reaction to your own actions. You seem very angry, both in the question and in a comment. Projecting that does you no good. You resent being given additional tasks, it seems. But some would interpret that as being given additional responsibility, which is part of the learning process. Five years experience doesn't make you an expert. Sorry. But, your research advisor is probably a good person to talk to. Ask if your complaints are valid. Ask if others have complained. A local source is more valuable than anyone here (myself included) since there are details you can share there, but not here. You say the tasks are "questionable" but we can't judge that. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: > > 1. Am I allowed to use the word 'micromanage' in an email, or would it be considered unprofessional or inappropriate? I wish to let the instructor know that I would like to be treated like an adult. > > > I’d advise you against using that word. It’s a somewhat loaded term, might have a negative triggering effect, and besides, some supervisors might believe that micromanaging someone is actually a good thing in some circumstances. I suggest instead that you focus on communicating in a jargon-free manner that given your experience you could be doing your job more effectively with less detailed instructions from the professor, and that this could save the professor’s time and energy as well. As for “treated like an adult”, that sounds fairy hyperbolic to me. They may be treating you like a first year graduate student instead of a fifth year, but first years are still adults. When you discuss this with anyone at your department, tone down the hyperbole and stick to factual, emotionally neutral terms. > > 2. Do math departments at US universities have some kind of support system for TAs? If a TA such as I is distressed with their instructor, who would they go talk to? > > > That’s specific to your department but probably the graduate program coordinator, graduate program chair, or the graduate vice chair. In a smaller department it might be the department chair. At my department, all of the above people would be quite supportive and try to help you resolve the situation. > > 3. As a TA, am I allowed to say no to a task given by the instructor? Or must I do whatever they say? > > > Generally speaking a math department is like most hierarchical workplaces in the US, that is, people have supervisors who give them instructions, and they are expected to follow those instructions. However, it’s not like some kind of navy ship where disobeying an order will get you court-martialed (or, during wartime in certain historical times and places, summarily executed); if that were the case, there’d be a lot of dead TAs on my record… In reality in professional workplaces where the employees are college-educated “knowledge workers” (a description that certainly includes math departments) it is understood that the supervisee is going to apply their own judgment to the situation and try to get the task they were given done in the best way as they understand it. So, while it is not considered appropriate to disobey a direct order, it is also not considered very appropriate for a supervisor to give a direct order that has extreme levels of specificity to it and takes away the autonomy of the supervisee to apply their professional skill and judgment to the situation. In such a situation it would not be inappropriate to at least try to reason with the professor. In reality, in my experience TAs often don’t do everything I tell them to do in the exact way I told them to do it, and somehow the world keeps spinning. But I’m a reasonable person, and your professor may not be. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm not going to address your 3 points specifically, because I believe these are not the right questions to ask in your situation, and because two other posts have already replied to your specific concerns. Rather, I think it is important to realize that there are multiple ways to organize the "staff" (i.e. all instructors, lecturers, TA's, etc. involved) of a course. Additionally, the teacher in charge usually has the freedom to choose a method of organization, and any "staff" member subordinate with respect to this course (including faculty members) should try to adapt towards it, as much as is reasonably possible. It seems that the new person in charge of this course has a very different management style than your previous one. Please be aware that there are probably many reasons this instructor opts for a "micromanaging" style (relative to the style of the previous instructor), and that probably none of them have something to do with you. So please try and do not take it personally. For example, I think it is more likely that the tone of the emails is a result of the new instructor not liking the management style and organization of its predecessor, of which you are unfortunately one of the most visible components. An analogy ---------- Consider this analogy: You have been working in a factory for 5 years now, assembling widgets with your bare hands, and all is going well. Suddenly, you get a new boss. The first time you meet, she cries in disbelief when she sees you carrying widgets with your bare hands. Angrily, she orders you to start wearing gloves from now on, and inspect all widgets you produced for any fingerprints, and start wiping them off. Does the new boss hate you? Unlikely, you just met for the first time. It is more likely she simply does not want fingerprints on the widgets, and overreacts to the situation. Does the new boss treat you like a child? No. She treats you like a subordinate, which you are. It is true that academic staff are usually given more freedom than factory workers, but teaching tends to require more organization and structure (depending on your educational styles), and thus often has a de facto "boss" as well. What to do ---------- I think you should try to talk to your instructor (or your research advisor) first (preferably face to face, or video chat), before doing anything else. (as a side-note, if you feel your advisor is not able to advise you on these matters, for whatever reason, consider contacting the relevant support people at your university to make sure you have at least someone to talk to. Yes, you have this site, but this is no substitute for an advisor!) If you keep in mind what I've stated above, this conversation ought to bring some calm to the conflict between you and your instructor. One way you could start is by first mentioning that you feel overwhelmed by the requests of you instructor, and that you are having a hard time to adapt to their way of running this course. Then, you can explicitly ask for help in performing your duties to their expectation. The latter may give you more work than you're used to. However, not doing that would be insubordination, and only prolong your conflict. If, after talking to the instructor, you still believe their requests are unreasonable, then you may go to others and ask them to do something about it. However, be aware that the others may disagree with your whether the requests are unreasonable. Be open to the possibility that the previous instructor simply made things easy for you. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Not to put too fine a point on this, but generally speaking the way to make sure you are treated as an adult is to convince people that you are an adult who should be treated as such. Part of this is competence — the ability to successfully complete tasks, which you have no problem with — but a larger part is confidence and self-assertiveness. On a purely psychological level, you need to present yourself to this professor as an equal (a colleague, not a student) until s/he wakes up and sees you as such. A good first step would be to set up a face-to-face appointment, and begin it (after the pleasantries) by saying" I'm getting the sense that you don't trust or respect my work, and I wanted to talk to you about that." When asked why you say that — which is the likely next move — calmly and factually explain that s/he has been loading you with trivial tasks, double-checking what you do, and speaking dismissively to you. Have examples ready-to-hand to show what you mean, and keep emotion out of it (even if s/he starts to get irked). Then talk it out: negotiate... Your workload probably won't drop much — you're being paid to do what this professor tells you to do, after all — but it should change his/her attitude to give you more leeway, independence, and courtesy. You may discover, for instance, that the last TA for this class was a complete tool, or that the professor is under some kind of pressure from the department or students. Keep in mind that a small cohort of undergrads believes the road to better grades lies in complaining about TAs to professors, and complaining about professors to the department. Such students are a PitA (Pain in the A...), but their parents pay the school's bills. The key here is to ask for what you want — this being a measure of consideration and mutual regard — from the state of mind that you have a right to receive it, and any reasonable person would naturally give it to you. When that becomes true, then you are being treated like an adult, because you've become an adult in other people's eyes. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: My guess is that students are asking the instructor about the worksheet grading. They assume the professor did it all, or that you graded using their criterion. The awkwardness when the instructor replies "uh, this -1 was for, uh, I'll have to get back to you" is the source of the problem. The fix is for the instructor to tell the students about the arrangement. Maybe your instructor wants to check around, but having mere worksheets done by a grad TA (I assume), with close supervision, of course, seems fine. I got to write a few test Q's when I was a TA. Then work out whatever seems comfortable. For examples, maybe they want to look over the worksheets first (at one of these meetings). Maybe you talk a little about how in class they emphasize more X when the book covers more Y, so the worksheet should also be more on X; you're using the terminology the students are hearing in class, and so on. A rubric is a pretty simple thing: "Part I: 5pts, Part-II: 4pts general approach & most steps, 4pts details; several minor mistakes (overall) -1". The goal is students coming to you, not them, to whine about worksheet points (during your well-publicized office hours), and many fewer students appealing to the instructor, who is now not blind-sided by a worksheet Q they've never seen before. My guess is your instructor asks less and less about the worksheets as fewer and fewer students ask them about it. If they wanted to really get involved in the worksheets they wouldn't have given you the job. As far as duties, TA's tend to be paid on a basis of 20 hours/week. Generally this will be roughly laid out -- 4 hours grading homework, 1 hour meeting, 3 hours in class, 6 hours office ... . And, of course, TA's are firstly students -- unlike other part-time jobs, TA-ing is educational and less disruptive to your schoolwork. That's what we say, anyway. Your best defense against too much work is letting the instructor know how the extra time past 20 hours is cutting into your studies. Having your TA flunk the semester doesn't look good. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: LEAVE The usual failing of someone in an academic position is typically too much of a laissez faire attitude viz-a-viz teaching. Someone erring on the opposite side of the scale is unlikely to see their failing - nay they are probably going to consider themselves virtuous for lavishing attention on minute aspects of how their course is delivered. They don't trust anyone to do as good a job as themselves. It is clear that you are unlikely to meet their exacting standards. Complaining about their management would be interpreted as you attempting to shirk responsibility. The fact that the work being loaded on you may be meaningless is not the issue. While we could talk about the pedagogical pros and cons of this style of management, it's not actually relevant to the question. I cannot realistically see any scenario where you could make the fundamentals changes to the management style that you require. This is probably multifaceted for you. Teaching is pretty labor intensive at the best of times. Pointless busywork will make the nominal task grow exponentially in terms of time cost. Unless there is a requirement not stated in the question it will certainly not be worth it from a monetary point of view. It almost certainly not be worth it either from the perspective of reputation as you are already being treated as an underling, and remaining in this position will likely cement that perception, at least in the instructor's eyes. If you are asking this question here, you are probably close to saying something about the way in which you are being managed, which is more likely to sour the relationship rather than establish the firm boundaries that you are seeking. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: A detailed rubric on grading, is the wrong way to do it. It may seem useful, for someone who wants a "dumb" person (or a robot) to do grading. An intelligent person can do much better. When you have a detailed rubric, you're stuck with it – which is bad. Specify every way a student may loose a point? Well, they always invent new ways of doing an exercise badly. And when the new error isn't on that detailed list, you can't take a point for it. This is why the detailed spec doesn't work. You end up giving an A on something mediocre, because "this isn't on the list of what they can loose points for". It is ok that they ask why you deducted points. They must do the occational check to see that you do your job properly. And perhaps they're following up a complaint. Of course, the complaint may be bogus. Students occationally complain in the hope that a complaint alone will improve their grade. They should not go for a detailed rubric in order to cover their asses or whatever. Next thing, they publish that list, and students will then complain "yes, this is an error. But it is not on the list, so I demand an A as is my right..." With a detailed spec, you get "lawyers" arguing. So, the spec should simply be: Read the students work. Deduct points for anything that is wrong, missing or otherwise bad. (Infinite list, cannot be specified!) Or the other way: Read the students work. Grant points for correct complete answers... Math people often go for a detailed approach to grading, because it is to some extent possible with math exercises. But this is not the only way. A math test can be graded using the same approach as when grading an essay: "Read the whole thing, get a feel for how good they are." Grades set this way can be harder to argue about. But they capture phenomena such as: "Student had all the correct answers, but clearly don't know the best way to get at them. Bad intuition, laborious and roundabout methods..." Being good at math, is much more than coming up with a correct answer. Good education should appreciate that. An exercise/test consisting of a series of problems where one awards "points" in a strict way, is not a good way to grade. It may be useful because it is quick and easy to do with a large class. But it shouldn't be the only approach to grading, and certainly not made progressively stricter every year. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: From a college professor who has supervised TAs. 1. Rubrics are fundamental for "assessment of learning". Your supervisor may have to demonstrate whether they are closing the loop on institutional objects required for accreditation. Rubrics demonstrate that learning objectives are being assessed. So, try to also think from the point of view of the supervisor who has their own goals that they need to meet. 2. This does NOT absolve them of using a disparaging tone. 3. Whatever you do, don't burn bridges. Like all professions, this can be a really small world. Good luck! Upvotes: 0
2021/09/19	421	1,635	<issue_start>username_0: So I've been instructed to write an essay that has citations for research that must be within the last 5 years. The exact phrasing is "Minimum of 20-30 up to date (within 5 years) references". One of the key and major concepts was defined in the 70s and simply can't be avoided in the discussion. Is it cheating to cite a paper from recent times, which discusses another research article from that older time?<issue_comment>username_1: Did the instructor say all references must be from the last five years, or just some? If it is the former, then that is not a sensible instruction, but I would cite the recent paper and also say "this is a recent description but actually the concept was first defined in the 1970s". If it is the latter, cite the 1970s paper, and also the recent one if you want. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The function of this essay (as I gather) is for you to get familiar with recent literature and show your instructor that you read & understood it. > > Minimum of 20-30 up to date (within 5 years) references > > > It does not mean only use refs from last 5 years. It means "don't copy-paste from textbooks many of which references papers that were published 10+ years ago". In science there are usually couple of very old foundational papers, few important ones, but only the most recent present modern view on concepts and experiments. So it makes more sense to read few old papers, and many more very recent ones. It makes no sense to read the mediocre papers from 15 years ago, better read mediocre papers from 1-5 years ago. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/09/19	374	1,457	<issue_start>username_0: I defended my thesis in Spain with cum laude. My PhD program was research based. Now I am in the employment process and I have been asked to provide equivalence to cum laude. Could you please help me to obtain this information?<issue_comment>username_1: Did the instructor say all references must be from the last five years, or just some? If it is the former, then that is not a sensible instruction, but I would cite the recent paper and also say "this is a recent description but actually the concept was first defined in the 1970s". If it is the latter, cite the 1970s paper, and also the recent one if you want. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The function of this essay (as I gather) is for you to get familiar with recent literature and show your instructor that you read & understood it. > > Minimum of 20-30 up to date (within 5 years) references > > > It does not mean only use refs from last 5 years. It means "don't copy-paste from textbooks many of which references papers that were published 10+ years ago". In science there are usually couple of very old foundational papers, few important ones, but only the most recent present modern view on concepts and experiments. So it makes more sense to read few old papers, and many more very recent ones. It makes no sense to read the mediocre papers from 15 years ago, better read mediocre papers from 1-5 years ago. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
2021/09/19	418	1,712	<issue_start>username_0: As title suggests. First year Doctoral fellow with a scholarship. The article has no bearing on my Doctoral thesis. It is a side project. My synopsis hasn't even been finalized yet. So should I have mentioned and declared ny fellowship as a funding source while submitting the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: There is no need to list it if the funding didn't support the research (if any) that went in to the paper. But it might be at least courteous to mention that you are "personally" supported by as scholarship, naming the source. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you were paid by a fellowship, or your tuition was paid by a fellowship, while you worked on a paper, then yes the fellowship must be acknowledged in the paper. You can skip the acknowledgement only if you did not use any fellowship resources in any way. If you do not include the acknowledgement, you take on a small risk of angering the funder and violating the journal's policies. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a case where the conventions of the journal probably override any answer that we can provide. In general, I don’t see people acknowledging fellowships that were provided “for study” — for example fellowships that all graduate students in a department receive. Similarly fellowships that were awarded “for excellence” to attract a particular candidate to a university are often not acknowledged. On the other hand, fellowships that are “for research” or designed to further your research goals (even broadly) typically get acknowledged (in my field). Regardless, it is okay to let this “grey area” slide for now and then ask the editor if you get a revision. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/20	979	3,792	<issue_start>username_0: My question is related to [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97008/choosing-ones-best-papers-for-job-applications), but is more specific (and has no answer there). I am a postdoc in mathematics, applying for tenure-track jobs for the first time. Some departments ask me to indicate my 3 best works. To explain the motivation for my question below, here's my publication record so far: 1. Paper in a top general math journal with a senior coauthor (from my PhD thesis). Cited many times. 2. Recent preprint with senior coauthors of a strong result, with a senior coauthor. 3. Paper in a top general math journal I wrote as a postdoc, singly authored. 4. Paper in a much less prestigious journal I wrote during my PhD, singly authored - this paper was rejected from several top journals - but a "famous" top mathematician read it carefully, talked to me about it, and said that is at the level of the top journals in maths. 5. 2 papers from my PhD thesis, in subfield specific-journals, that happen to have relatively high impact factors, but in reality are very far from the top journals. Papers 1,3,4,5 are in one subfield of math, while 2 is about something rather different. I decided to include the preprint (2) in my list of 3 best papers because it is recent, and it is my only paper in this "hot" subfield. While I would appreciate any advice on my particular situation, here's a more general question which may apply in different cases: > > Should I include paper (4) among my 3 best works? The advantage: It is a way to say: "Clearly you'll notice that (1) and (3) are great, because they are in top journals, so let me tell you that (4) is also great, and you can ask Prof. X". The disadvatage: Including (4) will force me to drop one of (1) and (3), and so maybe the hiring committee will miss the fact that I have 2 papers in top journals? And maybe it will be like saying: "I actually got lucky with the paper I didn't include, it's not one of my best works". > > ><issue_comment>username_1: You’re overthinking this. It seems to me that you’re trying to hack the system by coming up with some clever trick to convey more information in the “3 best works” field than it is designed to communicate. We have seen [these sorts of things](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/36824/40589) before. Generally speaking such strategies do not work and can leave a poor impression. “3 best works” means just that — whatever you think are your best works by some reasonable criterion that makes sense to you (papers in top journals are very appropriate to list in such a situation). If you list papers that are not actually your best works, you’re missing an opportunity to push the competitiveness of your application to the max. You may also leave people baffled if someone actually does look a bit more closely at your application and is left scratching their head about what signal you’re trying to send exactly by not including an obviously top paper. Maybe it will have the effect you imagine, maybe not. Personally when I am reviewing job applications I tend to be more impressed with candidates who engage with the process in an honest, good faith way and don’t give me the impression they are playing some weird game I don’t understand. Good luck in any case! Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: 1,2,3 sounds like a great choice to me. Remember that the committee won’t be working in a vacuum, and will have your recommendation letters. Presumably you have a letter writer who will talk about 2 and then it’ll be clear why you think it’s in the top three. Dan’s answer is right, you shouldn’t try to explain your reasoning here, but that’s ok because your letter writers will do that for you. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/20	1,747	7,261	<issue_start>username_0: My university is an "at will" employer. Graduate students are not unionized. I'm a PhD student and I'm sensing a possibility for a TAship termination, so I want to explore possibilities. (1) What should I expect to happen if my TAship is terminated? For example: am I likely to get severance pay/continued health insurance/change in student standing, etc? Should I seek legal help? (2) Any suggestions on best practices? Aside from communicating with my advisor, what are some things I could do to minimize damage? I'm mostly worried about health care and student standing. Some background: I study at a private US university. My current teaching assistantship is not aligned with my background/has an unreasonable workload. The teaching professor is somewhat not communicatible. I will not be surprised if my teaching assistantship will end up being terminated (maybe even slightly happy), so I want to be prepared.<issue_comment>username_1: > > What should I expect to happen? > > > You will not have to teach and you will stop being paid. Though, replacing a TA mid-semester is pretty difficult, so I suspect this outcome is less likely than you think. More likely, the professor will request that you not be assigned to their classes in future (which is probably a win-win). To your specific concerns: * Severance pay: it's possible that an arrangement will be made so that your funding is not interrupted. We wouldn't normally call this "severance pay" (which is not really a thing for grad students), but most departments recognize that cutting a student's funding is a big deal, so there is a good chance that they would reassign you or adjust your duties rather than completely firing you. * Student standing: usually, TAships are only important for funding, so this will have no impact on your enrollment/research. Though I am aware of a few schools where TAing successfully is one of the requirements for a degree -- so, you should find out ASAP whether this is the case for you. * Medical insurance: varies widely, this may be funded through the department or tied to your TAship. Even in the most extreme case, I would expect they would offer you the opportunity to pay the premiums yourself so you can keep your coverage (this is usually cheap as health insurance goes, though potentially a lot for a grad student with no funding). > > Aside from communicating with my advisor, what are some things I could do to minimize damage? > > > My key concern would be remaining eligible to be a TA in future semesters (for a different professor). Though if you're ready to switch to full-time research, and you don't need additional TA experience to earn your degree, even this may not matter to you. If it does matter, I would defend yourself vigorously through whatever processes the school has; bringing in legal counsel is really a last resort (and I would not expect it to improve your situation, though I am no lawyer). Another key concern is the status of your tuition. TAships normally come with tuition remission; without a TAship, you may find yourself responsible for the tuition (which can easily be thousands of dollars). So, you will need to understand what the arrangements with regard to tuition remission for the remainder of this semester. Again, departments (especially in STEM) realize that requiring a previously-funded student to start paying tuition is a big deal, so it's likely that some arrangement can be made to avoid this. The other potential issue is your reputation in the department. Unfortunately, there is little you can do about this, except trying to be reasonable, respectful, and concise when resolving these issues with other department members. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I will relay my own experience with a similar situation. I was TA for a lab class one semester. In the past I was TA for the associated theory class. To make a long story short, at some point the TAs for the lab class were asked to grade exams for the theory class, which I objected to as not my responsibility. I recall it was stated that the theory class TA was overloaded and we needed to help out. (That actually was false. I did my own snooping and I'd say that the theory TA would have had an uncharacteristically easy semester even if they graded all the exams.) I said that I was going to check my with advisor before grading any exams for another class. Critically, I did not refuse to do the work and merely said that doesn't seem right to me and that I am going to look into whether that is my responsibility. My advisor agreed that this situation was fishy, and he brought it up during a department meeting. Apparently, this sort of thing has happened before. My advisor's guess is that it involves department politics neither of us are aware of. There was a meeting of the department heads and they decided to ban TAs grading assignments for classes different than the class someone is a TA for. However, they also decided to continue the practice for the remainder of the semester. My advisor told me to grade the exams, which I did on time. The department has a TA review system. From what I was told the review I received for that class was negative, saying that I refused to perform work I was asked to. I was almost unable to be a TA again. The next time I needed to TA, my advisor and I had to talk to the professor who was handling TA assignments and tell them that the review I received was inaccurate as I did in fact do everything that was asked of me. I voluntarily did not TA again after that semester even though my funding ran out. I didn't want to deal with being a TA in my department again, mostly because I believe the time required to do a quality job exceeds the time I'm paid for. I don't know if the false review was retaliatory or not. I think it's possible that the professor writing the review interpreted my reluctance to grade the exams for another class as refusal, and was not made aware that I did in fact grade the exams (the latter was communicated through the professor of the other class who did not review me). I agree with username_1 that it's unlikely a TA will be fired mid-semester. I do think the incident unfairly harmed my reputation in the department, at least among the few who saw the false review. Some other recommendations: Keep detailed notes on every meeting and action you have related to the class. I did not do this, but it would have been quite useful at times to say (for example) "On 2021-09-20 I was asked by Prof. Smith to grade exams for the theory class. I stated that seems outside the scope of my job responsibilities and that I will check with my advisor before grading those exams. On 2021-09-21 I spoke with my advisor. On 2021-10-15 I met with Prof. Johnson and the other lab TAs to receive exams to grade. On 2021-10-18 I returned the graded exams to Prof. Johnson before the 2021-10-21 deadline." Etc. Make your concerns known in writing so that there is a paper trail, and if something needs to be communicated (for example, in my case, that I did in fact grade the exams), don't assume that it will be communicated or communicated accurately. Be explicit to avoid misunderstandings. