date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2021/11/08
| 763
| 3,348
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm studying computer science at a technical college. In some courses we perform live coding exams, i.e. we download the code and have a certain amount of time to solve the exam, then we have to push the code to the server where it is graded. (No internet access allowed)
I'm already doing all the exercises twice, some of them even three times. I generally perform very bad on these although I can solve the exercises reasonably well. Also after the exam is over I usually see the solution within minutes. However the time constraint gives me like tunnel vision, which leads to silly mistakes, which leads to non-functional code which gives a bad grade. (no points if test-cases do not succeed)
What strategies are recommended given the circumstances described?<issue_comment>username_1: Do practice timed tests using conditions as similar to the exam as possible. Ideally use the same platform that you use in the course. But you can find similar platforms to the one you are describing online, such as [HackerRank](https://www.hackerrank.com/) and [LeetCode](https://leetcode.com/), which also have banks of questions on different topics at different levels of difficulty you can use for practice.
Usually, these kinds of platforms have an ability to test your code on user-specified input or pre-made examples. *Always* test your code as you write it, especially in these kinds of exams. Test your code every time you add a new logical feature. The test can be as simple as feeding in a simple set of input and adding print strings to check you are getting the output you expect at every step -- just something you can do quickly to check yourself as you work. When you have a complete solution to a question, make sure your code runs on simple tests and gives correct results. When it does, then try thinking of edge cases, and if you're being graded on efficiency, try making a huge example test set. You should be able to generate test data quickly (if not, practice it). You also should practice thinking of good test cases -- simple ones that test correctness on "sane and small" input, and more complicated ones that can find edge cases and are large.
Learn techniques to calm yourself down in the exam room. Make sure you eat and sleep well before the exam. Don't cram -- study and practice in advance, and use the time before the exam to calm your mind. Take deep breaths. If you find yourself scrambling during the exam, take a moment to center yourself. Imagine yourself being in the comfortable place where you take your practice tests. Try to break your task into smaller, manageable sub-tasks that you can test, and build your way up to a solution, rather than trying to solve everything at once. Don't be smart. Be systematic.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The number of mistakes are infinite, in the statistical sense, but not for an individual. Most likely, your mistakes will always be of the same family of mistakes.
Remember your errors, because you know you can solve the excersises. Focus on having a subset of templates that you know by heart (i.e. a function with a vector in input and a string as output) and build on these small blocks your solution.
As per the answer from username_1, at the exam you have to be systematic (and **b-or-i-n-g**), don't try to be smart.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/09
| 2,838
| 12,489
|
<issue_start>username_0: I proposed a project about twistor formulations in noncommutative geometry for alternative theories of gravity to a professor to apply for a PhD program in physics in 2019, and though the professor didn't have any publications concerning the theories and techniques in my proposed project, he signed on to agree to supervise me to work on that project. And the PhD program also admitted me.
Then due to COVID-19 travel restrictions, I couldn't arrive at the university until October 2020. However, since my arrival, the professor seemed to always talk to me in a tyrannical or sarcastic tone. He always criticized me, even for trivial matters, often as negatively as he can, and never praised me. In all, he is irrational, surly, capricious and thus very difficult to cope with. Since I feel it is so hard to work in such a negative environment, I took the excuse that I am not sure if I am interested in so mathematics-oriented research he does in noncommutative geometry to resign from him as it’s like he wants to speak like even withdrawing from the supervision agreement is my mistake - he is a person who never admits it’s his fault whenever things don’t go well.
The scenario of our resignation from each other is as follows. He asked me to make a presentation 3 times and was never satisfied with it - every time he kept asking me very basic questions, like what is a vector, tensor, metric, covariant derivative, etc., making me to explain everything from the very beginning, even the conventional notations, and caviled and scorning me throughout the process to run out of time before I could finish my presentation. Then at my request, he let one of his students show me an example of the kind of presentation he expected and gave me a final chance to make a presentation satisfying him. He said if I can’t make such a presentation, I can’t work on mathematical physics. On that day, he went to my office asking me if I was ready to make that presentation, then, as I hesitated, he started to talk with me about PhD studies - he said my progress is too slow to carry out that project in the given PhD period, so it's better that I work on something else, like experimental physics, or just resign the PhD. I felt he completely didn't believe in my ability and held me in so low contempt; I realized his previous criticizing and scorning me was treating me like a clown. I thus felt so sad that I thought I couldn't work with him any further.
After calming down, I thought about the reasons for his treating me that way from my arrival. I think the reason is very likely that he wants to try his best to discourage me from working with him on that project, because he found not only he but also I am not familiar with the theories and techniques in the project, so that to work out results in 4 years may be problematic. I think he is not familiar with the project because he seems to rarely answer my scientific questions in that project - he either said "so what?" or "please focus on basic questions first." On the other hand, he also has no publications about the project.
Then we each wrote a mail to the program’s head to resign from each other in the end of February, 2021. The head seems not to know that professor well in person, so can’t judge it’s whose mistake, and just approved my request to change my supervisor. But he seems not be able to help me with looking for a new supervisor at all - he does not know which researchers in the faculty are engaged with the research topics I hope to work on to suggest them to me - the only thing he does is to threaten me from time to time to kick me out of the doctoral school if I don’t join a research group soon. This constant threat makes me feel uneasy and lack peace of mind.
In the beginning, I thought finding a new supervisor should not be too difficult, but later I found it’s not that easy. I approached several researchers, and though almost all of them invited me to have a talk with them and most of them even spoke in a way like they could be my supervisor in the beginning, none of them was willing to declare to be my supervisor afterwards. The reason is one of the following: they don’t have PhD projects in mind nor can they supervise me on my proposed project with which they don’t have experience; they are going to retire; they already have many students or they think I have no sufficient time to learn their research techniques since I have lost some time since the beginning of my PhD studies; they don’t feel safe to take me because they don’t know me much. I think in general, the situation is that no researcher in the faculty is engaged in topics close to the research I did during my MSc and those who work on topics much different from my MSc research don’t think I have sufficient background knowledge to do their research nor do they think I have sufficient time to learn. Some other PhD student said I just need to find a researcher who can sign to be my supervisor but doesn’t need to really collaborate with me, but I think this is not easy - except for that professor I originally contacted for admission, I have not found any researcher who is willing to sign to be my supervisor to let me work on topics they don’t have experience with.
The program’s head has sent a letter to the director of the doctoral school to suggest to kick me out of the doctoral school with the reason of having no scientific progress. However, the program’s head sent that letter only based on the fact