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/20	1,157	4,696	<issue_start>username_0: This may be a stupid question, but I can't quite figure it out. For an academic career, it seems to be quite important to be "principal investigator (PI)" on cool research projects. Now, say for some reason you're not eligible to be an official applicant on a grant proposal (e.g., because you're abroad and the funding agency doesn't permit that), but you're still involved as a project leader, providing important scientific stimuli, attending meetings, etc. - can you still call yourself a "PI" (as long as all involved parties agree), or is that an official stamp that really only the formal appointee of the grant receives? To make it a bit less hypothetical: I'm thinking about writing a grant proposal with my former supervisor for funding a PhD student at his institution, with me co-leading the supervision of the student. I'm currently abroad, doing a PostDoc at another institution, and I'm trying to figure out whether there's a way I can be involved in that project and receive "official academic credit points" for it. ;-)<issue_comment>username_1: There are three only partly-overlapping senses of the label "PI" that I am familiar with in the US; as usual, things may vary a bit elsewhere in the world: 1. Shorthand for professor/advisor in a research setting. When a student refers to "my PI" they mean the person overseeing their research. It may help resolve the ambiguity of saying "my professor" which might be taken to mean "the instructor of a course I am taking". 2. "PI status", meaning eligibility to apply for grants on behalf of an institution. For example <https://research.wisc.edu/compliance-policy/principal-investigator-status/> talks about the responsibilities and eligibility to be a PI. For tenured/tenure-track faculty it's pretty much a given, though others may be eligible for the role, too. 3. The actual bona fide "principal investigator" on a grant. This is distinct from the other uses of the term, and is totally up to the policies of the grant institution/organization. Some people may be officially a PI in this sense of the term but yet would not be called a PI in either of the other circumstances. For example, the recipient of a doctoral or post-doctoral fellowship may be officially the "principal investigator" on that grant. For your specific situation, I think it depends on what sense you're thinking of "PI". If you're going to be someone's primary mentor, maybe they'd call you their "PI", and there's no need for you to scold them over it and demand they use a more correct title. However, if you're listing the activity on your CV it would be better to just describe the relationship rather than put any title on it. If you've mentored a graduate student, list it as a graduate student mentored/supervised. If it's a co-supervisory relationship, you may also want to make that clear. Something like "PhD Students Supervised" in a heading, and then a line like "Student A. Learner, PhD University of Important Things (co-supervised with Dr. Big S. Hot)" If you're submitting a grant where there is some box to fill in who the PI is, well, it completely depends on the rules for that granting agency. It sounds like you don't fit those requirements, so no, you aren't a PI. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In the US, for federal grants, the "principal investigator" is defined by the grant, see the NSF search, e.g. [here](https://nsf.gov/awardsearch/simpleSearchResult?queryText=mri&ActiveAwards=true). If you aren't the PI on the grant, you are not the PI. I don't review early-career CVs, but you could conceivably run into someone who knows the grant, or just looks it up to learn more about it, and would see you are not the PI, and would wonder why you've listed yourself. In conversation, it would probably be fine. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends where, and in which way, you want to use it. When applying for jobs you want to list on your CV which grants you got. There, you don't want to lie. If you didn't get the grant/weren't the PI on it, don't claim so. If you were a co-applicant in some way, state this in a clear way on your CV, where your role becomes clear. Importantly, these parts of a CV often state how much money one got through those grants, so be honest here. On the other hand, when you were a project leader for a project in some way or the other, this is something which is less regulated, and you can state more informally on your CV. However, then you shouldn't connect it to the grant money involved, but only relate it to your role in the given scientific project (design the project, guide postdocs/students, etc. etc.). Upvotes: 3
2021/09/21	993	4,128	<issue_start>username_0: I had a largely misguided journey through college, then fell in love with scholarship in the last 3 semesters when I began studying philosophy. The change in attitude is extremely clear on my transcript: before beginning philosophy, I had a smattering of every grade from A to F, and after beginning philosophy, I have almost completely earned A's. It's now my last semester, and even if I earn all A's this semester (which is certainly a possibility), I won't be able to break a 2.95 GPA. I think I have what it takes to study in graduate school, and I really love philosophy. My goal would be to study philosophy in graduate school and produce research in either technology ethics or philosophy of mind. That said, I know my record is kind of abysmal, and philosophy is particularly competitive. I'd like to know how I can work towards achieving this goal, or figuring out a comparable goal that would allow me to pursue my philosophical interests at the level of graduate study. Even if the odds are against me, what could I do?<issue_comment>username_1: I would apply to the master's programs at a few second or third-tier graduate schools and see what happens. Explain your late bloom and newfound goals in your statement of purpose and personal statement. The worst they can say is no. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: While I agree with the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175783/75368), let me add a bit more. I think that a second bachelors in the US would not be your best option as you would probably need to repeat a lot of courses that you already had. What you need to do is find a way to convince people that the past is the past and that you have good potential for success in the future. Your recent grades help with that but you likely need more. It might, however, be important which courses you earned bad grades in. If they are foundational in what you want to study in future it is a bigger problem. Some places will let you take individual courses as a non-matriculated student, though you need to pay for them. Letters of recommendation are relatively important in the US and, if they are the right letters, can give you a big boost. The reason is that when others say how serious you now are, for example, it holds much more weight than when you say it for yourself. I'll guess that there are a few faculty that can help you here, especially in philosophy. But you should talk to them about your options. Perhaps they can suggest a grad school where they have a bit of influence on some colleagues. Perhaps they just know of some schools that would be compatible with your goals and skills. If you apply for graduate school, note that you should do a broad search. Schools ranked around 50 to 75 are still very good. There are a lot of state schools that have good programs in philosophy. They also tend to have larger faculties and more options for advisors. The tuition, which you are likely responsible for, can be reasonable (or not). And also note that funding for masters level students is generally much harder to obtain than for doctoral programs in which TAs are normally employed. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Your general idea of doing another degree to prove your ability in this field is a reasonable one. However, since you already have an undergraduate degree, you could probably go directly into a graduate diploma or masters degree in philosophy (by coursework) as a preferred means of showing your abilities. These are higher level degrees and they are also generally shorter, so you could demonstrate greater knowledge in less time. If you can maintain your present high grades in a masters program then that would give you a good launching point for an application for a research degree. Obviously there are a lot of factors to weigh off in this decision, including the costs of study (which depend a lot on where you are). However, for students like yourself who have found your passion at the end of their undergraduate degree, pursuit of a higher level coursework degree can be a good idea. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/21	598	2,686	<issue_start>username_0: I had a manuscript accepted with major revision. I have now revised it and will resubmit shortly. The editor requested that I highlight any changes in the text, which I have done in yellow. However, I have also simply removed certain parts of the manuscript. How do I indicate this? The editor specifically stated that the results should be reduced to X pages and discussion to not exceed Y pages, so using strikeout feels inappropriate. Can I resubmit with track changes? Or is there a better way to indicate?<issue_comment>username_1: If I was you, I would use tracked changes for all the changes, and add yellow highlighting to all the changes. And in case the editor views it with the changes visible and thinks you have not reduced the number of pages, explicitly tell them "I have reduced the results to X pages and the discussion to Y pages, as you can see by viewing the final version with no markup in Word." You might want to add a "Microsoft Word" tag to your question, if that tag exists. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: You have to find a reasonable compromise between readability and making all changes transparent. Therefore, I would advise against using the track changes function in MS Word exclusively to present your revisions. You would primarily reduce readability to an unacceptable extent. Usually, it is fine to explain in the letter that accompanies your revision which parts you removed without making this transparent in too much detail in your revised version. In my experience, this works very well. Especially of you basically rewrite/shorten large sections, it is enough to write something like "section XY was rewritten in order to stay below the limit of Z pages, as requested by the editor". Then you can highlight the new/revised text, and you are fine. In some cases, journals also allow to upload a specific version only used for review that includes highlighting of the changes, in addition to a non-highlighted version. In such cases, it might be appropriate strike out parts of the text or even use the track changes function because the fully readable version is also available to the reviewers. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: No one who is not on your editing team is likely to read the details. However, you can be nice to your editors and offer multiple levels of detail: 1. the shortened manuscript 2. a list of essential changes (listing not every detail, only the important ones, possibly with rationale if relevant) 3. a file with the complete set of changes, e.g. latexdiff/MS Word tracking if it's not overloaded. This gives the editors the choice of level of detail they seek. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/22	2,357	9,807	<issue_start>username_0: TLDR: Is it normal that an applicant for a limited term fellowship should have to justify why that fellowship would be more advantageous than a permanent academic position? If so, why? The details of my specific situation: I recently applied for a 5-year research fellowship in the UK. The fellowship is quite competitive and prestigious. If approved it would provide funding for me to set up my own research group at a UK university. I just received the referee reports. There are four reports, of which three are very positive. The fourth is generally positive about the research content and my track record, but identifies what the reviewer believes are some "clear weaknesses" in the application. Given the competitive nature of these grants this last not-so-positive review likely kills my chances of getting the fellowship, although I do have a chance to respond to the reports. One of the "weaknesses" identified by this reviewer, was that I had not sufficiently justified why receiving the fellowship would be more beneficial to me than simply being appointed as a lecturer at a UK university. I found this comment frankly unreasonable and nonsensical, but maybe I am simply responding emotionally, and so my question whether this is generally considered a legitimate reason to criticise a grant proposal and what the reasoning behind this is? Bear in mind that in the UK a position as Lecturer, is generally a long term academic post with both research and teaching responsibilities. Being appointed as a lecturer in the UK is broadly equivalent to getting a tenure-track Assistant Professor position in the US. So the reviewer is essentially saying "you shouldn't get the 5 year fellowship because it would be better if you had a permanent position". The true (and in my opinion blindingly obvious) response to this is: "of course I would like to have a Lecturer position, but such positions at good universities with research strength in my area, are extremely rare". I can't really write that in the response, because it would sound like I wasn't taking the reviewer seriously, but that's the truth. It seems to me unreasonable that I have to justify why the fellowship would be better than an alternative that barely exists.<issue_comment>username_1: The exact phrasing here sounds a bit unusual, but it does tie in to a common criteria in many fellowship evaluation guidelines. Many of them want evidence that the fellowship is enabling something which isn't possible through other routes. The particular comparison this reviewer made is a bit unusual though, since as you say in many fields it's not like a lectureship is an easy option. But if you are responding to that, I'd suggest not getting into why lectureships are hard to get, and instead focus on features of the fellowship which would make it superior to a standard lectureship for your research. For such large fellowships, this usually includes protected research time, the duration of funding enabling projects of a scope not feasible under smaller research grants, the scale being much bigger than possible with the (usually meager) startup and new lecturer grants in the UK, prestige, etc. Exact phrasing will depend on your proposal, but focusing on the fellowship's benefits is the way to go. And, one angle is 'Why not both'? Many fellowships are compatible with holding a lectureship at the same time, or universities can commit to a permanent post at the completion of the fellowship (I leveraged a past fellowship into a lectureship, and my current UKRI FLF into advancement to Reader). If you can say this fellowship gives you a route to a permanent lectureship in a high-quality institute ideally suited to build your career (etc), all the better. It may be a little late to negotiate that at this stage, but something to bear in mind. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that the referee wasn't trying to say: > > "you shouldn't get the 5 year fellowship because it would be better if > you had a permanent position" > > > I suspect they were suggesting that the proposal did not make sufficiently clear how you would use the opportunity provided by this 5-year fellowship to supercharge your career in a way that you wouldn't be able to do if you "just" got a simple lecturer position. So their point is probably more: > > The research council should not fund this person if they are just going to use this fellowship as a temporary lectureship. > > > Whether this is a fair criticism depends on what the stated evaluation criteria are for the grant. These often do contain something about "career development potential". Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: "Obvious" is becoming my least favourite word. "Blindingly obvious" does not help. I agree to the general advice in [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175791/4249)'s answer, and would like to add a couple of more specific considerations about a typical Lecturer position: * While a lot of Unis mention an adjusted teaching load for starting Lecturers, many can't actually afford it. The teaching load can be quite high. And even with a reduced teaching load, you'll likely spend much more time preparing teaching materials in your first year then after a few years of teaching the same course/module. * One of the core criteria for advancing in an academic career beyond Lecturer level is the amount research income won for the Uni through grant applications. * (But a good publication record is the best evidence in grant applications). * Many Unis don't really have a start-up package (PhD student/postdoc funding) for newly-started Lecturers. * As a consequence, during your first couple of years as a Lecturer, your publication output will fall (unless you have a lot of pending publications with your previous institution), and submitting even your first bid might take a while if you have a lot of teaching obligations. * Generally Lectureships seem to get off to a "slow start", where your profile is likely to fall in desirability and hireability before it bounces back (after your first successful grant, a secured PhD studentships, or a few accidental pairings with exceptional MSc students) On the other hand, after a few years of Fellowship: * You can already demonstrate success in successful grant applications -- the Fellowship itself was one. * The Fellowship provides funding from the start, so you will have the opportunity to hire postdocs who can keep the practical work running and publications coming under your guidance. * You will be able to dedicate as much of your time as needed to writing further grant applications. * Your profile will almost certainly improve if you use the Fellowship resources well. All in all, a Fellowship actually gives you an excellent opportunity to build your profile from the "single-project" orientation expected of a postdoc, to a "5-year research vision" expected of an academic, all without having to mark hundreds of student papers and answer e-mails asking "will this be in the exam". To answer your reviewer, I would mention the benefits of having 80+% of your workload dedicated to research, and start-up funds allowing you to form a research team to work on your research ideas from the start of your appointment. Imagine how your research work would develop if you instead had only ~40% of research time, and wait for a year or two before your successfully secured (funds for) a postdoc/PhD position -- and talk about how much more you will achieve with the research freedom and funding support provided by the fellowship. Source: I started a Lectureship in the UK nearly 2 years ago, in a setting that is more akin to a fellowship (no teaching for first 3 years, and a startup fund more modest than that of a fellowship but certainly better than the standard at the Uni where I am). I am comparing with other colleagues starting more "standard" Lectureship positions at my Uni (and other UK locations). Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: > > One of the "weaknesses" identified by this reviewer, was that I had not sufficiently justified why receiving the fellowship would be more beneficial to me than simply being appointed as a lecturer at a UK university. > > > I think this is a miscommunication. The reviewer thinks you are a lecturer with teaching and research duties. They think you should continue to have teaching duties. They think you should only get a research fellowship without teaching duties if you have justified why your research is more important than your teaching. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: tl;dr: Yes, you are responding emotionally. --- > > If approved it would provide funding for me to set up my own research > group at a UK university. > > > versus > > "of course I would like to have a Lecturer position [...]" > > > The reviewer is seeing you as a person that is applying to the fellowship because other positions are not available at the time. While a lecturer has both teaching and researching duties, with the fellowship (if it is the fellowship I have in mind) you will be in charge of research funds at a scale much larger than the researching duties of a lecturer. Even more, these will be your funds. I think the reviewer is saying you are not ambitious enough for the fellowship: please keep in mind that such fellowships implies a workload similar to the one of a lecturer plus at least an equivalent workload of managing duties (managing funds themselves, hiring processes of the PhD&PostDoc funded by the fellowhship ...). Without enough ambition/motivation, it is quite likely to fail in bringing these fellowships to a fruitful conclusion (disclaimer: I am against such kind of fellowships). Upvotes: 0
2021/09/22	2,183	9,072	<issue_start>username_0: I am writing an article with a senior colleague. Although English is not their first language, they keep re-writing the entire article in their own words. I would not normally care, but the way he re-writes it is semi-grammatical and very hard to comprehend, so that I feel I have to change it back to something grammatical after I have figured out what he means. A week or two later, I will find that he has gone back to certain sections and re-written them so that they are in semi-grammatical English again. I understand that language is not the main priority of a scientific article so as I say this would not normally bother me, but it is having an active effect on the ability of the paper to convey its results, as well as causing me work having to read and understand it to translate it back. What is the easiest way to get around this issue without coming across as rude? Edit: Unfortunately the manuscript was rejected by our first choice of journal and the referee comments suggest that the unclear writing style introduced by the supervisor was a contributing factor in this. I'll have to think carefully about how to re-write the manuscript when submitting to a more specialised journal.<issue_comment>username_1: This depends a lot on your analysis of their personality. If they are reasonable, then suggesting that you edit the final submitted version will improve the English and make it less likely that the reviewers would ask for corrections should not cause blowback. "Hmmm, prof, maybe I can improve the English a bit for the final version." If they are primarily committed to the ideas, and not to their "obviously brilliant" exposition, it should be fine for a reasonable person. But, it is dangerous to offend some advisors. It isn't a question of being rude, but for some, just being honest is enough. In the former case, I'd raise the issue. But in the latter, just let it go at the end and see what the reviewers say. You may be wrong about how language is less important in science, actually. Clear writing is needed. For some things, even more needed. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Another alternative is to submit some excerpts with "semi-grammatical" issues to a second opinion of native language and with at least some knowledge on the field and compare with your version of the text. No need to mention the whole situation, just ask which version is clearer/correct. If it happens that they agree with you most of times then explain with all due respect the situation, otherwise consider that can be your limitation. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Plan B: do nothing (since the co-author is more senior) but offer to work on the revision after the paper has been submitted. Any self-respecting editor/reviewer will point out the issues with language. By offering to do the work on the revision following the reviewers' comments, you will have the last say on the language used in the paper (after all, language is the only thing you disagree with your co-author). --- The Pros: * You're the last to work on the paper * The changes to the language of the paper are motivated by third party input (the reviewers), it's not you that's saying that your co-author's language is bad. You can always pretend to be happy with your co-author's work to save everybody's face * Since the co-author's version was submitted, and the language is likely to be pointed out by the reviewers, you're here to the rescue The Cons: * Some things need to happen for this to work + The paper being accepted despite the potentially bad language + The co-author being happy for you to do the revising + The reviewers pointing out the bad language * You're planning to fix the issue at the very last point in time, which is generally not very prudent * You're wasting the time of the reviewers and make their work more difficult (as pointed out by some commenters) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Maybe you should have a joint session. Both of you sit side-by-side in front of a computer and make the final edits together. You two can discus every formulation. The advantage is, you get a better feeling of what your advisor wants to express, you can help him finding the right words, and you can let it go once you sense anger or other negative vibes. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Senior colleague? I'd leave it alone. He wants it that way, so it goes. If there's an issue later, deal with it. Perhaps he's laying claim to a particular point of the publication, as in, "that sounds like Dr. Joe's voice" or something. "I understand that language is not the main priority of a scientific article" True, but we do USE language to clearly convey ideas to one another. If it's not getting in the way of clarity, leave the errors alone, just out of respect. You could address it straight on, asking, "you've changed this passage back. My editing seemed clearer to me? What do you think?" and then read both excerpts of each instance of this. Especially if it's quite minor, and DOESN'T impact the conveyance of any crucial detail, you're fine. Just leaving his errors in, you could be said to be irresponsible, not looking out for your senior. Buuut...you edited...they went in and CHANGED IT BACK! Not the same. Definitely novel situation. Play it by ear and go by how it feels. Depending on the dynamic between you two, it may not really be an option to discuss, unless he's open to it as well. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I have refereed many articles and reading poor English is very unpleasant. It's hard enough to understand the ideas the article is presenting without language making it harder. Also, I have had several advisors and many bosses and uniformly they all valued opinions in this order: 1. opinion from a so-called expert 2. opinion from someone outside the organization 3. their own opinion 4. opinion from a crazy homeless guy on the sidewalk outside 5. my opinion I've had this experience with advisor/bosses that liked me and thought highly of me. This dynamic is probably at play with you and it is exceedingly unlikely to change in the (hopefully) short time you have to work with this advisor. Another dynamic that could be in play is that the senior colleague feels a need to put their mark on the paper. This need can come from many places. Maybe their way of writing makes more sense to them. Maybe they feel like they didn't contribute enough to the paper, and this is their way of contributing. Maybe it's a pure dominance play. Edit: [ Two more dynamics that could be at play. (1) It could be that the colleague is an immigrant and is sensitive about his English because he has been treated poorly by natives. If the original poster is a native, this makes the situation delicate. (2) Some cultures/individuals are much more hierarchical than others. If the colleague leans towards hierarchy then he may need signals from the original poster acknowledging who is in charge.] I don't think there is a simple way of resolving this conflict. But one way or another, you should have to have a discussion with your colleague. At a minimum, you need to understand where your colleague is coming from. You'll have to be very polite and fawning. His ideas and inspiration are great. Clearly, he is the more learned and knowledgeable party. But please, you're begging: could he allow you to clean up the grammar a little here and there? Edit: [ I use "fawning" as hyperbole and it may be too strong. but a sincere effort should probably be made to acknowledge the colleague's strengths. ] If he truly feels that his writing style makes more sense than yours, then you are at an impasse and you may have to go to plan B: wait for the referees to come back with comments. Good luck Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: There is one very simple solution to your problem. You have to refer to facts not to your own opinion. Such facts could be, for instance, a passage from a respected book in the field. Or an automatic grammar/spell checker such as *Grammarly. You can say, I was not sure about my writing, therefore I checked the text with Grammarly*. Here are the mistakes. In order to effectively argue against this defense, one has to be very knowledgeable about English grammar and style. This program is very strong. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: Since you say senior colleague, Im assuming this is not your professor. If it is there may be little that you can do. Complain to your professor and explain what is happening, he is unlikely to want you wasting your time on this kind of nonsense. If he doesn't step in immediately he is not doing his job. If this doesn't work (unfortunate) then explain the situation to your department chair. When I did this the professor quite literally got yelled at by the chair. Remember that too frequently "senior" colleagues are simply people who have failed to get a professor job, and hence seem to like picking bones forever more. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/22	657	2,675	<issue_start>username_0: I recently had my delayed graduation ceremony and met up with an old lecturer who supervised my dissertation. It was nice to see them but we sadly didn't get the chance to catch up. I was considering maybe sending them an email. Do you think this is a good idea? I'm sure they'd love to keep in touch since they taught me for 3 years. Similarly, there was another lecturer who sadly left and they helped me to apply for my post-grad degree and served as head of department for the duration of my degree. The bottom line is: Do lecturers appreciate hearing from former students? I'm in the UK by the way.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, if you thank an old instructor it is one of the most wonderful things you can do. They will appreciate it tremendously. Even just catching up is fine. But don't neglect to add a thanks for their help. I once had the opportunity to visit with and thank a mentor from my doctoral study days. He said that it was rare to be thanked so many years after he helped me advance. He was very touched. Do it. --- We old folks don't remember all of our students, of course, but we sometimes wonder how some specific person turned out in their career. Just yesterday, I thought of someone I taught in the 1970s, but have no way to find them. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes! This is what we live for as supervisors. Students are a terribly inefficient source of papers/CV entries/departmental brownie points, almost anything they do can be done by the supervisor in less than half the time. The main reason to supervise students is in developing them as researchers and as people. When we hear from students after they have left us, it is a complete validation of all the time and effort we spent on them. We LOVE it. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Speaking as an ex-student: To those who went out of their way for you - absolutely, yes. Better still, let them know where you are so that if they need anything from that part of the world then they have someone to do the running around for them. In the western hemisphere we don't appreciate our teachers enough. I know someone who never went further than middle school - and a vocational school at that - in China. Every year her class takes this favourite teacher out to a restaurant for a good meal and a sort of "class discussion" . . . It's one of the things I have great guilt about myself. Good teachers are hard to find but exceptional teachers are nearly a couple in a lifetime experience. We shouldn't let their occasional human limitations excuse us from acknowledging their role in our lives. Upvotes: 4
2021/09/23	1,927	8,156	<issue_start>username_0: I am an instructor for a machine learning course and I need to make a presentation on all the recent architectures or models. I have to include a lot of images from several research papers and need to keep them in public on my website for all the students to study. To keep the details about the models and architectures, I thought of using diagrams describing the architectures from various research papers available and use them in my tutorial. But after reading about rules and copyright infringements, I concluded that I *may* not be allowed to use those images directly in my tutorials. Although I can cite the paper that contains the images it will be difficult for students to follow the tutorial if I don't keep images in sequence. With this context, I'm not doubting whether I can place images like this in tutorials that are intended to keep in public for further use of students. So as an instructor, do I need to make the images on my own for every architecture and model I am going to discuss? If yes, that would a lot of time.<issue_comment>username_1: For legal advice you can be certain of, check with someone appropriate at your school. Start with the chair of your department. That said, common academic practice says you can use the images as part of the teaching material you provide your students - properly acknowledged, of course. You may not be able to use them in something you publish. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Even if someone wanted to complain and/or sue (and they won't), this would almost surely fall under "fair use" (or equivalent in other countries). You are using a small portion of copyrighted work for teaching purposes, which is allowed - so you don't even need to mail all journals. On the other hand, "fair use" wouldn't apply if you wanted to publish your lecture (as a book, review article etc) - in that case, the practice is to obtain permission for all the images from the journal that published them. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: [About Fair Use](https://www.copyright.gov/fair-use/): > > Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by > permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain > circumstances. Section 107 of the Copyright Act provides the statutory > framework for determining whether something is a fair use and > identifies certain types of uses—such as criticism, comment, news > reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research—as examples of > activities that may qualify as fair use. Section 107 calls for > consideration of the following four factors in evaluating a question > of fair use: > > > 1. Purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes: Courts > look at how the party claiming fair use is using the copyrighted work, > and are more likely to find that nonprofit educational and > noncommercial uses are fair. This does not mean, however, that all > nonprofit education and noncommercial uses are fair and all commercial > uses are not fair; instead, courts will balance the purpose and > character of the use against the other factors below. Additionally, > “transformative” uses are more likely to be considered fair. > Transformative uses are those that add something new, with a further > purpose or different character, and do not substitute for the original > use of the work. > 2. Nature of the copyrighted work: This factor analyzes the degree to which the work that was used relates to copyright’s purpose of > encouraging creative expression. Thus, using a more creative or > imaginative work (such as a novel, movie, or song) is less likely to > support a claim of a fair use than using a factual work (such as a > technical article or news item). In addition, use of an unpublished > work is less likely to be considered fair. > 3. Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole: Under this factor, courts look at both > the quantity and quality of the copyrighted material that was used. If > the use includes a large portion of the copyrighted work, fair use is > less likely to be found; if the use employs only a small amount of > copyrighted material, fair use is more likely. That said, some courts > have found use of an entire work to be fair under certain > circumstances. And in other contexts, using even a small amount of a > copyrighted work was determined not to be fair because the selection > was an important part—or the “heart”—of the work. > 4. Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work: Here, courts review whether, and to what extent, the > unlicensed use harms the existing or future market for the copyright > owner’s original work. In assessing this factor, courts consider > whether the use is hurting the current market for the original work > (for example, by displacing sales of the original) and/or whether the > use could cause substantial harm if it were to become widespread. > > > In addition to the above, other factors may also be considered by a > court in weighing a fair use question, depending upon the > circumstances. Courts evaluate fair use claims on a case-bycase basis, > and the outcome of any given case depends on a fact-specific inquiry. > This means that there is no formula to ensure that a predetermined > percentage or amount of a work—or specific number of words, lines, > pages, copies—may be used without permission. > > > Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: No, this is not expected. Mature instructors often rely on their own publications/materials for showcasing things, otherwise, the most common way to go about it is to crop/screenshot data and provide a reference to the paper on the same slide similar to how one would do it if including this material in, say, a review article. I am more particular about this kind of thing than most of my colleagues as well but my current understanding is, essentially: 1. If it is in the public domain, you are free to use it in your talks (even though you're technically making money that way) long as you properly credit the authors. In most cases, it'd be just a reference; some resources like wikipedia provide more explicit instructions about proper attributions, if this is the case, follow those instead. 2. If you obtained this knowledge elsewhere (such as while being a contractor), inquire about whether it is okay to use it for educational purposes first. Some areas such as medicine are particularly sensitive to this as they deal with personal data. 3. If you use it outside of educational courses and have decided to write a book on the subject with the intent to eventually sell it, it becomes more complicated and strict, although in academia largely the same applies: many publishers/journals would have guidelines on fair use, however, facilitating this task. 4. If parts of this course go into industry and you start using graphics in products you're shipping, this is almost certainly a big no. No one might come after you for a while but still... Don't do that. Obligatory I am not a lawyer. TL;DR: No, unless you make this course into a book or try to earn money with it outside of academia - in this case more caution/attention would be needed. Better use public domain resources. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: > > I am an instructor for a machine learning course and I need to make a > presentation on all the recent architectures or models. I have to > include a lot of images from several research papers and need to > keep them in public on my website for all the students to study. > > > No, you don't, and probably shouldn't. Your course material should be behind some sort of a wall that only enables those who are entitled to it have it. Most institutions of higher learning have a Learning Management System (LMS) that facilitates this. If you use such a system, the images are no longer public, but much more limited in distribution, and claims of fair use are thus more legitimate (though not always true). Upvotes: 0
2021/09/23	2,490	11,029	<issue_start>username_0: Our group (western Europe/Switzerland) has submitted a review on a device that generates a lot of money (i.e. multibillion $ industry). Our results speak mildly against the use of said device, although we have low confidence in those results (meta data warns about the possibility of a false positive). Since the inception of the study, we have been queried multiple times by a VP of the relevant (US-based) company through email, asking us to share our data (which we refused). Since submission, the VP is asking for a meeting in person and there are rumors of them not being happy about our results (which are BTW still unpublished). We did not respond. In the meantime, the company also reached to our head of dept. to express that they were worried about our work. They are obviously treading very carefully so we can't accuse them of exerting pressure on us. But we are worried about the risk of retaliation on publication (i.e. legal action). Our boss told us not to worry and discouraged us from seeking legal advice. Neither the study nor our group are financially supported. How can we protect ourselves? Are there organizations specializing in / providing (free?) researcher protection? Edit: ----- * our work is not funded. Period. No money. Nada. It is not unusual at all to do unfunded research aside from one's professional activity in my field (medicine). * we do not promote (nor are we interested in doing so) an alternative device. The review compares the process using device to the usual process without device. The comparison is made upon patient outcomes (cured, harm, death, etc.). * The company hinted sharing data with us, but then refused to do so when explicitly asked. It seems that they were already worried about the results by that time. * The company asked us for our results ahead of publication. We refused, as we would have had to state that in our manuscript, which would have made our readers suspicious and would have reflected badly on our work. There was no reason given for our refusal.<issue_comment>username_1: Do you, or any of your co-authors, work for a university. If so you could contact and speak to the legal department about how to protect yourself legally. Alternatively (or in addition) I read a book called "merchants of doubt" which talks about disinformation campaigns against research and researchers who threatened the products of certain industries. There is a website associated to the book here: <https://www.merchantsofdoubt.org/> . While I doubt they would be able to help directly, the authors may be able to point you any relevant groups to guide you in protecting yourself both legally and publicly (if the company in question is malicious then they may not just use legal means to try to bury the results). The book was mainly focused on things that happened in the US so there may be some differences to your case, though if the company in question is US then this may be a benefit to you. Broadly, since neither I nor many people on this site, are lawyers then legal advice should not be sought from us. Your boss' concerns about legal advice may also be from a worry of agitating the company and making them act. While you don't want to trigger anything (if you are big and have a lot of money you don't need to win a lawsuit to win) getting proper advice regarding what you should keep a written record of and what kinds of behaviours to avoid for legal or public reasons is not a bad idea. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Merely asking to see your data, and expecting open scientific work, is not at all inappropriate, and nothing you have described so far amounts to anything untoward by this VP. You are certainly right to tread carefully, but you may be getting ahead of yourself in regard to concerns about "pressure" and "retaliation". Indeed, I would go further and say that it is desirable that scientific researchers should generally be under some pressure to make the data for their work available either to the public or other researchers. (I am also sceptical of characterising legal action as "retaliation"; see further commentary below.\\) You will have to decide if you intend to make your data public, or make it available to other researchers, etc. If you are withholding access then you should have a good reason for this, and it should be communicated to people who seek access to the data. When you publish your research, the journal might also impose requirements on you in respect to data availability. Whatever your decision, it is certainly a bad look if you refuse to give access to your data to other researchers on the basis that they take an opposing view of the efficacy of the research to your own (or on the basis that they have interests that conflict with yours). Ideally, you will be able to formulate a reasonable way for other researchers to get access to your data, perhaps subject to reasonable restrictions that do not constrain their ability to oppose your own findings. Perhaps you can even negotiate some data-sharing arrangement where each organisation provides a quid pro quo in terms of data access. In any case, by your own description, you have "low confidence" in the evidence adverse to the device. Presumably that assessment will be incorporated into your published work on the topic, so that the reader is aware both of the direction and strength of the evidence. You will need to decide whether the evidence is strong enough to assert a conclusion at all, or if it is so weak that it would be irresponsible to make a clear conclusion on the device. The fact that you have low confidence in your result does not necessarily mean that you cannot state it, but you should be careful to impose appropriate caution and caveats. I note that the company asked for access to your manuscript prior to publication, and you have refused this on the basis that you think it might raise a suspicion of collusion by readers. That is not a fanciful objection, but it is unlikely to occur in a context where you are making findings that are adverse to their product. In any case, it is also worth noting that it is handy to have a dissenting pair of eyes review your work prior to publication, since they will likely push back on anything in the manuscript that is in error or is weak. This is also handy if you are concerned about legal action, since it will give you an opportunity to see what, if any, objections the company raises against your work pre-publication. If the matter proceeds to legal action later, it will be hard for the company to raise new objections if they have already been given an opportunity for feedback and review prior to publication of the work. Consequently one thing to consider here is whether it would be worth having a member of this company provide a referee report prior to or during peer review. (You would not normally need to give data access for this to occur.) The advantage of this is that you then get pre-publication information on what they object to, and you can make changes if you think that any of their criticisms have merit. Manuscripts do not usually disclose the identities of referees, but in this case you might ask the journal editor for guidance. In terms of possible legal action by this company, that is something you should speak to a lawyer about. In principle, a publication giving an adverse review of a product could amount to defamation, product disparagement, or a related tort. If your research work is negligent then it could also amount to a tort of negligence. A lawyer will be able to advise you more specifically on these matters, but one thing to bear in mind here is that one element of the tort of product disparagement is knowledge of falsity of an assertion or "reckless disregard" of its truth or falsity. The latter will be much easier for the company to prove if they can show that they tried to talk to you about the research (to raise objections) and you refused to listen to them or communicate with them at all. --- On characterising legal action as "retaliation": One thing that bothers me a great deal when I see these kinds of reactions (as in your post) is this tendency to characterise legal action as "retaliation", in the sense often used in procedures to prevent victimisation of complainants. This type of characterisation smacks of bad faith --- if the taking of legal action is "retaliation", in the sense used in procedures for victimisation of complainants, then the speaker is implicitly saying that other people/companies should not have any legal rights in regard to their own conduct. Of course, some laws and legal procedures are indeed abused, but some laws exist as genuine protections of rights, and it is perfectly reasonable for people/companies to avail themselves of those protections when appropriate. Aside from being quite sociopathic in its own right, such talk is also potentially legally dangerous, insofar as it gives evidence of bad faith and reckless disregard for the rights of others (which can be elements of torts on these matters). If you start out these types of negotiations by considering the possibility of legal action by the other side as "retaliation" you essentially have a total disregard for them having any legal rights in relation to your own conduct. You are effectively saying: I should be above the law. Ask yourself, if the shoe was on the other foot, and someone was thinking about publishing commentary that was adverse to your skills as a researcher, your professional competence, etc., would you like to be treated this way? Wouldn't you be glad that you have some legal protections? Would you consider the exercise of your valid legal protections (by taking legal action if necessary) to be a form of "retaliation"? (To take a more extreme example: If a rape-victim reports their rapist to the police, and maybe also sues them in civil court, would you characterise that as "retaliation"?) I don't intend for this to be a severe criticism, because I think some people just use this term "retaliation" rather flippantly, because they get extremely defensive and nervous at the thought of legal processes, and they let this override any real assessment of the implications. A much better approach in these matters is to go into the matter with a genuine respect for the rights of the other party, and give genuine consideration to whether or not your actions are lawful and fair to them. Instead of regarding legal action as "retaliation" against you for your (presumed) perfect conduct, regard it as a thing that might happen to resolve a dispute by the ruling of a third-party (the court) if that becomes necessary. Give proper consideration to the fact that you might do something wrong if you are not careful, and seek information that will ensure that you do not do something wrong. Don't be afraid of legal action per se --- be afraid of doing something that breaches the rights of another party. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/23	709	2,950	<issue_start>username_0: I have a double master's from two prestigious European universities with the highest grade, but my Ph.D. was a nightmare. My advisors were at loggerheads, never read any drafts, and finally gave me a cum laude, which in Germany is equal to "just pass" and It took me more than a decade, working in odd jobs, to get this Ph.D. which is in an interdisciplinary social science subject. I cannot go back to my violent home country in the Third World. Can I apply for postdocs with a Ph.D. that took years to complete and is interdisciplinary? My advisors may give good recommendations if only to get rid of me. My main aim is to immigrate. I would be happy to go to Canada or the US, but I understand getting permanent residence is easier in Canada.<issue_comment>username_1: You can always apply, and the old adage is true as well: If you don't apply, you will never get the job. For sure you are at a disadvantage compare to people with maybe smoother trajectories and CVs that more clearly show their strengths. But in the end, people mostly get hired based on (i) their qualifications, not on how they got them, and (ii) whether those who seek to hire already know an applicant. As a consequence, your #1 priority should be to make sure you identify people you know (and who know you) and make sure they know that you are on the job market. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If your main aim is to immigrate, consider exploring career options other than an academic research track. With a double Master’s degree from prestigious universities and a PhD, even a (supposedly) mediocre one, your employment prospects in most western countries should be excellent, and some countries’ immigration systems will explicitly favor a person with your credentials (Canada and Australia come to mind). A position as a lecturer, school teacher, researcher at a think tank, government agency or non-profit, and a variety of industry/private sector positions are all options that would be realistically within reach, and potentially easier to secure than a postdoc if you feel doubtful about your ability to present yourself as strong in the academic research context. Of course, you might have additional goals other than the desire to immigrate. Continuing in the academic track is no less of an option than the other ones I’ve listed. Even from a shaky starting point, it is not too late to launch a successful academic career. Depending on the discipline and on how broad you are willing to make your search, the bar for getting a 1-year or 2-year postdoc can be pretty low. The fact that you are interdisciplinary, which you see as a disadvantage, can become an advantage in certain contexts, so try to look for places or opportunities where that will be the case. Being flexible about geographical locations can also be a big advantage. The world, and also the academic world, is a big place! Good luck in any case. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/23	3,872	16,778	<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD-student in (hopefully) my final year of my thesis, but there are still some open tasks before handing in. Since funding has already run out some time ago, I am trying to wrap up everything as soon as possible. Thus, I try to be more pro-active, i.e., do not wait until colleagues or my supervisor are answering mails/setting up meetings, but rather set them up and plan them by myself. This also involves writing meeting notes from meetings covering the next steps and send those to the persons involved. Especially for planning future steps I usually prefer to get responses within a reasonable time frame (i.e., usually within two workdays) such that I can continue with the discussed tasks as soon as possible. If I do not get responses within that time frame I earlier could assume that everyone agreed with the results and next steps. Now, during the recent months my supervisor and colleagues started working together and increasingly ignored the summaries. On multiple occasions the decisions of earlier meetings were completely neglected and the direction of the project was changed, meaning that I had to discard my work done until that point to start from scratch again. When bringing that up my supervisor stated that I should be more aware of the schedule of the people involved, and therefore understand that getting answers/change suggestions can take up to several weeks. He stated that I should be more relaxed, something which is getting more difficult for me in light of the situation stated above. I currently do not know how to handle the situation, and how to improve it (if possible). Thus: * Are my expectations to get responses in a timely manner (i.e., two workdays) too high? I know that my colleagues and my supervisor are busy, but I'd still appreciate it if I would not have to deal with changes introduced several days or weeks later. * What would be the best strategy to improve the current work situation, to finish the project within a reasonable time frame? To a similar question it was suggested to set own deadlines for answers, comments, etc., but that failed in my case.<issue_comment>username_1: Your expectations may definitely be unrealistic. I have a PhD student who needs to complete his dissertation draft by the end of October, when the contract runs out (revisions can come in later, but the bulk of the work needs to be done by that deadline). For the last year, we impressed on this person time and again that there is not much time left, and that they need to deliver publishable chapters. Over the first half of this calendar year, including the relatively quiet Summer months, this person delivered basically nothing. Now, in September and October, lies the peak of my teaching load. If I neglect my teaching for even a moment, I have 200 screaming students in my inbox (and rightfully so). During such a busy time, if the PhD student would suddenly deliver a draft, I cannot guarantee that I will have a go over it within the next two weeks, let alone two working days. You must understand that your supervisors may be under pressures from all kinds of sides: management duties, teaching duties, reviewing duties, multiple students to supervise. These pressures are not equally intense all the time, but it's hard to quantify what hits exactly when, so it's impossible to forecast when you will get quick answers and when you will have to wait longer. Regarding your second question: the best plan is probably to make a timeline of what you can deliver independently. Don't focus on what they can do for you, focus on what you can do for you. If you keep producing material, at some point there will be a skeleton of a dissertation. Your supervisors may quibble with exactly what flesh they want to put on the bones, but if you keep working towards the end goal, at some point they can no longer neglect the direction in which you are pushing your work (which is: completion, one way or another). Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: > > Are my expectations to get responses in a timely manner (i.e. two workdays) too high? > > > Yeah, I think that's a high expectation. In some groups it may be possible, but especially to expect this from a group of multiple people each who have their own responsibilities both to themselves and others I think is too high. I'd set about a week as a low end for expectations, partly on the basis that most people have a somewhat weekly schedule (that is, if they have more free time on Thursdays, it's like that free time recurs every Thursday). However, some times people have other "one-time" events that may make them unreachable for longer (their own deadline, particular busy parts of a course year such as before/after exams, etc). > > What would be the best strategy to improve the current work situation, to finish the project within a reasonable time frame? > > > It sounds like you're soliciting a lot of feedback for this stage in your project. By now you should somewhat know what you're doing and who you're working with. You should be able to anticipate some of the feedback you get and pursue alternative directions without getting instruction. For things you need immediate feedback on, especially from more than one stakeholder, schedule meetings. Prepare all the information necessary to make the decision, present it concisely, and get your answer. I do think it's generally reasonable to have a weekly meeting scheduled with the people you work closely with, but that's not reasonable for everyone. However, if you're someone that needs a weekly meeting to be productive and your supervisor isn't, well...you're pretty much out of luck by this stage on that one, you'll just have to manage. This is sort of "week/month one" negotiation stuff, or things to work out before you even start. If you have more than one thing going at once (you mention multiple "tasks" that need completing), structure your work so that you can be waiting for feedback on some things while preparing others. Lastly, work with your advisor on a reasonable timeline. Instead of asking for more rapid feedback (your solution), present them with your problem (needing to graduate by some date) and ask for guidance. At some point one simply has to stop iterating on things. There is no natural defined end beyond which there is no more work to do for most academic projects. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If OP is independent, that's great. I am a big fan of PhD students that set their own schedule and are proactive, as long as they are reasonably capable of taking a sensible route. If a student would start foisting a time table and response times upon me, however, and insist on them being followed, we would have a discrete "tete-a-tete" about who is in charge of setting the schedule. Now, of course, you are under time pressure; we do not know what was the cause of that or who was responsible for that - but from your question it seems that you regularly went off into directions which were later canceled. We do not know whether this is because your supervisor would be a pedant, or because you might have been more enthusiastic than discerning. This may have cost you a lot of time in the past. Also, you talk about "tried to be more proactive." That indicates that there was another problem in the past; we do not know what it was, but perhaps you were too reactive in the past and you now try to compensate for that - but you cannot dump recovery from past mistakes onto your supervisor to fix. All this is reading between the lines of your question, and the matter may have been entirely different. Your funding problem is the real issue here, it appears. Ask your supervisor what can be done to alleviate your problem. If additional funding cannot be found, ask them what they advise for you to be able to finish as quickly as possible. Be respectful, they may be able to help you in your situation - but, by no means impose your pacing onto them. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You are trying to boss your advisor around, and that is not going to work. Other answers have had much good advice on alternatives. I would like to focus on one detail in your question: > > the direction of the project was changed, meaning that I could discard my work done until that point to start from scratch again. > > > This is not acceptable. It is way to late for changing directions. Push back on this. We are talking about your thesis. Your advisor can offer advice, but you decide whether that advice is good or not. And if they are too busy to talk to you, make your own decisions and stick to them. Once you get out of the "three steps forward and two steps back" routine, you should be able to reach the goal in a reasonable time. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: > > Are my expectations to get responses in a timely manner (i.e. two workdays) too high? I know that my colleagues and my supervisor are busy, but I'd still appreciate it if I would not have to deal with changes introduced several days or weeks later. > > > From my experience, a one-word answer is yes, your expectation here is unrealistic. I state later why I say so. > > What would be the best strategy to improve the current work situation, to finish the project within a reasonable time frame? To a similar question it was suggested to set own deadlines for answers/comments/etc., but that failed in my case. > > > I would think that a hard deadline is the best way - where you leave your current position and/or move to your next employment. In most cases, the first vision of a PhD project is not achieved - which is fine. One of the outcomes of a PhD project is also your career training and that is non-negotiable. Apart from that, if your university requires you to have certain requirements fulfilled before defending your thesis, that should be done as well. On the research outcomes, by the time you finish your PhD, the experiments/data/code should have been documented properly and have reached a stage to be made publicly available if that is what your group has agreed to do. The thing is your research project(s) is only a part of your colleagues' (including your supervisor) ongoing projects. They should prioritise your projects since a PhD is a hard deadline, unlike their employment which might not be for a limited period, but placing unrealistic conditions on them would harm your collaborations with them. There are other factors (family, life and so on) that determine how much and when they can focus on working on common projects with you. My suggestion is that having end goals for your PhD to achieve some research outcomes is a great way to approach and tackle your PhD - since it gives meaning to what we do. But it is a problem if it gets in the way of you collaborating with others and makes you non-flexible and non-adaptable - both to the research goals and to the schedule. One of the other outcomes of PhD is also to work with people on big projects (longer timeline and goals which typical PhD projects are). I would suggest having open communication with your group - tell them why a certain deadline is important to you in the long term and give them the room to think and react when they want instead of requiring them to respond within 2 days. Giving them the benefit of doubt when they are late in responding is also good for your health and nerves (you can think and work on your personal projects in the meanwhile). These are positive collaborating practices and is conducive to your career growth and good health in the long term. In the end, if you feel like the grand goal of your PhD is unattainable due to the pace of the work, it is still fine since you do grow out of your PhD and have learned something in the process. Hope this helps. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Getting timely responses/decisions by email in academia is in my experience a lost cause. However, if you're scheduling regular meetings (which are the right way to make time-sensitive decisions, imo), you shouldn't have to deal with things by email. I would suggest that you try to be clearer about meeting agendas and conclusions. It sounds like during meetings, you and your PI/collaborators aren't on the same page about when you're making a firm decision about the next steps in the project, and when you're having a general discussion about possible options. So you need to be very explicit about what you need, what you're planning, etc - and you need to do that during the meeting, not by email, because emails clearly aren't a good communication medium for these kinds of issues in your group. 1. Before the meeting, send everyone an email summarizing what you want to talk about and what decisions you need to be made. 2. At the end of the meeting, state what you understand the decision to be and what you plan to do as a result, and ask if everyone agrees with that and if they have other concerns. If people have concerns or the decision is unclear, you want to make sure that this is figured out during the meeting, instead of by email afterward. If it looks like things are unclear, schedule another meeting (or extend the current meeting if possible). 3. Your goal is to make sure that by the end of the meeting, everyone understands what decisions have been made and what you will be spending your time doing, so that if they decide to change direction later, they know this will cause wasted work on your part. That said, projects pretty much inevitably involve changing directions and wasted effort going into different things that end up not working out - if everyone already knew what they were doing, it wouldn't be academia! So it's possible that everyone does already understand how much time you're spending on backtracking and wasted work, and they think that's how science normally works. (They may be right! There's not enough detail to tell.) In that case you have a larger-scale problem, and you should talk about that with your PI and ask if there's anything that can be done about it, possibly by making your work more independent. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I think you cannot steer your supervisor and the research project. Everybody besides you have multiple other duties like different research projects, other PhD students to supervise, writing proposals, reading theses, writing papers, teaching, and so on. They have to balance the amount of their time they spent to these topics. Further, your personal goals (finishing your PhD in a timely manner) does not necessarily align with the research group (research breakthrough, some long-term goal, creating PhD thesis topics, being interesting for industrial collaborators, preparing research questions for the next grant). So you cannot change how fast you get answers and you cannot change the research group. I think you should try to decouple your PhD thesis from the research in the group. Sit down with your advisor and define what you still need to do for your thesis. Both of you have to agree, that once you covered the defined scope, you are allowed to write up your thesis, hand it in, and defend. Beside that, you can or cannot invest in the common research direction - that depends on what you can negotiate with your advisor. Their slow pace will help you allocating your time to your personal research, to aim finishing your work. Good luck. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: > > Since funding has already run out some time ago, I am trying to wrap up everything as soon as possible > > > I think this is the key issue. The project suddenly became much more urgent to you, but it did not get any more urgent to anyone else. Your advisor and other stakeholders are still getting their normal salary and so are still on the same pace they used to be, you are trying to accelerate the pace. The only way to solve this is make your advisor or other stakeholders truly understand why this is so urgent to you, and get them to feel the same urgency. Read the book "Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It" by <NAME>. One key takeaway from this book: phrase questions your advisor in the form of "how am I supposed to?" For example "As you know, the funding has run out a long time ago. I can't get a job until I finish my dissertation, but I can't finish my dissertation due to XYZ issues. I have $X left in my bank account. How am I supposed to pay my rent and buy food once that runs out?" He might answer this by solving the problem in a different way. For example, maybe he knows of some other source of funding get you through until the end. Or maybe he agrees to speed up his timetable. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/23	1,126	4,707	<issue_start>username_0: UPDATE: Lost funding and leaving the program. I continued my search and tried to establish contact with around 10 faculty of interest. Most did not even reply to my emails. Contacted gradutate coordinator and could only receive a rejection response after then. At the end of the semester they stopped my funding. To be frank, they did not even tell me that they will discontinue my funding. I heard from friends that they received TA offers. Emalied ask for my funding status to get a reply. All in all, I realize that this was the best thing for me, as I got rid of that toxic, unresponsive, unsupportive and uncollaborative environment. Program expects me to find an advisor, but how could I get one if I doomed to failure from the day one. It was a mistake to go there. (I dont remember my Acad SE username, thats why updated anon). --- I am an international PhD student at a top 50 computer science department in the United States. Due to COVID, I had to start in Spring which was a tough time for everyone. So I thought that the situation might change in Fall. Since then I have been trying to find a PhD advisor, but I can't seem to succeed on this. I have tried to reach a wide range of professors (related to my research interests) in order not to leave any stone unturned. Probably, I contacted around 10-15 professors. Some never replied after multiple emails with a range of more than a month or so between them. Some said they were out-of-capacity. Some were always asking to be convinced, while continuously accepting other students to their lab. Some say that they don't know me. Some vaguely mentioned if an opportunity arises in the "future", but also recommended me to check with other faculty. Here they used the exact word "future" without any certain dates etc. My GPA in the program is 4.0 and I already have some publications from my Master's in my country. Master students with much lesser qualifications than mine get research assistantships, while I can't even find an advisor. I don't have the network of researchers known to faculty which might be a reason for them to be uninterested. My country is not as developed in research as countries such as India or China with lots of international connections. I need to find an advisor ASAP because I might get unsatisfactory progress and lose funding. To be frank, I have totally lost my hope in finding some suitable advisor. I don't even mention funding issues and having to serve as a teaching assistant during all of the PhD. My question is should I leave the program after this semester without wasting more time and energy and getting stuck in the end? Also, if I apply to other PhD programs in the US, will I be perceived badly by the programs, since I could not get an advisor in my current institution? How are students applying from other universities considered? Another option is completely forgetting about getting a PhD.<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that switching schools will do you a lot of good. You will find the same issues at that new place. Instead, I'd recommend that you (a) think long term and (b) get flexible. Talk to some prof who you think would be good to work with and who hasn't already indicated they won't take any student and ask them if they have a suitable project for your dissertation. No, it isn't exactly what you want, but it is a way to burst through. Better if it is aligned with your main interest than otherwise, but you can, if you finish the degree, return to any thread of research that interests you at some later point. It may take a while of course, but it is possible. Insisting on a particular research direction, with no known support, is costing you. I think you are in the dilemma of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. There are a lot of "interesting" problems out there. But you need an advisor who is also "interested" in working with you. At the very least, switching will cost you time and might leave you in an even worse situation. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me extrapolate: you have no one that can vouch for you, so you are casting your net wide. You are trying to contact big names, full professors and the like, without any connections to them. That approach is bound to fail. They are too busy, they receive too many emails, they can spend 2 minutes on you, if your needs do not align perfectly with their needs in those 2 minutes, you are ignored. Start small. Contact assistant professor, academic involved in opensource projects related to the tools you would use for your topic, get in touch even with other PhDs and Post-Docs ... and from there try to build your little network. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/23	1,420	6,393	<issue_start>username_0: This is a general question inspired by an interesting [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/175816/) where a researcher investigated the efficacy of a product produced by a company and made adverse findings against the product. In that question, the company became aware of the research prior to publication and some of its personnel sought input into the research (e.g., requesting the data, requesting to see the paper prior to publication), and the researcher wanted to know how to deal with this. There are some obvious dangers that arise when personnel in such a company seek input into the research process for an outside review of one of the company's products, since it could potentially break the independence of the research. However, there are also a number of potential benefits: (1) company personnel may be able to share expert knowledge of the subject, perhaps provide useful information, interpretation, criticism, or data; (2) the researchers potentially benefit from critical feedback on their work (from a potentially hostile reviewer) prior to publication, allowing them to strengthen the work with revisions; and (3) the review process could potentially avoid ---or reduce the scope of--- possible false research findings and resulting legal claims. In view of the possible benefits of this kind of review, I have a number of questions (feel free to respond to only one/some of them): * Should researchers or academic journal editors ever seek referee reports (or more informal feedback) from personnel from companies who are adversely affected by outside research of their products/services/etc., prior to publication of results? If so, what circumstances would make this appropriate? * If such referee reports are solicited (and given) as part of the formal peer review process, how should an editor treat them? Should they be treated just like any other referee reports, or should the editor take them "with a grain of salt"? * If such referee reports are solicited (and given), either in formal peer-review or in informal communication with the researchers, what if any disclosure of this should be made in the paper? Should the report just be treated like any other referee report and remain anonymous, or should the reader be made aware of any changes made to the paper in response to referee review by the company? * Is there any clear current practice for this in universities or academic journals? Have there been any cases that have caused controversies or misconduct issues? Is there a "best practice" on this issue? * Is this all just a complete no-no (i.e., reports should not be solicited from interested companies)?<issue_comment>username_1: First, companies do not review papers. People review them, and as an editor you need to ensure that you know who actually wrote the review. Second, the rule in general is: People who have a conflict of interest should generally be avoided, and if you need to choose them (for example, because there simply are not enough other people in a field who are not conflicted), they need to disclose the conflict of interest and when you make a decision about a paper based on a conflicted reviewer, you need to take the conflict into account. For this particular case: * If that is possible, as an editor I would try to avoid using a reviewer from the company simply because they have real or perceived conflicts of interest. (Note that a perceived COI is just as bad as a real COI.) * If it is not possible to avoid using someone from that company, or because you want an insider opinion, you can do so, but you have to consider how much weight you want to give that review when making a decision. It also seems appropriate to state in the reply to the authors that Reviewer #4 works at Company X (without disclosing that person's identity), and that you have taken this fact into account when making your decision. Personally, if I had to do this, I would probably write a longish description of which of the points reviewer #4 made I consider valid, and which ones I think are points that I believe are tainted by perceived COIs and that can consequently be ignored by the authors (but can of course still be addressed if they so wish). I would also lay out this kind of procedure when asking the person from Company X, to make sure that they understand how I will treat the review I ask them to provide. In the end, the goal is to ensure that you get good feedback on a paper and to have a (documented) procedure to guarantee impartiality. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This reminds me of the [AlphaZero paper](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AlphaZero). AlphaZero is a game-playing AI by DeepMind that learned to play chess. Naturally DeepMind compared AlphaZero against Stockfish, the strongest conventional chess engine at the time. However their inexperience with Stockfish showed, and their tests had serious problems. When they made their preprint public, a Stockfish developer wrote: > > The match results by themselves are not particularly meaningful because of the rather strange choice of time controls and Stockfish parameter settings: The games were played at a fixed time of 1 minute/move, which means that Stockfish has no use of its time management heuristics (lot of effort has been put into making Stockfish identify critical points in the game and decide when to spend some extra time on a move; at a fixed time per move, the strength will suffer significantly). The version of Stockfish used is one year old, was playing with far more search threads than has ever received any significant amount of testing, and had way too small hash tables for the number of threads. > > > To DeepMind's credit, they fixed all these weaknesses in the final published paper. So yes, I would do it. Other parts of their review might be less reliable (I would certainly examine them carefully), but the person will be a great expert on whether the company's product is being used correctly. Caveat: the person/company might be more incentivized to take action based on the unpublished results. For example, they might seek to improve their product using the methodology of the paper before it is published. I don't think there is a good solution to this because it can happen regardless of who the reviewer is; I would therefore do it anyway. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/24	979	4,298	<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student at a US university, and earlier this week I asked a former undergraduate mentee if in her evaluation I qualified for an "excellence in mentorship" award. She responded enthusiastically, and just today wrote the she finished it. She also offered to let me review it to make sure she's included all pertinent information. All the past letters of recommendation I've received have been closed-envelope letters that I don't have the opportunity to review, I am not sure how to respond. I trust her to write a good letter, and would probably have little if anything to say, but I certainly wouldn't mind having a chance to be sure. Basically, years of closed-envelope letters of recommendation have conditioned to feel that it is not appropriate to be able to read your own letter. However, the only reason I know for that is to allow writers to speak freely, without the pressure or awkward situation that would arise if one were to ask for the opportunity to read their own letter. On the other hand, this one was freely offered, and so I am not compromising the writer's ability to speak freely. Do you see any reason, ethical or practical, to turn down my mentee's offer?<issue_comment>username_1: This is clearly a judgment call, but upon reflection my advice is for you not to read the letter. There is a tiny chance that the student wrote -- presumably unintentionally -- something that you won't like, but that is really going to hit hard in the present context. (Long ago a faculty member wrote a recommendation letter for me and it got accidentally sent...to me! I didn't know what it was until I started reading it. The letter was overall very positive, but the one flaw in my work was...well, I won't say, but that was more than 15 years ago and I still remember what it was. I don't remember anything else in it specifically.) I don't think this is a serious worry, but compare that to what you have now: a totally positive, sunny black box. More significantly, although the student "offered to let me review it to make sure she's included all pertinent information," if you actually find something that seems incorrect, getting her to change it gets awkward really fast: calling for a factual change should be ethically permissible, but I would rather not get anywhere near the terrain of rewriting the student's letter. You say that you trust her to write the letter, so...great; you're not worried about needing to change what's in it. I have read lots of letters of approximately this type: namely, where a student says nice things about their instructor (in the context of a departmental tenure / promotion case, a teaching award nomination, and so forth). There is really not much in the way of specific expectations for what a student should say, how they should format it, and so forth. I find it quite unlikely that this letter is going to be read with the kind of critical eye that would justify even getting the student to take the trouble of revising it. Finally, the student probably doesn't know the academic culture that these types of letters are usually not read: from my limited experience with the nonacademic world, I believe it's quite different out there. I think the student is trying to do something nice for you but has landed on the wrong thing. Here is a suggestion: tell the student that you don't need to read the letter and in fact are used to thinking of academic recommendation letters as confidential. But if she would be willing to write a small note or card addressed to you, you would enjoy that and would hold onto it. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: First, kudos for being in the running for the award, and for earning this kind of student response. I would thank her and decline the offer because it makes you uncomfortable. You could tell her that or just say as per Pete Clark's answer that it's just not done in academia. In an analogous but not identical situation: when I a write letter of recommendation for a student I regularly show the student what I have written before submitting it in the traditional sealed envelope (nowadays that's a web form). The student has usually waived the right to see the letter but I have not waived the right to show it to them. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/24	712	3,075	<issue_start>username_0: I have recently signed an offer letter for a faculty position.This is not a permanent position. One of the required documents in the offer letter was the names of referees. As far as I know my referees have not been asked for letter of recommendations yet. I am confused about why they asked me to sign the offer letter, whereas they have not contacted my referees in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: I haven't seen it before in universities, but certain corporate firms use [conditional offer letters](https://www.thebalancecareers.com/how-to-handle-a-conditional-job-offer-with-letter-examples-4158946) where the terms of the offer may stipulate that it is subject to referee checks, security checks, work-history checks, checks of educational credentials, medical tests, drug tests, etc. In such cases, the terms of the offer will usually specify that you agree to assist them with conducting these checks, and if the results of the checks come back unsatisfactory (or if you fail to provide them the required information/permissions to conduct the checks), your offer of employment never materialises. Firms do this partly as a time-saver and partly to try to "lock in" favoured candidates while they conduct pre-employment checks. I haven't seen this from a university before, since they usually take their sweet time with academic recruitment anyway, so they usually conduct referee checks prior to offer. Nevertheless, universities have become highly corporatised, and it is not particularly surprising to see them using this mode of offer. You should look at the exact terms of your offer letter to see what you are obligated to do and what obligations the university has. (Ideally, you should have had a good look at the terms prior to signing!) The legal status of conditional employment offers is quite a complicated field. From a purely contractual point of view, firms can make conditional offers and if you fail to meet the conditions then the stipulated outcome does not occur. However, these contracts are also impacted by employment law and principles of estoppel. In particular, in some situations where the final offer of employment does not materialise, the offering firm can be liable if a prospective employee relies on a conditional offer to their detriment, such as by quitting their existing job or moving to a new location for their expected position. Here is an introductory [article](https://www.natlawreview.com/article/can-employer-legally-withdraw-job-offer-after-it-s-been-made) about the legal status of conditional employment offers, though it pertains to the legal jurisdiction in New Jersey. Employment law differs over different jurisdictions, so if you need legal assistance understanding the implications of your offer letter, you will need to consult a lawyer in your jurisdication. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have seen this before. It meant, references were a formality. Basically, the offer stands as log as your referees don't tell something horrible about you. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/24	722	3,262	<issue_start>username_0: I have just accepted a paper for reviewing for a journal in neuroscience. While skimming through the paper, it appeared that the authors had heavily cited literature originating from the country where the authors are from. Since then I have carefully read through the Introduction and most of the Discussion section and I am quite convinced that this is so. There also appears to be a tendency of self citation, although it is hard to be certain. To be clear, the paper has nothing to do with any specific region of the world and there are other papers (from diverse regions) that the authors could have cited but have chosen not to (whenever the authors are throwing in an example citation of the ilk: "...many studies have shown that xyz is quite common (Citation)". My questions: 1. Are there tools that can return the affiliation information (specifically the country and additional information like ORCID iD), given a list of references? I would like to see whether my intuition about the possible citation bias is correct (and if so, perhaps mention it to the editor) 2. Should this be a matter of concern? I am quite new to peer review and I feel that wherever possible, the references should be diverse (once again, to clarify, the paper has nothing to do with a specific region of the world and that there are other studies which the authors could have cited)<issue_comment>username_1: Well, yes, the citations should cover relevant literature no matter where it originated. I wouldn't worry too much about tracking where the authors are or are from. Simply note that there are many possible references missing (perhaps provide some), and note which seem excessive. It would be easy to imagine that the authors have been closely following work in their own country and are building on it appropriately. I would give the authors a round to review their citations before approaching the editor. While I'm sure it's not your intent, it would be easy to come off prejudiced here. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As someone who has received similar (valid) criticism literally last week - it's not necessarily malicious, might be just a lack of effort with finding relevant and more globally visible literature on the topic (such as papers with more citations) instead of relying on own or known from local collaborations/conferences work. Good way to go about it is to cite it as a concern in your review and suggest improving this part. If a reviewer is familiar enough with the topic and knows most major groups working on it, they might provide an example (e.g. "authors cite a tangentially related work X while a much more well-known work Y deals with the subject directly"). But this is not required, either. My suggestion is cite this concern of yours in the review as a suggestion for improvement and let the editor handle it from there on. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: What language are the cited papers in? It's possible that some of the authors find it easier to read papers in their native language and that's why they mostly choose those in cases where there are multiple options. I wouldn't find that concerning, as long as the underlying information is fine. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/25	913	3,715	<issue_start>username_0: We have 3 days gaps during exams. It takes me about two days to get tuned into a subject, i.e ., to get into the state of flow. I get tuned to studying around the middle of the second day. Is there anything that I can do to get tuned in faster? I think that would greatly help me increase my GPA score.<issue_comment>username_1: Considering that your exams are either written/laboratory experiments, I can suggest few pointers: 1. Get proper sleep and eat healthy during such particularly high-stress periods (lot of caffeine is not probably the best way, but drinking water helps!), 2. Get a proper break after you are done with one exam, it is important to send a signal to your brain to rejuvenate before you dive into a different topic. You might want to take a nap, go for a walk alone or do something similar to reset, 3. Keep to your normal schedule, this helps your brain to manoeuvre the daily tasks without much added effort, 4. See these 2 days for what they are - a revision opportunity and not essentially to learn something new. To focus on deep learning rather than surface learning, before the start of the exams, keep a set of notes finalized that you can skim through and know which topics you need to focus especially during this 2-day revision. You can choose to tackle the harder ones first and then revise the smaller chapters since that would be more assuring. 5. Try to have fun on the exams - see them as learning opportunities rather than something that you are fighting for. Our brains relish experiences that are more 'fun' and dreads the situations where they do into 'fight-or-flight' mode. Hope this helps! Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree in full with the [answer of Wandering\_Alice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175893/75368) but have another suggestion, though it may be too late to implement for the current cycle. If you study, and prepare, and take proper notes throughout a course, the exam prep can be very simple, but it requires discipline. First, is to take good notes. I strongly suggest that you do this with pencil/pen and paper, not electronically. Writing engages the brain in a way that typing does not. A court stenographer can capture very word, but without actually understanding or remembering any of it, though they use a shorthand (machine) to capture it. The notes in your computer is a different thing than the ideas in your brain. The next thing is to capture for each lecture, the two or three most important ideas of that lecture. Perhaps you do this as you go along, or perhaps you immediately write them out at the end of the lecture and before you have a chance to do other things (and forget). I gave a long [answer to a different question at CSEducators](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/a/1168/1293) and discussed a simple thing called a Hipster PDA. This is a good technique for capturing the essence of a course. The advantage is that you can carry a small deck of index cards with you wherever you go and can review important points at any time. In particular, the deck for a course serves as a very fast review that you can use as the basis for exam prep. If you have reviewed periodically, and updated the deck, inserting (and maybe discarding), and re-sorting the cards, exams prep can be fairly painless. Note again, that paper works, but electronic capture is less flexible and less engaging. To learn, you need to [change the brain](https://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/com/1579220541). --- Using the Hipster PDA Write only one idea per card. Write on one side only. Use different colors for different things, perhaps. The backs can be used for annotations later. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/25	709	2,923	<issue_start>username_0: I am a new assistant professor. I have been invited for a conference discussant and said yes. However, I just realized that I am required to register for the conference (fee is $710) to serve as a discussant; my school doesn't pay for it because it is not my own study. In this case, can I ask someone to present my comments instead of me? Is it rude to the organizer or harmful to my career?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer you need is from the conference, probably from the person that invited you. But, make sure that this is a reputable conference. I get many "invitations" to less than reputable venues who are trolling for those fees. For a reputable place, it might depend on why they asked you, specifically. If they want your expertise, then a substitute probably isn't going to satisfy them. For a reputable place, you can also plead poverty and ask if the fee can be waived. Whether this works or not depends on lots of things, but if they really want you then --- maybe. But ask them. An affirmative answer from this site does you no good at all. A request to attend and speak at a conference not in your field is a fairly clear sign that it isn't reputable. The exception would be for superstars who might have something to say about the crossover between fields. For an assistant professor, I'd guess they want your money more than your ideas. Red flag. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's assume that the conference is organized in good faith and it is not a predatory one. The organizers think your contribution is very relevant to the conference general success and they want you onboard. Unfortunately, your current institution does not offer travel costs, because they do not understand the importance of the conference. Once you reply this to who invited you, after a couple of days you will receive the reply from the organizers. They will have covered the session without your important contributions, therefore picking a second class discussant, or they may have decided they really need you. Since the organizers of the conference are really interested in you bringing your contributions, not in you being just a +1 carrying money and credibility to the conference with your affiliation and title, of course they will waive the conference fees. The fees waiver will most likely allow you to participate just for the day your contribution (you will have a no-frill conference, no banquet dinner and no excursion), plus maybe they will offer you some form of travel bursary. Or, they will reply with a 10% discount, since most likely they are the usual predatory conference outsourcing all the communications to a cheap company which will organize the conference the same way they would organize a sight-seeing cruise in [the Gowanus Canal](https://static01.nyt.com/images/2010/03/03/nyregion/03gowanus_CA0/03gowanus_CA0-articleLarge.jpg). Upvotes: 0
2021/09/26	859	3,791	<issue_start>username_0: There are several types of tasks in academia. Some may be simple and some may be complex in nature. Although some tasks are very simple for many, they can be quite complex for me. If those tasks are institution-specific, then I need to get clarified from the concerned authority or from the other students only without any other option such as asking on public platforms. This question is about such tasks (very simple to others and highly complex to me). Is it ok to ask for help from others in dealing with such tasks? Or is it better to avoid communication and wait for a long time to get a solution since the task is very simple for others and hence people may take it odd and form negative opinions on me? Although, in the ideal situation, it seems to be good to get a clarification/solution as early as possible. But since I am an experienced person about the work dynamics in long run, I am asking this question.<issue_comment>username_1: In a positive work environment, such tasks that are institution-specific will have some starting notes to tackle them, e.g. where to find a given resource, how to reset the VPN etc. If not, asking for help is the best way to go about it. I would guess that in most cases the questions I am facing are also queried by several others (even future employees) and would suggest making a common FAQ page/PDF about it and sharing it with the HR/library to whom people can refer to for department/Faculty-specific tasks. Sharing resources and collaborating on such situations is highly encouraging to junior and new colleagues and should be encouraged. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd say there are four distinct scenarios of you employing some outside help: Short term: * Something not expected of a person in your position to be capable of. Say, after a programming course it is desired that you know your way around it but no one reasonable really holds a general expectation of you being a pro at that from day 1. Totally ask for help. * Something expected of you to be capable of which you can't do because you say have been sick while the relevant information was distributed. Again, asking for help is actually expected here. Long term: * Something that you are expected to do as a part of your responsibilities but what is genuinely hard for you. It happens all the time, actually - there is always that otherwise brilliant colleague who can't for the life of theirs figure out how to center a figure in Word or remember which server to use for testing. Be acutely aware of these weaknesses - it is okay to employ help on a permanent basis long as you acknowledge calling in favors, provide some value back and, ideally, plan for requesting help in advance. "I will be turning in some report later today, could you help me with formatting a bit? Will be around 4 pm today and probably would take some half an hour" is unlikely to make you hated, "The supervisor requests it done by tomorrow so I need 3 hours of your time today to fill in all the gaps", however, isn't particularly nice. Try not to be a burden and repay those favors. * Something you are capable of learning and not consider particularly hard but just don't feel like doing it. If it only happens once or twice, whatever, but absolutely do not do so on a permanent basis. Also, this is not that specific to academic culture - any workplace with juniors in it (that is, nearly any thriving workplace out there) has this "issue". Long as you genuinely try and improve, asking for help is actually highly encouraged: it is lot easier to methodically cover gaps in one's knowledge than give them a task and wait for a week for them to acknowledge they lack some more understanding of the topic, over and over again. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/26	1,967	6,660	<issue_start>username_0: For a study, I want to analyse the writing style of (contemporary) world-famous academics who were not educated in the West, yet I can find few examples. My focus is on Eastern Europe, but I will be happy to consider any non-Western academic (regardless of the discipline). Due to the nature of my study, I am only considering scholars who published at least one well-read text in English after the year 2000. Upon some research, I found that most famous scholars of non-Western origin were in fact educated in the West. Few were not (e.g. <NAME>). Do you know any world-famous (or really famous) academic who was not educated in the West? Edit: to be more precise, with "educated" I meant receiving their pre-doctoral education (including PhD) at a non-Western institution. With "world-famous" I meant that such a scholar is known also outside specialist academic circles (e.g. was interviewed in popular media, received prices, their work is read trans-disciplinary, their work is translated in other languages etc.). <NAME> is perhaps a good example, but one of few I know. Second edit: thank you, everyone, for your answers. I have spent the day reading the work of some scholars you proposed above, which was an interesting endeavour. What I realised is that none of the papers I read would be comprehensible or received trans-disciplinary (or at least this is my guess). This was a very useful insight which told me that perhaps I should ask not for a world-famous scholars, but rather a world-famous text that was written by a non-western-educated scholar. Moreover, no one has suggested anyone from social sciences or humanities. In both fields, this is my feeling, we can find more texts that are at the same time scholarly text and read widely across disciplines or by lay audience. But are there any such well-known works written by scholars educated at a non-Western insitution?<issue_comment>username_1: Not many academics are really well known outside academia, but of Nobel laureates who are Japanese citizens, it looks like the most recent eight were all educated in Japan up to doctoral level. It might be more than eight but I stopped checking. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Japanese_Nobel_laureates> Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There are plenty. The Soviet Union was a scientific powerhouse, after all. Some quick names are [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_Geim), [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Linde), and [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Starobinsky). Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: ### [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksander_Wolszczan) Polish astronomer, co-discoverer of the first confirmed extrasolar planets. > > I am only considering scholars who published at least one well-read text in English after the year 2000 > > > His key publication in Nature was in 1994 but he published afterwards as well (notably in 2007). Not sure how this fits your constraints. --- Please note that if you ask for scientific "well-read text in English" you are likely to get zero answers from laymen, and obscure references from specialists. "Well-read" is really difficult to qualify (is something published in Nature or Science well-read? If so, it is "well-read" by 0.0001% of the population (a made-up number). I think that any article from a mainstream celebrities magazine is way more "well-read") Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: [<NAME>ian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yuri_Oganessian) appears to be educated solely in Moscow. He has been among the lead physicists in superheavy elements for half a century. The discoveries of six heaviest elements is [credited](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_chemical_element_discoveries#Modern_discoveries) to him. He is also one of only two people after whom a chemical element has been named during their lifetime and the only one still living. Unfourtunately, he might not be great for your cause as he is in the field where a bunch of co-authors is a common practice. It's hard to know who did the writing. [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman) appears to be educated solely in Leningrad. He is widely credited for proving the Poincare conjecture, the only of the [Millenium Prize Problems](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Prize_Problems) that has been solved as of today. Although this would make him a math celebrity aleady, he is most widely known for declining the millenium prize money. He was also awarded a Fields medal for this work which he also declined (the only person to have done so). You can inspect Perelman's most famous articles on arxiv: [https://arxiv.org/search/math?query=Perelman%2C+Grisha&searchtype=author&abstracts=showℴ=-announced\_date\_first&size=50](https://arxiv.org/search/math?query=Perelman%2C+Grisha&searchtype=author&abstracts=show&order=-announced_date_first&size=50) Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Academics from the 30s/40s, ranging from [philosophers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosopher#Philosophers_during_the_Nazi_era) to [physicists and chemists](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Heisenberg#German_nuclear_weapons_program) were educated in a Central/Eastern European world. On top of them, there were notable scientist, like [the man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun) that brought the first human to the Moon, after giving birth to the first drone strikes, called V-2s bombing of London. If you require then to be famous in the sense of "known to the larger public", that is reserved to the few that are innocuous to the western establishment, such as the above mentioned Zizek. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: A list for the winners of the Abel Prize (A), the Clay Research Award (C) and the Fields Medal (F). Received PhD (or equivalent) in Hungary: Lovász (A). Received PhD (or equivalent) in India: Agrawal (C). Received PhD (or equivalent) in Israel: Lindenstrauss (F). Received PhD (or equivalent) in Japan: Kodaira (F), Mori (F). Received PhD (or equivalent) in what nowadays is Russia: Novikov (F), Margulis (F), Drinfeld (F), Zelmanov (F), Okounkov (F), Szemerédi (A), Sinai (A), Malinnikova (C), Logunov (C). Received PhD (or equivalent) in what nowadays is Serbia: Marković (C). P.S. The definition of a Western country is somewhat ambiguous. Apparently the criteria can include being a democracy, having a GDP per capita over 20,000 USD and having Christianity as the predominant religion. Apologies if the above selection of countries offended anyone. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/26	318	1,428	<issue_start>username_0: I am about to submit a paper on arXiv which is accepted but yet to be published. In the accepted version, we have thanked the referee, as their comments helped us in many ways. Should I add this acknowledgement to the arXiv version? Or post without it?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, people who read the arXiv version understand that it is a preprint they are reading that may or may not match the published version. So, it matters little whether you include it or exclude it. My preference would be to leave the paper as it is, rather than providing a "different" version explicitly. But be sure that your publisher permits you to upload a preprint. Some do. Some don't. Some do it themselves. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If the preprint is the revised version that incorporates the changes engendered by the referee comments then I think it would be appropriate to have the acknowledgement. Contrarily, if the preprint is the original version of the paper prior to the revisions then it would not make sense to acknowledge the referee, since they made no contribution to that version of the paper. (As a more general rule, we add acknowledgements into a paper at the point at which the recipient of the acknowledgement did something to warrant that acknowledgement, so changing revisions of papers may accumulate acknowledgements as people give help.) Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2021/09/26	982	4,071	<issue_start>username_0: I am currently preparing my applications for various theoretical physics/physics master's programs in Canada and Europe. Canadian institutes typically require you to write a 1000+ words SoP. Now I am mostly certain about what to include in my SoP and how to do so. However, I am in a dilemma regarding my introduction. In particular, is beginning with a childhood story of how I was inspired to pursue the subject is a good way to start or not? Some sources like [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/105597/what-should-i-cut-out-from-my-sop-for-masters-programs/105599#105599) call it "cheap talk" whereas some sources like the one [here](https://uwaterloo.ca/graduate-studies-postdoctoral-affairs/future-students/applying-graduate-school/writing-your-personal-statement) stress having a narrative and gripping the reader from the first line on. The two suggestions might have an intersection but the latter source particularly encourages beginning with an impactful childhood experience. In my case, the story goes as follows: I happened to tag along with my father to an ophthalmology conference in the US. While my father was busy, I was left with this engineer colleague who was relatively free. He spent the next three days talking to me about some interesting areas of research in modern physics. We spoke about topics like QM, dark matter, LHC, and gravity. Of course, it was more of a first popular science introduction to things but it sparked my interests and genuinely led me to pursue physics. This was 7 years ago. Now, I wish to mention this in the introduction and spend about 60 words doing so. I am unsure as to whether the above comes off as something unprofessional or unnecessary. Any help would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: In physics culture, most people do not care what inspired you. Telling stories (in the sense of a narrative with a sequence of events) is not a popular activity among physicists. I would not include an inspirational or motivational story in an application for anything relating to physics. Your statement should describe what you want to do (your purpose) and why you are able to do it, with factual evidence. Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It was okay to mention colleagues/relatives/family friends getting you interested in some particular topic during the initial assignment at the university right after high school, at least where I'm at. By the time of writing master's SoP, however, one is expected to know lot more about various areas of modern physics. Writing about "inspirational" childhood experience actually would undermine my confidence (as a hypothetical member of the admissions committee) that your understanding of the field has increased enough since that story's time, which is supposedly way back in high school - before you have actually gotten all your advanced education in physics. So, ultimately my advice is the same as in the [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175921/145124): Do not do that. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: NO!!! ===== Telling stories about your childhood will not "grip the reader from the first line on," it will put them to sleep. Possible exception if something truly unusual happened during your childhood (e.g., being hunted by the mob), but chatting with your father's friend does not rise to this level. Moreover, this is a professional document in which you are asked to state (and justify) your purpose; telling inane personal stories is not a reasonable way to answer this question. I'm writing this so emphatically because this is such a common mistake. And it's understandable -- writing the first sentence of a statement of purpose is not easy, and including such stories is often encouraged during grade school English classes. But now is the time to make the transition to professional documents written for an audience of your peers, and that means providing logical thinking with factual evidence rather than cute stories. Upvotes: 4
2021/09/26	4,016	17,049	<issue_start>username_0: If someone has a paper which could be published in a peer-reviewed journal, but they choose to not publish it in a peer-reviewed journal, what can they do to help the research to be taken seriously? By "taken seriously," I mean that this paper would not be significantly disadvantaged; that is, a typical researcher would assume that this paper is roughly comparable to similar papers in a peer-reviewed journal. Many academics view peer review as currently practiced as indicating credibility of the work. I completed a PhD last year and currently work in a non-research job. I am working on a few papers on the side. I have published peer-reviewed journal articles and reviewed some articles before, but I find the review process to be typically superficial and slow. I barely have the time to do the research in the first place, much less time to format the paper to the journal style, respond to reviewers, etc. I also would like to publish open-access but can not afford the fees. In my case I think publishing in a peer-reviewed journal as they exist today fails a cost-benefit analysis. I'm not interested in debating these points here, so take them as given for the sake of argument. At present I'm thinking about publishing on preprint websites and leaving it at that. I know from experience that many people won't take me seriously if I do that, so I am curious if anyone has advice for being taken seriously publishing outside of the typical peer-reviewed ecosystem. Note: Assume that I am not a crank and that the content of the paper is similar to that of any normal preprint which is eventually published in a peer-reviewed journal. There are many webpages that give advice to cranks and those webpages are not helpful to me. The question is about how to make a paper which could be published in a peer-reviewed journal but is not have the credibility to most researchers of being published in a peer-reviewed journal. Related: [How should I interpret a promising preprint that was never published in a peer-reviewed journal?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/133502/how-should-i-interpret-a-promising-preprint-that-was-never-published-in-a-peer-r)<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible to do what you want, but, it takes more work than going through the standard process. At one time there was no such system and people got a reputation by sending off their work to other scholars. Many had patrons who helped give them a bit of visibility. So, in actuality, the journal/publishing system is an attempt at an optimization, by giving a third party an incentive to help you get your work seen. An added feature is that a reader can have some confidence that other experts in the field have "blessed" the validity of the work by reviewing it. The problem with the old system, is that every reader has to verify every paper independently and so reputation grew only very slowly and not very "far". But, you can send your work to those you think are interested and carry on conversations about it if they respond. You can publish preprints, but, again, no reader has automatic confidence in your work until you already have an established reputation. The current system isn't perfect, but we haven't managed to replace it with one with different positive incentives than are present in the journal system (money, primarily). There are other possibilities, and some are being tested, such as open publishing, but it is difficult to cover the long term cost without some incentives. It isn't essential that people make a profit from publishing, but it is essential that the costs get covered if you want long-term availability. One way to build a reputation in some fields, however, is to attend lots of conferences, though you won't be a presenter. But most conferences give you an opportunity to meet people between sessions and talk to them about their (and your) ideas. You can, in theory, establish a circle of collaborators this way, but most of them will want to publish (and then present in conferences), so you are more likely to be a 'junior' partner in their work than if you were on the podium also. This was also not a possibility in the far past. But conferences (and the associated travel) are expensive. So, it is more likely to be open to the independently wealthy. A third method is to somehow get tenure (good luck with that if you don't publish) and then let your students do the publishing of ideas you develop jointly. You will get a reputation through them if you are successful at it, but it still depends on some sort of publishing system, probably with peer review. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: What is the purpose of all this? The goal of publishing, ultimately, is to communicate your ideas to other researchers. Peer review is supposed to help with that: to give you few more eyes to look at your work and - supposedly - ask you questions a wider audience would have upon reading your work. Side note - I must admit there is an argument [barely anyone](https://www.straitstimes.com/opinion/prof-no-one-is-reading-you) [is reading](https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0809/0809.5250.pdf) academic work, raising questions about its cost efficiency. But the bottom line still is - what do you intend to write these papers for and who do you want to reach out to? If it is researchers, publishing in peer-reviewed journals does make sense as it is what they read, a lot. If it is industry, by contrast, they don't read these papers a whole lot but they do attend conferences and exhibitions. If you want to reach out to just general audience with your cool ideas, you might as well post on social media instead for arguably bigger impact at a less effort. Sorry, it all boils down to how you define "be taken seriously". If your ultimate goal is for scientists to act upon your work, you either publish in peer-reviewed journals and attract attention that way, or reach out to academics saying you have a project where collaboration would make sense and you'd provide them with some resources from the industry and they would do some more in-depth research in return. Finally, don't forget that funding in academia is oftentimes tightly coupled to publications. If you want academics to act on your ideas, you either hire them to work on the industry side or seek grant funding which means... publishing this work. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Unfortunately, "peer review" has been made the core certificate of quality for research. Not that everyone agrees with it, but this is how the community works. If you do research that can be reproduced from the preprint (mathematics, theoretical physics etc.), you might get the occasional follower of your work, but unless you have a network of people that know what you do and have interest in it, I doubt that you will make much headway in visibility - but that's normal, even for "peer-reviewed" papers, unless it is a top journal. If you just want the knowledge to be out there, the preprints might be sufficient. If you want visibility, you probably have to drum it up in social media - but you need to be careful not to come across as overly interested in publicity. In an experimental field where experiments are not easily reproduced, you will likely be entirely out of luck. Nobody will see themselves being able to rely on experimental results of an unvetted paper. Put this way, for an external reader, "non peer reviewed" means: nobody but the author may have read this paper. It might be full of mistakes, badly or inconsistently written, and possibly a waste of time. Unless it promises a really interesting introduction, model, technique or result, which would attract their attention, it more looks like a waste of time. Whatever you do, you need to make sure that your work does not come across as a waste of time for the reader, peer-reviewed or not; not being peer-reviewed increases the a priori expectation for that for the uninformed reader. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In mathematics, currently, it seems to me that if you have some good, interesting ideas and can present them well, and put documents on arXiv, people will look at them. I look at arXiv daily (and, also, web pages of people I know) for new things. I rarely look at on-line versions of "peer-reviewed journals", because all that stuff is a year or two out of date (given the glacial slowness of the refereeing process...), and, anyway, would have either been on arXiv a year or two earlier, or someone would have told me about it. I gather that some parts of physics treat their arXiv more seriously than some mathematicians seem to want to treat our arXiv. I have no idea about other fields. Certainly it's best to have already cultivated some sort of reputation/credibility before "rebelling". :) Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Ultimately, I think this comes down to where most of the good papers are. If all the best papers are in the traditional peer-reviewed academic journals, then naturally they are going to maintain credibility and outside sources are going to lack it. However, if substantial numbers of valuable papers are appearing in alternative fora (e.g., on ArXiv) then it is likely that those alternative fora are going to be "taken seriously". In any process like this there is a temporal delay between quality and credibility, but they will tend to connect in the end. I agree with many of the criticisms of traditional academic publishing, and indeed, there are some you do not even mention. Nevertheless, one advantage these journals do have is that they have a filtering mechanism that is likely to filter out really low-quality contributions. Non-peer-reviewed repositories have some very good papers in them, but they also have a substantial amount of "chaff". Peer review provides some kind of quality assurance to the reader (for all its many flaws and limitations) and this is something that is helpful when looking for papers. My suspicion is that we may eventually end up with some kind of hybrid system, where researchers post pre-prints on a general repository and then put the onus on journals to come and have a look at what is available and make publication offers on papers they like. Such a system would solve many of the problems relating to difficulties matching papers to journals, long delays in review, and the one-journal-at-a-time inhibitor on the publication process. To answer your main question, if you publish on a non-peer-reviewed repository, and don't seek to convert these papers into peer-reviewed publications in journals, you are going to be at some disadvantage. Whether the work is "taken seriously" will ultimately come down to whether it is visible to other researchers, and perceived by them to be of high quality. All of the normal advice for advertising your work and trying to get it noticed applies here. Some papers on ArXiv get lots of attention and citations, so it is clearly possible for papers to be taken seriously without peer-reviewed publication in traditional academic journals. Although you may be at a disadvantage in the short term, if you publish high quality papers in such fora, you are contributing to their credibility in the long term. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I’m happy to assume your premise that you are not a crank and the research you generate is comparable in quality to mainstream research that gets published in peer-reviewed journals. Here’s the problem though: it’s not me you’re trying to impress. The academics who you are hoping will “take your work seriously” are not assuming that premise. And it’s not because they’re mean or snobbish; rather, they cannot afford to assume your premise, because they are living in a world where there are a lot of cranks, and there are a lot of people who may not be outright cranks but are legitimate researchers who nonetheless sometimes generate mediocre or not-very-good research that other researchers don’t want to waste their time reading. So, what the academics you are trying to impress need is a credible signal that will tell them that your work is likely correct, and more worth paying attention to than all the other papers clamoring for their attention. There is simply not enough time to look at all the work being put out there, even legitimate, serious work that does get published in peer reviewed journals. Now, a mechanism that produces such credible signals (or the best approximation to them that anyone’s been able to come up with) exists. It’s called peer review, and you say you don’t want to use it, and have your reasons which you’re asking me not to question. Well, fine, like I said I won’t question your premises, but the question remains: where are you going to get your credible signal that replaces peer review? I don’t have an answer to that question, and for that reason I believe what you are hoping to achieve is basically impossible — unless your work is at such an amazing level that it will immediately attract attention and the appropriate level of scrutiny based on its obvious stellar quality and merit. In math, announcements of breakthrough proofs of famous conjectures do get taken seriously when the people making them have a modest amount of credibility and a quick look at the work convinces serious researchers that it’s worth their time to dig deeper. But with “normal”, non-breakthrough research, you’d have a hard time getting anyone to care about what you’re doing without going through the normal process. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_7: ### Work for a tech giant with deep pockets. If you want to do innovative work that will still be taken seriously, then you need to be able to demonstrate that your work is serious. One potential way to do that is to work for a massive tech corporation like Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, or Google (often collectively referred to as FAANG). They're all massive companies that do innovative research and development work within their areas of business, that can sometimes be more advanced than the state-of-the-art within academia. Similarly, within the financial tech industry, there would be many companies whose financial market prediction tech is more advanced than similar tech within academia. Of course, all of that work would be company trade secrets, so talking about specifics in public would likely be verboten (though these companies do occasionally publish technical "blue papers" about their research), but academics would respect you and take you seriously. If the guy in charge of Google's quantum computer division starts talking about quantum computers, academics won't dismiss him as a crank. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: Ultimately it comes down to getting the people who would be interested in your work to read, review, and cite it. So whether you submit to a journal or put it on a prepublish website, how about contacting the researchers in your field about your work. Submitting to a journal will get you some visibility through their readership, but there are probably a lot more out there you could find. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: You have three problems: 1. How will people find out that your work exists? 2. If they see it, why should they trust it enough to bother reading it? 3. If they read it, why should they trust it enough to rely on it and cite it? Problems 1 and 2 If you develop a good enough personal reputation, you can just post stuff. Two blogs that come to my mind are <NAME>[1] and <NAME>[2]. But this is pretty rare, not reliable. For the rest of us, you want to put your work somewhere your audience already reads, and you want it to go through some filter so your audience believes it's worthwhile. I have no idea how to solve this, though. When you think about it, peer-reviewed journals are amazing in this way: where else will you get top professionals to thoroughly investigate your idea for free, then publicize it to all the other top professionals? Good luck! One thing you can do is communicate with some people who already have strong reputations, tell them about your work, and ask them to publicize it e.g. on social media. Another thing you can do is post to arxiv and hope. Some eyes will get on the paper, but... Problem 3 For someone to rely on your results and build on them takes a lot of trust. Investigating correctness can take a lot of effort -- even more if it's not very well written, which is possible for a solo author with no peer feedback. I don't think this is as big an issue as problems 1 and 2, but it will be a barrier. You might also find that someone replicates your results in a somewhat different way and is able to publish, with a small citation to you, but their paper is the one that ultimately gets most of the credit, because it goes through peer review and people are comfortable relying on it. [1] <https://danluu.com/> [2] <https://vitalik.ca/> Upvotes: 2
2021/09/26	925	3,398	<issue_start>username_0: I've been selected for a PhD position in a medical school at Lower Saxony in a DFG Transregio Collaborative Research Project. Even though I'm yet to receive my contract, I am curious to know if my salary will be according to the DFG payscale or the institute payscale (which is significantly lower than the DFG payscale)? My supervisor unofficially told me the scale would be 65% TVöD E-13, but he expects the salary might be between 1350 -1450 € per month for the first year (isn't that lower than 65% TVöD E-13?). On comparing with the DFG pay scale table 2021 (and after reading the first paragraph, of course), I want to know what salary can I actually expect in hand after tax deductions (I'm supposed to have some pension scheme, which I know nothing about)? Would the money be sufficient for 2 people in Hannover if I take my spouse with me? What % of salary will I be able to save, if at all? Thank you. P.S.: I'm very new to the German system and hence request to guide me. Any obvious issue which I don't know/haven't mentioned in my question can be happily addressed to give me an idea of my upcoming years.<issue_comment>username_1: Finding out about your salary in a TV-L or TV-ÖD setting is pretty straightforward. For TV-ÖD you can simply look it up [here](https://oeffentlicher-dienst.info/c/t/rechner/tvoed/bund?id=tvoed-bund-2021) (note that <NAME>'s link in the comments refers to the table for 2020). Net salary for a 65% position would roughly be 1754.40 €. While the final amount depends on some personal factors (such as Steuerklasse), it should not be as low as suggested by your supervisor. Now, the table provided by the DFG (you're probably referring to [this](https://www.dfg.de/formulare/60_12/60_12_de.pdf) one?) is not suitable to find out about your final salary, as is stated in that document ("Für die Ermittlung der persönlichen Vergütung sind sie weder vorgesehen noch geeignet"). This table gives numbers to be assumed as the Arbeitgeberbrutto, which corresponds to the amount of money your employer has to pay and is thus higher than the gross salary you receive. The purpose of this table mainly is to serve as a basis for calculating personnel costs in project proposals etc. Whether your salary is sufficient for two people to live in Hannover completely depends on your expenses. The highest share of your income will probably be needed for rent, you can do a search for flats on the internet to get an idea. The university and/or Studierendenwerk should have an international office that may assist with further questions on living in Germany. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The DFG numbers say how much the DFG is giving through a grant, such as a CRC, for a PhD position applied for. This doesn't mean the university has to pay the same level (i.e. pusername_1entage of E13) to their students - they can pay more or less if they want to. So you have to take whatever you are told (i.e. 65% E13) and use one of the available calculators (see username_1's answer) to determine your net salary. (As a PhD student, you will get Stufe 1.) Whether this enough to live with 2 people in Hannover: I'd say yes, but it clearly depends on your standards. (Note that if you are married and your partner does not work, you should get tax class 3 which should get you some extra money, almost 2000€ net.) Upvotes: 0
2021/09/27	779	3,332	<issue_start>username_0: I submitted manuscript to a reputed journal(computer science field). It was desk rejected after 6 weeks. Summary of reason given by the editor are 1. It is purely a paper applicable in the field of "computer network" and do not match the scope of the journal 2. Performance evaluation is based on simulation and not on real world data I feel the reasons given by the editor is unfair . Because 1. The journal website itself states that they encourage "theoretical and simulation based paper " in their web page 2. I have sufficient reasons to believe that my paper is within their journal scope Rejecting the paper if the journal is not interested in publishing is acceptable. But what makes things sad is the time they took to do the same and for reasons which I feel is unfair. I have politely mailed my defence for the issues raised for the rejection to the journal My question is 1. In general, does author's opinion on the rejection matter ? If communicated , will someone read it ? 2. What are the extra things we should consider while applying to a journal, given the paper is good and within scope of the journal? 3. Are there instances of unfair rejections in reputed journals ?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, there are always unfair rejections. Editors are human, too, and they have many papers to handle. But we'd have to hear also the other side of the coin to know if yours is really one such case. In any case, at this point your energy is better spent on submitting the paper to another journal rather than trying to argue with the editor at this one. It does not matter whose fault it is; just move on. To improve your chances, before you submit your manuscript to another journal take some time to review your introduction, conclusions and cover letter, trying to show how your paper fits with current literature and the scope of the journal. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I’m not sure the reasons can be fair or unfair: they are subjective but it’s not necessarily the same as fair. The editor (or an associate editor) looked at your paper and figured this would not be very useful to the readers. Take it to mean just that: you probably sent your paper to the wrong journal. Now 6 weeks for a desk reject isn’t that bad: editors don’t stop their work whenever your submit a paper, there might be a backlog etc, and the handling editor is likely busy with all kinds of stuff. 6 months is excessive (but not unheard of) but 6 weeks isn’t that bad. Next, it could well be that the editor asked a couple of people to function as referees and these guys replied something like “not interested”, so the editor had a look and decided it wasn’t up their alley, or it wasn’t worth the trouble considering how many submissions they receive. Finally, if the manuscript was desk rejected, why would you want to fight this? Do you really expect the editor to change his or her mind after 6 weeks? Even if you convince the editor and the manuscript goes to regular refereeing, do you really expect the the paper will be quickly published? In other words, if you fight this you have no guarantee it will be published (remember the editor chooses the referees), and even if it is published it might take quite a long while. So pragmatically why not find another journal? Upvotes: 2
2021/09/27	426	1,942	<issue_start>username_0: My paper got accepted for publication last week, and I have not received the galley proof yet. I recently learned that one of my results implies another interesting result, and I want to mention that in my publication. Deriving the new result takes no more than three lines, and I do not think it can be published on its own. Can I ask the editor to add a new result to an already accepted paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you could certainly ask especially if implementing the new few lines is that quick and straightforward. I would provide the actual addition in your enquiry letter, otherwise I suspect that the editor answer would be NOT by default. It must be something that s/he can evaluate on her/his own. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I strongly suggest not doing that. * If the correction will be accepted, it is a sign of "the editor is accepting non peer-reviewed results ---> paper is questionable", unless the editor is a proven expert in your field (and even then, it is obviously not a blind review and the editor has some interest in the accepted paper being finally published). * if the correction will be submitted to peer-review, the paper will go back to peer review. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: You can certainly ask the editor. But, the most likely outcome is that the paper would need an additional review. I doubt that it would require starting the process over again, but the editor, unless they are already an expert in your subfield, would most likely ask advice of one or more of the original reviewers. It would delay your paper's appearance, though perhaps not for long. The alternative is to take the new results and incorporate it into some new paper with additional results, since you say it isn't enough to stand on its own. But others are fairly likely to notice the extension in the meantime, so you might get scooped on it. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/27	786	2,922	<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing an article that cites some scientific works of a [religious sister](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_sister_(Catholic)). I noticed that some authors cite her works including the title "Sister", as in "Sister Surname [ref] was the first..." or "see (Sister Surname, year)", but other authors use only the surname. Of course, this can be a matter of personal preferences. However, I wonder if the scientific community has considered the issue of using or not religious (or other scientific-unrelated titles) when referring to an author. On the one hand, I understand the use of the title as a courtesy. On the other hand, I understand if somebody does not want to use the title because she/he thinks that it is irrelevant to the scientific work, or even does not recognize it. Are there some recommendation about that?<issue_comment>username_1: Since one does not even cite other academics as "Dr." and "Prof.", I rationally tend to think one would not cite "Sister", "Mullah", "Guru" or whatever religious role may have a specific person. However, different bibliographic standards may have different suggestions and I am not aware of the details. EDIT: OP, as always it is worthwhile to contact your trusty librarian, for example [Citing Theological Sources: How to do a Bibliography: Church Documents](https://libguides.stthomas.edu/c.php?g=88581&p=570749) mentions that > > In MLA style, honorific titles like "Pope," "Father" or "Cardinal" or > "D.D." are not added after, or before, a name. > > > Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The only case of which I am aware is in the acknowledgements that Hungerford made in his book Algebra. He references "<NAME>, S.J.," a Jesuit priest at Holy Cross. So, if you know the nun you are referencing is a member of a particular order you could follow Hungerford's example. Other than that, I agree with others that it is largely a matter of personal choice. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is mostly a matter of recognition. In papers, it is indeed uncommon to include titles (we write "XYZ, 2009", not "Prof. XYZ, 2009") when referencing results. By contrast, when writing a historical/sociological article (full disclosure: I'm not an expert in either area) it seems to make sense to include honorifics (say, it stands to reason to see "Pope Pius II mentions this in Epistles" as opposed to "Piccolomini mentions this in Epistles"). In the context of your question, historical scholars who were also religious figures are most commonly referred to without relevant honorifics/titles, and the same probably would apply in your case if you want to focus solely on a person's work, not any of the other circumstances about their life, seeing them as irrelevant to the work itself. We do not - as a general rule - refer to Mendel as The Right Reverend Gregor Mendel. Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
2021/09/27	3,108	14,125	<issue_start>username_0: I am reviewing a paper of a top-tier computer science conference. After reading the abstract and introduction of the paper, I think that the paper does not have that standard to make it up to the conference reputation. In other words, the problem that they have solved is a minor one and perhaps belongs to some low-tier conference. Can I simply recommend to reject the paper without reading it further? Is it right to do so? I am feeling that it is a waste of time to read it further. Or should I must read the full paper and verify their claims and suggest the improvements (if any)? --- Note: I am somewhat new to reviewing; this is the 6th paper that I am reviewing this year.<issue_comment>username_1: > > must read the full paper and verify their claims and suggest the improvements > > > Read again the letter editor sent you. Why did they want your input on the paper? In my field, the review is not about "rejecting" or "accepting" but about finding errors and flaws, as well as good points, and assessing the value of the artefact. The editor will decide whether these issues are suitable for rejection, acceptance, or acceptance with modifications. For example, here are the top-level questions that editors ask reviewers in PNAS: * Suitable Quality? * Sufficient General Interest? * Conclusions Justified? * Clearly Written? * Procedures Described? * Supplemental Material Warranted? As you can see, only one question is about suitability for the outlet. The others are about the quality of the research paper as it stands. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In theoretical CS I wouldn't recommend this. If mathematics I would definitely suggest it would be improper. You don't have enough information on what the future value of the paper might be. It is possible, though unlikely, perhaps, that the techniques used to prove a "minor result" are actually more valuable than the result itself. Those techniques might, in theory, be used to establish other, much more important, things. How something is done can be much more important than what is done; certainly in mathematics and possibly in other theoretical fields. I'll agree that the authors should have pointed this out, of course, if they thought it was important. If you told me, as an editor or conference program chair, that you'd done this, I'd likely feel like I needed additional advice before rejecting the paper. You are admitting to providing little advice of value. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As others have pointed out, your responsibility is to help the editor decide what to do. I don't think you can fairly recommend rejection without actually reading the paper. You could write the editor declining to review because, based on the abstract and introduction you don't think the paper is significant enough to warrant the time it would take you to read the manuscript carefully. Then the editor can find other reviewers, or agree with your assessment and desk reject. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Look at this through the author's perspective. They spent time working on this research and writing the paper - probably because they believe it is important enough to be worth their time and the readers' time. Now, as a reviewer, you may think that this is wrong and the research is not so good to merit publication, because > > the problem that they have solved is a minor one and perhaps belongs to some low-tier conference. > > > Perhaps you are right and the author's are wrong. But how helpful would it be for the authors to receive a rejection stating only this? Surely, they would like to know how to become a better researcher and how to increase the chances for their next paper to be accepted. Can you help them with it? Can you offer constructive critique and helpful suggestions for improvement? This will make the whole experience more pleasant and rewarding and ultimately worth everyone's time. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: It is of course possible that a single portion of a paper will be sufficient for rejection, so you can recommend rejection on the basis of a single part alone. However, you should remember that the best practice for a peer-reviewer is not just to reach a recommendation but to offer useful advice to the author on how they might improve the paper. As a reviewer, you have an opportunity to help the authors of a paper make it better for the next submission. As a secondary matter, except in extreme cases, failing to read the entire paper may be viewed as a bit of a dereliction of duty by some people --- I would certainly view it that way. Even desk-rejections will almost always say that the editor read your paper, so even here, the author is given the courtesy of having their paper read in full. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: I have two points, one objective and one subjective, why you should not do this. Objectively, it is quite common to form an opinion of a paper only by reading the abstract and introduction. I have heard that most reviewers decide by the end of reading the introduction whether they want to recommend revision or rejection; reading the rest of the article does not usually change this initial impression significantly. However, sometimes a promising introduction might fail to deliver and so an initial inclination towards recommending revision might change to a recommendation of rejection. On the other side, sometimes a lackluster introduction might be followed by an article with real potential, in which case the reviewer who initially felt inclined to recommend rejection might realize that the introduction needs to be rewritten to properly highlight the value of the article. So, objectively, you cannot properly evaluate an article until you have completely read it. Bad beginnings might end well, just as good beginnings might end badly. Subjectively, it is irresponsible and even morally wrong to claim to give a scholarly review of an article that you have not read completely. Would you write in your evaluation to the article, "My recommendation for rejection is based only on reading the abstract and introduction of the article; I saw no need to read further"? If you would not openly write that, then that should tell you that there is something wrong with doing that. I am sure that you would feel rather upset if you found out that a reviewer of one of your articles did that to you. So, subjectively, it is wrong to recommend rejection of an article you are asked to review if you have not read the entire article. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: As a small addition to the other answers: Whatever you choose to do, please be honest and open about it towards the editor, the other reviewers and the authors. If you really made your recommendations after reading the abstract and the introduction, (and think that was quite enough), then say so in your review. This helps the others in putting your review in perspective. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: There are two scenarios both consistent with the data that you have described. 1. The paper makes only a minor contribution to the field and you should recommend rejection from this journal. 2. The authors have found an important result but failed to effectively describe/"sell" its importance in the abstract and introduction. This is not uncommon when researchers are wrapped up in their own field, they see the importance and feel it should be obvious to the reader. Good scientists are not always good writers. Here you might need to recommend revisions in order to better highlight the contribution of the paper. If you stop reading after the introduction, you don't know which scenario is the case, and you are doing the authors a disservice by assuming (1). If you were submitting work for feedback, would you feel satisfied if someone read only the first section and returned it to you saying it wasn't good enough? Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: If a math journal is asking for a quick opinion, then yes it's ok to recommend rejection based on just the introduction but you must actually read the introduction carefully! If the introduction clearly lays out the main results of the paper and you think those results aren't interesting enough to merit acceptance at the level of the journal where it's submitted then there's no need to read the rest of the paper carefully. By contrast, if they've already gotten quick opinions and are asking for a more thorough refereeing job then I think it's inappropriate to not read the paper more thoroughly. Remember that other people may have different opinions about the merits of the paper. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I’ll sacrifice politeness for the sake of clarity: If you have time to write here - you have time to read the paper. You may feel that you can’t understand it (I’ve seen such badly written) but at least you should give a try. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I wouldn't base a decision to accept or reject a peer-reviewed paper based solely on the abstract and introduction sections and an opinion "the problem that they have solved is a minor one." Perhaps there is more in the paper that authors haven't explored and perhaps their focus is not correct. There's a plugin in chrome called Read Shit Faster (ugly name but what a powerful tool it is) that allows you to read the paper in a super-easy manner allowing you to detect major flaws almost instantly and know what to look for in a more thorough reading. The order in which I read carefully these contributions goes like this: 1. Abstract: What am I suppose to learn from this piece? What is it that the authors claim to have found that has not been addressed before? 2. Conclusions: Yes, I go to that section right away to see if it is consistent with the abstract and if they are delivering what was promised. 3. Methods: If this section has problems from the experimental plan, setup, tools, etc., I will start considering rejection. By now, you should have seen if the language is correct or if there are major problems in this department. I collect those right away to either help the authors write a better paper or simply to justify a rejection in case there is no substantial contribution. If at this time I consider that the authors have something worth reading, I'll read their Results and Discussion section to check for consistency with the sections that I have already read and then I will move to he references section to see how up to date is the bibliography. By the way, I would dig some extra references that are more current to suggest some improvements for the authors and perhaps to see if there's something remotely similar that has been published... Sometimes, if you know the authors, you may see if the work has been published before and point those works to the editor. Turn it in can also detect plagiarism (intentional or not) and you may point that to the conference organizers. Typically, by the end of a Read Shit Faster session I would have made my mind in regards to reject, major editing needed, or accept (rarely) a paper. The remaining process is to document everything. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: (copy-pasting directly from the OP comments, to enable room for discussions) In some (most?) top-tier CS conferences, papers are screened before they are assigned to reviewers. Usually, this involves checking for obvious plagiarism, but it can also extend to verifying whether the manuscript is (just from its looks) acceptable. The idea is to maximize the gain from reviewers: assigning 5 papers that do not even "need" reviewing to be rejected would waste the reviewer's time; and would also waste the reviewer potential contribution to the proceedings. If the paper passed such screening it's likely that the abstract was deemed "somewhat" appropriate for the venue. You should read it thoroughly and - moreover - question whether YOU are the problem (ie, lack of expertise, which is common and acceptable): if this is the case, then avoid clear statements and do mention that your recommendation is just an educated guess. If the abstract is really, really bad, then you can still recommend a rejection. But - for the sake of science - try to provide at least some additional motivations. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: Based on the other answers, I guess this will probably be a contrarian opinion, although to be honest I suspect this is probably how many people behave even if they don't admit it. I don't think you have an obligation to thoroughly read the paper, although I think you should spend, say, an hour or so going through it. For a top tier journal / conference, "results are not sufficiently impactful for this venue" is a valid reason to reject the paper. I think you should read the discussion, main figures/results, and read through the text (not necessarily checking every step) to make sure that you understand what is there and can summarize it. You should at least be able to confirm that the content of the paper matches what is in the abstract and introduction, or else find if there is something in the paper that you need to look into in more detail because it could change your opinion. In an ideal world, every referee would thoroughly read every paper they were sent and send detailed feedback on how to improve the paper. In the real world, people are busy, and if you already think the headline results of the paper are not sufficiently interesting for the top tier journal/conference you are reviewing for, I don't think you are obligated to spend days checking every claim. It would be different if the journal/conference were mid or lower tier... then I would tend to say that something correct and novel could be publishable even if the impact of the main results was not very large. Judging correctness requires more work to actually read the paper and check things, compared to judging the importance of the headline results, assuming you have a good sense of the quality standards in the field. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/27	4,946	21,835	<issue_start>username_0: My research supervisor wanted to produce a cost-benefit analysis for an infrastructure project (civil engineering). First he had someone else work on it, then he involved me. When I got involved, I noticed that the benefits were inflated and the costs downplayed to convince the reader of a massive benefit-cost ratio. I do not know if he stands to personally gain from this. I discussed it with him a few times, he pushed back with "I am experienced and I know I am right", and eventually in the final revision of the paper he changed my numbers. The way he changed the numbers is not even smart, he just changed the text, he didn't redo the calculations. Now I fear that if I bend under pressure, these bad numbers will be out there, forever! I am sure he will take the published paper and send it to every politician in the country trying to get this project approved. What can I do? I am still his PhD student so I can't get too confrontational.<issue_comment>username_1: First off, I'm sorry you were put in this position. I know you don't want to get confrontational but your supervisor crossed a line. I don't know how far along you are in your PhD but I think it's time to look for another supervisor (could be a different university). Here's what I would do: 1. Stall this publication to give you some time 2. Quietly look for another supervisor 3. Once you have a back-up plan, confront your current supervisor 4. If he agrees to keep the real numbers, great, go ahead and submit and then change supervisor 5. If he refuses, demand not to be listed as an author, and then change supervisor. DO NOT ACCEPT TO BE A PART OF THIS In my opinion, you have to cut your ties with this guy as soon as possible (even if he agrees not to change the numbers). He might already have done the same before and his publications could be a ticking time bomb until someone figures it out and his reputation collapses. He might also already have a shady reputation to begin with. Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Make absolutely sure you understand the numbers correctly before suspecting, or even worse, accusing your advisor of dishonesty. The following text only applies if you have satisfied yourself that there is no way these numbers could have been reached in an honest way. If you are absolutely convinced of this, get out of there, under whatever pretext. You do not need to confront your supervisor, for which you have little power at this stage; but get out. You are not only in danger of damaging your academic reputation. If the study enters policy, you may be indirectly or directly made responsible for wastage of public money and could face potential legal consequences stemming from that. If your supervisor is really into shady practices, he may even deflect any potential fallout that might transpire to his "dishonest" student coauthor; i.e. you. Do not accuse him of that. You have no proof and it is almost impossible to establish facts in the constellation you are in. Just get out of the paper, and ideally, out of the PhD relation. Find an excuse. You have my sympathies for a situation which no one should be ever be in. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Every cost benefit analysis includes assumptions. There will always be pieces that are a bit ambiguous and can be done several ways. Based on your edit, the items you are disagreeing about would not be a case of fraud, but of judgement (and the supervisor’s judgment does not seem unreasonable on the face of it here). The correct thing to do is to be very clear about the assumptions and where the numbers you are using are coming from. Ideally, you would also be transparent about the other options you did not choose and how they would affect your results in the paper, but that does not always happen. At this stage, I would suggest you do two things. First, add text around assumptions made to the paper. This may be an appendix. This will not change the overall cost-benefit “answer”, but will at least allow a careful reader to ascertain what is being included and left out. It should also be okay with the supervisor since it is not affecting the paper’s takeaway “sound bite.” Second, if there is really no justifiable way to defend some of the calculations, suggest an alternative with the justification that “readers may find this number to be a problem” or “people will attack our overall conclusion as being biased if we include this number.” The key is to put your objections “in the mouths of the reviewers” and therefore not make it about your inexperience vs. your supervisor’s experience. If the supervisor won’t budge, just continue to document heavily in the appendix. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Cost Benefit Analysis is not an exact science and all benefits cannot be accurately quantified. The key is to understand if the revised calculations are transparent and defendable. Let your supervisor know you still don't understand how he has come up with his numbers and what his assumptions are. Also ask him who the audience for the analysis and what he expects they are looking for. It's likely your supervisor has one foot in industry and one foot in academia. Large infrastructure programs, where CBA is used, generally do not show strong returns when initially calculated on base assumptions. Some of the benefits need to be padded a little, and this is where your supervisor will be relying on his experience. His padding will need to be supported by his assumptions. Politics are also heavily intertwined with infrastructure in the public space. Politicians will expect, because they think something is a good idea, that it will be supported regardless of the result of the analysis. There are surely cases where the benefits will never stack up, such as a monorail, and others that, although the benefit can never be shown on paper are generally considered good ideas with significant public benefit. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Look, you have to get your good name out of this thing. You are being used as a frontman at best and a patsy at worst by this professor for a dodgy study. Your professor is an old dog who knows how the dark trade-offs work. If he gets a "result" from this "study" there will be more and more "consultancy". I assume you have had a look at similar studies during your initial reading into the programme. It might be helpful to find some past projects that were over optimistic in their B/C and the consequences to that country's exchequer from all that goof-up. Spain has done a lot of infrastructure projects in the last 40 years and their construction cost-control processes are well-regarded. I'd expect that their vision of B/C would be pretty clear by now, especially w.r.t. local economy benefits. Beyond that I can only suggest gently sounding out the postgraduate studies dean or HoD - or any sympathetic professor - to get ideas on all this. In talking to these people, do not adopt a pitiful oh-my-career or aggressive damn-your-corruption manner. Just be quite cool and matter-of-fact about it all and clarify the long-term danger to a department's reputation by association with a dubious study in support of a huge public investment. Impartiality and objectivity are all the more essential when glory-hole projects are touted. It's one thing to support a local authority in a relatively small but socially beneficial project for the city: a department without a heart is one without a head. But it's quite another thing to put the department's stamp (not just yours) on a study potentially instrumental in guiding a decision on massive public spending. Rehearse your lines with someone trustworthy at home before going to speak to anyone and note their comments. If this fails, you have to extricate yourself academically from your supervisor even at the risk of a career detour out of academia for a while. You can plead "personal reasons" (e.g. need extra income, desire to be closer to ill parent, wife's career/personal choice, etc) for this detour. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I do not understand why none of the other answers may consider the case that there is no ulterior motives here. Especially in the case of engineering, academic calculations are based on ideal situations (none of which are in the real world) modeled after conditions which are not well understood. Actual estimates from industrial sources (the alleged source of the professor) are closer to reality when looking good data to use. The professor is presumably more experienced in the field than a PhD student and likely has a better idea than a PhD student on the reliability of sources iif information in the real world. In addition, the subject matter is a cost/benefit scenario, a question of economics; riddled with assumptions based on an economic model that doesn't fit reality that requires predictions of the future (something which is somewhat of an art) so I wouldn't even take a subject matter expert's likely facetious statement like "Just trust me I'm right" offensively as their best guess (a core engineering skill) is likely better than a student's just ftom experience. Just to offer a different perspective, if the proffesor says his information is more reliable, just try to understand the underlying reason for determining the reliability of the data. That said, you should absolutely point out that the calculations are inaccurate if they aren't rerun with the new data presented. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I am not a civil engineer, so it's totally impossible for me to judge what you are saying based on the merits. So, this is some general advice. I think, as others have said, a cost-benefit analysis is not something that has a right answer. I think the main requirement should be that the numbers are justifiable and source-able, and there is a reproducible way to get from your assumptions to the results of your analysis. The differences of opinion in the "Note" part of your answer, to me, are difficult to parse for correctness. For example: > > he wants to rely on word-of-mouth cost estimates by a local contractor instead of my idea which is to use published numbers in similar papers/reports. > > > The details really matter here. How "similar" are the papers and reports to the actual costs the project will incur? How reliable are the local contractors? Based only on what you have written, the truth could really be on either side... it could be that you are estimating costs for some very specialized task that local contractors don't have experience with, and that you found some papers/reports covering essentially the same project that are very reliable. Or, it could be that the papers/reports are similar but different in some crucial aspects and include some extra elements that are not necessary for the project you are working on, and the contractors can give a better estimate for the specific tasks you need. Given the murkiness, I would generally advise against thinking of this situation in black and white ethical terms. If you were very experienced in this field and could prove your advisor's estimates were going to miss the mark by a factor of 20, then it might be a different situation, but I suspect this isn't the case as you are a research student and were pulled onto this project at the last minute. Instead, I would focus on trying to understand what assumptions your advisor is making and how they derives their results from their assumptions. Unless your advisor is totally incompetent or a fraud, both of which are unlikely, there is some path that you can follow to derive the results. Even if you don't agree with the assumptions, if the assumptions are clearly stated and the main results can be reproduced, then I would classify this as a difference of opinion, and not an ethical dilemma. You may indeed learn something from understanding your advisor's reasoning or why they trust their source of information over the sources you are using. Again, you might learn something, even if you don't agree with the methods in the end. And it won't ruin your career to be associated with this analysis. You will gain experience, have a paper, and as you progress you'll have more opportunities to do things your way. In the event that you are 100% sure there really is no way to justify the analysis, either because the assumptions are objectively wrong or the analysis is bogus, and after discussing your concerns with your advisor they aren't willing to correct demonstrably false statements, then I agree you need to get out. To be clear, I think being 100% sure is a pretty high bar here, because a cost-benefit analysis is going to be murky and you are not an expert with a lot of experience. But if you are really sure that this is what is happening, talk to someone senior in your department that you trust (like a grad chair), explain the situation, and try to get away from this advisor. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: You need to make sure your understanding of cost-benefit analyses is on solid ground before anything else --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So this is this is my first time answering a question on Academia, but given this situation is based within my area of expertise as a Professional Civil Engineer, I think it's appropriate to provide input on how difficult it is to 'accurately' put together a cost/benefit analysis. Costs - From your question, you had indicated that your advisor had utilized the costs of a local contractor while you were depending upon published numbers from similar papers/reports. Consider a few things with the sources you're using, if you're relying upon RSMeans for example, you're going to need to consider that the costs of all work will vary considerably between Oregon, Texas, and New Jersey. Furthermore, you must further break those costs down to consider the cost of material, labor, and overhead/profit. Greater union participation in the northeast results in labor costs being higher than the national average. In addition, you need to consider the local economic climate. Estimates I prepared prior to Covid are completely worthless today due to massive supply chain disruptions which have invalidated my previously reliable material costs. What I can tell you from my work experience handling asset management planning for municipalities is that I don't rely upon published numbers for asset valuation and maintenance if I can help it. I'd much rather get my information from the people that work in the area and adjusting for CPI because when it comes time for that maintenance to be done, they'll be the ones performing it. Additionally, you should be aware that there are definitely some costs which are very difficult to account for and it's not unreasonable for a civil engineer to just throw a dollar amount and justify it with 'professional judgement'. I don't think I've ever issued a formal estimate that I didn't slap an additional 20% onto the back-end for 'contingency', because the amount of times we open the ground and it's not identical to the survey is just about 100%. Benefits - So this is where things get a little bit hazy. You have to consider who the audience is. From your question it doesn't sound like the target audience is another engineer, rather it's political in nature and to that end they may've hired your advisor to put together an analysis which depicts this project in an extremely favorable way. I want to make clear that this is not automatically unethical, there are a lot of gray areas in civil engineering and if you elect to pursue this as a career you will find yourself in them often. ESPECIALLY for infrastructure projects. They are costly to perform, they result in traffic, they often require tax increases, and a bunch of other politically unpopular things. But the reality is, very often municipalities aren't setting money aside to maintain infrastructure because otherwise that political victory might happen in a different administration and the current politician loses their re-election bid because they're 'wasting' money on infrastructure projects and maintenance that 'definitely isn't needed'. As for accounting for benefits due to increased economic activity not being 'actual dollars related to the project', are you sure? Would that increased activity have occurred without it? If you are trying to justify installing a new tide gate to mitigate flooding issues caused by worsening climate change, you may need to include in the benefits all the flood damage you don't have to account for. As a whole, the general public doesn't appreciate money that wasn't spent on things that didn't happen, so your advisor might be trying to show this ratio to help them see that benefit in a different way. Recommendations --------------- * Ensure you understand the goals of the client on this. Bear in mind that as a civil engineer, you will occasionally be in ethically ambiguous situations, but you do have an ethical obligation to represent your client's interest. This doesn't mean that you lie, but there are lots of ways to present technical information that makes something look more appealing. If you're unsure if you're going too far, consider the key tenets from [ASCE's Code of Ethics](https://www.asce.org/career-growth/ethics/code-of-ethics), which require you to hold paramount the health and safety of the public. As a reminder, the public often won't understand why they need to pay more in taxes, so it can sometimes be your job to present data in a way to persuade them. * Have a discussion with a colleague (not your advisor) about the ethics of the situation. Ethics is always hazy and having another person to discuss things with can help a great deal. If your colleague considers the matter to be unethical, or bordering along there, then request a meeting with your advisor and ask for their input on the ethical implications. It may be that the paper should have some kind of disclosure included; this is akin to a City Engineer disclosing to the City Council about some kind of conflict of interest they may have relating to a project they're responsible for inspecting. The Council can elect to replace the engineer for that project or acknowledge the conflict and elect to allow things to proceed based on their trust of the engineer. * Document everything. Hopefully your advisor's word-of-mouth cost estimate is backed up in writing in some fashion, because that's going to need to be an appendix. For most projects, it's very common a ratio on the order of a 20 page narrative and 200 pages of appendices, so don't be shy on providing them. --- UPDATE Practical Engineering released a video specifically on engineer estimates. I'd encourage you to watch it to provide further context on this answer. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOe_6vuaR_s> Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: If I want to get a new roof next week, which cost is more relevant? A) A published average for roof replacement, or B) The estimate a local contractor gives me to do the work next week. Surely, you can find pros and cons to each: published numbers aren't for my roof, so they're biased if my roof isn't a typical one. Published numbers might be based on costs for materials and labor when the previous study was done, possibly a year or decade ago, and not apply to next week (even straightforward adjustments like accounting for inflation may not be representative, since inflation doesn't affect prices of everything equally). On the other hand, the contractor I got an estimate for may be cheaper or more expensive than average. Their estimate may not include cost overruns that are typical for a project like this. Neither A nor B is fake, and probably most people would be offended and insulted if they used either estimate A or estimate B and you called them a fraud, or told other people they were a fraud. It seems your advisor is leaning towards using an estimate like B, and they feel their expertise gives them a better judgment than you in that decision. Maybe they're right, maybe not; we don't have enough information here to know. It's fine for you to argue for the benefits of (A) over (B), but I would keep out any accusations of serious misconduct until you have strong evidence of them. The most important thing for your paper is to be clear in your methodology. If your cost estimate is based on an estimate given by a local contractor, you need to write that in your paper and explain how that estimate was reached. If your benefits estimate includes secondary economic benefits, then explain clearly what those secondary economic benefits are: what are they based on, how does the methodology used to reach those numbers compare to other literature, etc. You certainly should not be basing your final judgment of the estimate on whether the number "seems reasonable". Sure, it's a bit of a red flag to investigate if your numbers are far from what you expect, but ultimately the best answer is the answer you get with the methodology you justify. If that number is cost:benefit of 20:1, then that's the answer. It doesn't matter if 20:1 is "reasonable" itself or not, if all your assumptions to get there are reasonable then the answer is, too. I'd also echo a comment by @a.t. - when there are multiple ways to answer an estimation problem, one solution is to provide a range of answers. If you can demonstrate how different assumptions lead to different answers, your reader can be better informed, can better understand the levels of uncertainty, and can possibly use their own judgment of what circumstances are most likely closest to the truth. Upvotes: 3
2021/09/27	980	3,245	<issue_start>username_0: Can any piece of media be described as a text to be discussed in academic research? I have found several conflicting definitions online. Those that disagree seem to be working on a different definition of what constitutes a “text”, referring more to what could itself be published rather than what word would you use to describe non-written media.<issue_comment>username_1: No, a painting is not a "text" but it is a "work". In particular a "creative work" and thus subject to copyright protections. The same is true of (some, at least) photographs and even graphs in a paper. A "text" is just one kind of "work" for purposes of copyright. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the language of library and information science, a painting is an example of a [cultural object](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_c.aspx#culturalobject): > > An artistic or architectural [work](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_w.aspx#work), or other [artifact](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_a.aspx#artifact) of cultural significance. The category includes both physical objects and performance art. The [Visual Resources Association (VRA) Foundation](http://www.vrafoundation.org/) sponsors [Cataloging Cultural Objects](http://www.vrafoundation.org/ccoweb/index.htm) (CCO), a [data](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_d.aspx#data) [content](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_c.aspx#content) [standards](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_s.aspx#standards) initiative for the cultural heritage community. The primary focus of CCO includes but is not limited to [painting](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_p.aspx#painting)s, sculpture, [print](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_p.aspx#print)s, [manuscript](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_m.aspx#manuscript)s, [photograph](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_p.aspx#photograph)s, built works, installations, and other visual [media](https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_m.aspx#media). CCO also covers many other types of cultural works, including archaeological sites and functional objects from the realm of material culture. > > > <NAME>. Online Dictionary for Library and Information Science. <https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_about.aspx> Other terms you could use in this context include information object and cultural heritage object. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Besides what the other contributors have mentioned, there are some academic fields in which paintings can be analyzed in a similar manner as texts. This kind of analysis is often found in material culture studies, and in art history, especially in the domain of iconographical studies (which showcases some parallels with the methods of "close reading" used in literary criticism as well as hermeneutics, not to mention philology). For a quick example, see the Chapter ["Philology and the History of Art"](http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt45kdfw.17), or ["Paintings as Objects of Discourse Analysis: Two Case Studies"](https://doi.org/10.15388/Respectus.2012.26.15486) or ["Iconography and Iconology as a Visual Method and Approach"](https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446268278.n15) Upvotes: 1
2021/09/27	737	3,235	<issue_start>username_0: I have two papers. In the acknowledgment of the first one I thanked my adviser for his mentorship and there was no problem. When I finished my second paper and I sent it to him to review, he replied back with bunch of comments, mostly reasonable. But one of the comments was that he asked to be removed from acknowledgments where I thanked him again for his mentorship. He wrote, "I am not happy that you never listen to advice! please remove this", where by "this," he meant the part in which I thanked him. Why would he do that? What is the meaning of this? What are the possible reasons for such a comment? After several years of hard work and collaboration I am somewhat hurt by this, please help me to get better perspective.<issue_comment>username_1: The meaning seems pretty clear as far as it goes: he thinks that you do not listen to the advice he gives you on your papers. If you are a student and you acknowledge your advisor, that makes it look like the advisor has "endorsed" or "signed off" on the results of the paper. It seems that your advisor thinks that the version of the paper you will submit is not one that he would have endorsed in this way. This sounds like a nontrivial breakdown of the student/advisor relationship, so I suggest that you meet with your advisor in person and try to smooth things out. If applicable, tell him that you thought you were pretty receptive to his advice, and ask for specific avenues for improvement. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Ask the advisor. I could image different things: * He is angry with you, as you might have published stuff with his name attached and he did not consent. * He might think that he asked you to remove the acknowledgement last time (I would always do so, so I would assume similar in such a situation) but it remained. * He thinks that the acknowledgement section is not the right spot to have a general thank you for your advisor. I would share this view. Either he has contributed enough to become a co-author or he is out. * It was meant as a joke you are just not getting it. Make sure to clarify this, as it might be or become a strain to your relationship. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Edit and disclaimer: As was explained to me in the comments, the practices described below are not acceptable in the math community. Why are you not listing your PhD supervisor as the last author of your paper? I am in physics, and last authorship is a big thing. The last author is traditionally designated for the supervisor or the group leader. The number of last author publications is also separately tracked and plays an important role in obtaining tenure, permanent positions etc. as it is a measure of how well you have supervised your students. Even second-last authors are tracked by our library system, often daily advisors are listed as second-last authors. If you had any serious discussions with your supervisor about the content of the paper at all, he should be in the author list. Maybe the math community has different standards, but a PhD student putting their supervisor into the acknowledgements would be considered something between a faux pas and an insult in my community. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/28	1,153	4,647	<issue_start>username_0: I am planning to go to graduate school for mathematics in a few years. I want to know which math graduate school(s) have the most rigorous math courses. I live in the USA, so I would prefer an USA math graduate school. By rigorous, I mean that all the statements, except the axioms, are proven.<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt you will find such a place. In part because "proof" is somewhat in the eyes of the beholder. But any decent graduate school in the US or elsewhere will serve you well. However, you will find some professors scattered around at those schools that require more from students than the average. There are still some folks around who studied with [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Lee_Moore) at UT Austin, though they are mostly my age (i.e. retired). The [Moore Method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_method) of teaching is to forbid students from reading mathematics, but to develop it completely on their own. He didn't develop everything from the axioms, but his students did. Some other younger people still carry on that tradition, though I suspect it is fading. It is a very hard path, though some people like it. But some of his own students have rejected it, also. --- OOPS, Most, perhaps all, of Moore's direct students are now deceased. So look for their students, who might be carrying on the traditions. A place to look is in the [Mathematics Genealogy Project](https://www.mathgenealogy.org/id.php?id=286) Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think this question is misguided. It turns out that if you want to prove "everything from the ground up", then mathematics is actually exceptionally boring -- because you will never get very far. At least as a student, you have to be able to rely on statements others have proved and for which you may or may not understand the proofs to do interesting things, or at best you sometimes have to go through a proof in some sort of cursory way without dwelling on all of the details (and without wondering whether this step might rely on the continuum hypothesis and/or might only be valid based on some system of axioms but not another). This isn't to say that mathematics should be all handwaving. But mathematics becomes a lot more interesting if you allow yourself to use tools you haven't developed yourself and might not actually be able to develop yourself. The point being that just because you don't understand doesn't make the theorem it proves any less valid: Someone else has already done the work for you, and you should feel free to use it. This perspective is really not so different from saying "Yes, I could try to learn everything about cars and build my own. But my road trips will be far more interesting (and be able to cover far more ground) if I allow myself to buy a car from an established car company whose cars are known to last for a couple 100,000 miles." You don't have to be able to build a car yourself to drive one! Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Somewhat as @username_1 says, your concern about careful, complete proofs in graduate school is probably misplaced. The top 100 or 200 graduate programs in math in the U.S. are staffed with good mathematicians who know how to really prove things, etc. :) More to the point: there are many textbooks and on-line notes that fill in many, many details of many, many things, so there is no obstacle to you finding good proofs of nearly anything you want. Especially nowadays, as opposed to pre-internet times, but already if a good textbook was available, lectures might not explicitly cover every detail, since it could be looked-up. Further, indeed, a lecture is a different medium/format/vehicle than written things... and one need not attempt to be a bad copy of the other. There is not much reason for a lecturer to copy onto a blackboard (or overheads, or ...) from their notes, to be copied by students... if/when an accessible type-set document exists. So, for me, I do not prove everything in class, leaving some to my typeset, on-line notes. Especially, delicate arguments that are not very conceptual are probably better communicated in writing, with live discussion addressing just the delicacy, but not attempting the execution. (For that matter, "in real life", mathematics is not actually lined up in impeccable logical order. First, because there is no unique such order... ) Anyway, I think you'll not find any real problem of the sort you fear. As in a comment, the aspects in which grad schools (in math, in the U.S.) differ are more in terms of the local culture, your peer group, etc. Upvotes: 2
2021/09/28	1,143	4,758	<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that was resubmitted following a revise and resubmit around 18 months ago. I have been in contact with the editor several times and she has been sympathetic to my enquiries but has explained that the referees are proving unresponsive due to covid. The resubmission was a meaty one and took a great deal of work, but we were able to address, in our view, all of the referees’ comments. Thus, normally, I’d be confident of publication in due course potentially after another round of R&R. But, I worry that if the referees haven’t found time in the last year and a half they may never find time. What can I suggest to the editor as ways to move the paper forward? I don’t want to threaten to withdraw the paper as the journal is a good fit for the paper and I don’t want to risk starting all over again. Of course this may become inevitable but for now let’s ignore it. I also don’t want to lecture the editor on her moral/professional obligations, etc., etc. She is the editor in chief and there isn’t an obvious person to escalate it to. I also believe she is trying to do her best. Instead I want to find a way to empower the editor to make a decision. The journal is a small and specialised one and my paper uses slightly different techniques to those it normally publishes and thus she may be loath to act independently.<issue_comment>username_1: Realistically, there are only two "ways to move the paper forward": either the editor manages to extort the reports from the original referees, or she finds new referees and they submit a report. (In a very rare situation she has exactly relevant expertise and judges the situation to be sufficiently dire, she might serve as such a referee herself.) It's unlikely she will accept a paper that was rejected with serious concerns in the first round, and heavily revised, without a referee report, just because the author grew impatient. No actions from your side are likely to change that. Even threatening to withdraw the paper is no leverage - she will probably profusely apologize, but say that she did her best. Strong journals receive far more good papers than they accept. If your circumstances make the delay really damaging (you are an early-career researcher in need of a publication for thesis defense/promotion etc.), you can mention that to her so that she mention that either to the original referees, or to the new referees whom she will beg to write a quick report. Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There is not much you can do in that situation but I believe you should be framing the problem bit differently. Namely, every time something like that comes up in life, you ought to draft a roadmap for moving forward. Do it together with the other side - in your case, EiC. In that roadmap, outline deadlines and milestones followed by concrete actions depending on how it goes. Make sure the outcomes work for you both. It is not "threatening to withdraw the paper", it is defending your own interests. In doing so, it is crucial to give the other side some breathing room and communicate. Instead of "I'll withdraw the paper if you keep stalling the reviews!", quite obviously, you provide the editor with something like "I'd like to get the next round of reviews done in two months at most, and it hasn't been moving for quite a while. Do you have any plan about how to proceed from here on? Because quite frankly, I would have to seek alternatives if our paper is in real danger of getting stuck in that limbo". In doing so, you both provide the EiC with information about deadlines on your side and make clear the ball is on their side. From there on, they have all the tools and the responsibility to make a decision. If they can't make it work out, it is okay, that happens all the time. At the same time, there will be long-term repercussions for them to delay the paper by an year and a half and then be unable to proceed with the publication - so the editor will (or should) at least be hella motivated to make a call about pushing the current reviewers or finding new ones. Finally, you might enjoy the little chat you're having with the editor and be sympathetic towards them and the effort they have to undertake to fix the problem, but at the end of the day, there is work that needs to be done. Further stalling it does not help you and, importantly, it does not help them, either. Looking back five years from now on, they will also have to admit that "I did whatever I could but had to make a call for paper to be withdrawn" is infinitely better than "I didn't muster up the courage to make that call and it got stuck in the limbo but I hope no one is mad at me cause I honestly tried". Upvotes: 0
2021/09/28	672	2,887	<issue_start>username_0: I'm returning to the office and haven't had the opportunity to physically meet the 10 or so people I'll be sharing it with in the coming year. Not all of them are researching the same thing as me and most of them are in their final year of postgraduate education so I'm kind of overshadowed as a first year. As far as socialising goes, how do I make friends in graduate school? Is it socially acceptable to just walk up and say hi? I'm so introverted and worried I'll spend too much time alone :(<issue_comment>username_1: Yes it's definitely okay to just walk up and say hi. Especially since they are more experienced and some are researching different things than you, since you now immediately have your conversation starter: "What are you researching/working on right now?". From there the conversation could go on comfortably, and you can talk about your own work. By the way - being introverted doesn't mean you can't develop social skills, just that you need more time alone to recharge from social interactions. So practice those social skills! With 10 new people, there's a decent chance you'll get along well with a few of them. Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your imagination is almost always worse than reality. Similar to you, I bet there are lots of other people feeling awkward or unsure of how to navigate social situations. It's totally OK to cue people in to your situation. You might say "I don't know many people around here" or "I'm new around here and trying to figure things out". I highly suggest going to on-campus activities or joining a club (on or off campus) that has regular meetings. Also, consider doing some volunteer work. Volunteering is great because there are often many opportunities where you NEED to talk to people to learn what to do or to get the work done. A nice perk of volunteering is that by doing something helpful for others, it often makes an individual feel better about themselves :-) During grad school, I didn't have a lot of good friends on campus, but found that my off-campus activities were much more rewarding. The university is a sort of default, built-in community, but it doesn't have to be your ONLY community. Find what feels good to you, and then keep doing that. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Making friends in graduate school can be tough, especially if you're introverted. The best way to make friends is to get involved in activities or groups that interest you. Some schools have graduate student associations that hold social events, or you can join a club or team. It's also a good idea to reach out to your classmates and chat with them online or in person. A great way to break the ice is to ask them about their research. If you see someone you want to get to know better, don't be afraid to say hi. A simple introduction can lead to a lasting friendship. Upvotes: 0
2021/09/28	2,245	9,287	<issue_start>username_0: So I'm taking an architecture class and there was a word limit for the essay of 500 words. I was wondering if I could go over the 500 word limit and in the email tagline/heading I wrote: "How strict are [assignment] guidelines?" And then in the email I asked if I could go over the 500 word limit. He said "yes, it's fine". All is well and good, I thought that was the end. But then he sent a follow up email after that saying "Oh to answer your email tagline question, as a former architecture and project manager, I am an especially harsh grader." I didn't intend to ask him if he was a harsh grader with my headline, just if the assignment guidelines are strict, but I see the implication now. I can't tell if he's joking to scare me or if he's being serious. What do you think? Is this something you've done before/joked about? Personally, I'd never ask a professor if they were a harsh grader or not so it's a really new response to me.<issue_comment>username_1: You should stick to the 500 word limit and not waste brain cycles speculating on the somewhat unclear communication you've described. There's a more general lesson here: You were given an assignment apparently with very clear requirements. Following the requirements is going to be faster and pedagogically superior to trying to circumvent them. Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I stand in agreement with An<NAME>'s answer. As someone who has worked in architecture offices in the past, I interpret the professor's statements as meaning: "Yes, in this particular instance it is OK to go beyond the 500-word limit, but do not assume you can ignore or circumvent any other guideline without good reason, and without checking with me in advance. Also, even if you are allowed to go beyond the 500-word limit, this is not an authorization for you to go overboard, rather it means for you to stick to the limit as much as possible, but you will not be penalized if you go slightly above the limit. However, if you go significantly beyond the word limit simply because you are incapable of masterfully summarizing your arguments, and you are just adding words without stating anything of significant value, or even keeping a good level of quality, you will almost certainly be penalized for it." Since you mention that you are in an architecture "class" (rather than a course) and that you are doing an "essay" (rather than a full-blown architectural design project), this suggests to me that you might just be taking an architecture class as part of another course, or that perhaps you are not particularly familiar with the way things go in architecture as a business practice or in academia. Without exaggeration, architecture is certainly in the top 10 list of the most cutthroat and merciless environments you can find yourself in. Clients are often ruthless, stingy and nasty, profit margins are razor-thin unless you work for a particularly large office, there is little tolerance for incompetence and laziness, everybody adopts an attitude of no-frills, no-nonsense, and are brutally honest in their criticism of your work (say, "<NAME>-style" level of honesty). Even though this particular professor may (or may not) be more gentle than the average architecture instructor (hard to tell without more information), I would advise you to quickly develop a thick skin for criticism (if you have not done so already), do not take it too personally (even if it may seem personal) and be careful to not deviate from the guidelines without good reason, or without making sure that your final work is actually really better because you were allowed to go beyond the word limit. Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think he's trying to give you a hint, you can turn in whatever you want, but realize that it should conform to the instructions or it will be marked down. If the assignment was to make an office space utilizing only 500 square feet, then would you ask if you could go over 500 square feet? Instructions were pretty clear, and he may actually be trying to get you to actually explain your answer without all the fluff or waste his time with a 1500 word essay that could have been 400 words. Also, harsh grading often means that little things matter and if minor things like a spelling error or formatting occur, you can definitely expect to get marked down. Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_1: You asked whether you could go over the 500 word limit in the guidelines. Your professor considered it, thought it wasn't a problem, and said yes. However, when rereading the emails your professor realised that your subject heading was 'How strict are guidelines?' They realised that you might get the impression that you can push your luck with the guidelines, or that they weren't important on this course. You can just imagine the potential problems the professor foresaw with that! They realised they had better quash any such mistaken impression forthwith and nip this problem in the bud. If it were me, I would reply as soon as possible with a short email along the lines of: > > Yes, of course. I understand completely. > > > Thank you. > > > And I wouldn't worry about it any further. There is no problem with going over the 500 words if within reason, and for good reason. Your professor has specifically given you permission to do so. However, I certainly wouldn't ask for any other dispensations . I'd also be wary of using any subject headings that could be interpreted as asking Is this a serious course? Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I think this would be easier to answer knowing what the other guidelines were. Assuming they are things like "make sure you use good grammar" and "your analysis should be correct," I suspect this person is saying some version of, they expect you to be careful in your work and pay close attention to the details. As a former project manager, they are probably used to reviewing work, spotting errors, asking hard questions and expecting good answers. If this is a relatively new person to teaching, it is also possible they are trying to avoid a reputation for being a softie. I wouldn't worry about it. Of course, don't slack off in their class, but also don't expect them to be unreasonable based just on that comment. Just be a good student and focus on learning and adapting to the feedback you get on your work. Don't sweat a very generic, off-the-cuff remark. Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Here's how I could -- fairly easily -- see myself writing the same thing. It's the start of the semester, I've very busy, with lots of department issues and students asking questions as they have difficulty on-boarding to my several classes. One student writes to me about parameters for the first assignment. It seems fairly minor and I quickly write a couple-word response to get it off my plate and get to a dozen other emails: > > Yes, it's fine. > > > Within the hour I start regretting that. I recall from the start of other semesters that when I let students break rules on the first assignment, they inevitably start assuming all the other rules are optional, and I wind up with a firehose of problems and/or students challenging me on more, and more important issues. Dangit, I say to myself, I told myself I wouldn't let that happen again and I'd stick to the rules firmly at the start of the term as an object lesson. I've literally written that down on a post-it note and still forgotten it half a year after I wrote it. Also, the primary complaints the department gets about me, and also what it shows on RateMyProfessor, is that students perceive me to be a "hard grader" (per RMP tag language) relative to other instructors. On the other hand, I certainly can't go back on the allowance I just gave; that wouldn't be fair. But I feel like I need to warn against extending that expectation in the future. So I write a follow-up after this further thought: > > Oh to answer your email tagline question, as a former architecture and > project manager, I am an especially harsh grader. > > > (I'm not a former architecture and project manager; but rather a former senior software engineer, and the same principles about hyper-awareness of how certain fine details interrupt the workflow in the actual business world apply.) I'd say it's a point in the professor's favor that they were reflective enough to think about you later, and write again with more nuanced information/advice. Many wouldn't bother to do that. Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: You have 500 words: use them to clearly express the required theme. If you spend more than 500 words, you are only increasing the chances of being less clear and of introducing errors in your essay. Since the professor said he/she is an harsh grader, unless it is a joke about building on steep slopes, you have more to loose from introducing errors in the additional words, rather than gaining from it. And if you can express yourself perfectly in 550 words, you can strive to show perfect synthesis skills contracting your essay down to 500 words. I would seriously focus on condensing well-written thoughts in 500 words, instead of showing off all my knowledge in 550 words. Upvotes: 1
2021/09/29	796	3,412	<issue_start>username_0: I'm working on a book but it's far from done, so I'm thinking of uploading much of its content on Academia.edu first, in the form of stand-alone articles. This would be without copyright, I presume, unless Academia.edu automatically adds copyright to articles that are uploaded to its website. So, if I were to do that, would I still be able to eventually publish the book (with copyright), since much of its content would be very similar to the articles I'd have written and shared on Academia.edu. I'd basically be converting the individual articles back into book chapters. I'd very much appreciate an explanation as to whether I would have to paraphrase/quote from my articles in the book and cite them as sources, and whether I would be allowed to copy and paste large sections from my articles (without paraphrasing/quoting).<issue_comment>username_1: I would strongly advise you not to upload anything openly on the internet. If you do so, it is extremely unlikely that any decent, good publisher would ever agree to publish your book. In order for their business model to be sustainable, they must have the privileged right to publish your content. Publishing the majority of the book on the Internet without significant changes makes it almost impossible for publishers to break even. The only exception is if you pay the publisher the exorbitant fees that are necessary to make a book as "Open Access", but even in this situation, you would still be putting yourself in an extremely risky position, as I think most good publishers would still refuse to publish you. Even when you are transferring previously-published content into a new book (say, your previous journal articles and book chapters), almost every publisher will demand you to either significantly rephrase and expand on the contents of those papers, or ask direct permission from the journal/book publishers to reuse the content (if you handed over copyright to them as a condition for publishing your research). Note however that it is far more common for publishers to force you to rewrite and expand previously-published work. Reuse of previously-published work is usually only accepted by publishers if the author is already well-known and has had a long, successful career. Furthermore, reuse of materials in a book (without significant changes), that were previously published in the Internet, is generally considered to be a form of self-plagiarism. Of course, if we are talking about an anthology of published work by a reputed author, there is no problem, but that does not seem to be your situation here. In other words, publishing your work in advance is a very risky, almost certainly a losing proposition. If you go ahead with this plan, it's likely that the only publishers who will agree to publish you are predatory/vanity presses. Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The arXiv contains many book chapters and book drafts. A few random examples: <https://arxiv.org/abs/1908.06165> <https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.07809> <https://arxiv.org/abs/1502.04780> An example outside academia: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martian_(Weir_novel)> Uploading drafts can allow you to get useful feedback. You are still allowed to do what you want with them afterwards. Claims that publishers might object need not be trusted unless they come with some specific evidence. Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
2021/09/29	513	2,110	<issue_start>username_0: Theses are exercises, rather than "full work"? Does this view hold? It's a bit vague sometimes, because a thesis is supposed to practice "real work", but since a thesis is often an author's first work of such kind, then I find that expecting it to be "fully professional" is same as asking some other "newbie" to perform like an experienced pro. Thus making me believe more along the lines that even Ph. D. theses ought to be treated as "first of an author's kind" work as opposed to "end-all"s like they often may feel for the author.<issue_comment>username_1: Your last sentence gets precisely to the point - it is to make the author adopt a new mentality and develop an approach to academic work; the thesis is supposed to be the start of the path, not the end of it. Or maybe a new beginning, if you wish, a new stage in life. It is an accomplishment and is celebrated accordingly, but it is similar to the first item crafted by an artisan or the first song written by an artist. It is not supposed to be their last, far from it, but more often than not it is special and holds sentimental value to the author. Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The truth, as so often, is somewhere in the middle. No, a PhD thesis is not an exercise in the traditional sense - it's supposed to be a novel, useful contribution to the scientific state of the art. For PhD students that leave research behind after their degree it will typically indeed be the most advanced, most complete piece of research they ever produce. However, for academics that stay longer at university it will often be only a starting point, with more, larger, better work to follow. Basically, a PhD thesis is a student's [masterpiece](https://www.definitions.net/definition/masterpiece) in the traditional meaning of the word ("A work created in order to qualify as a master craftsman and member of a guild."). It's not necessarily a "masterpiece" in the sense of "the defining piece of work of a researcher", although it might be (most commonly if this researcher quits academia after their PhD). Upvotes: 2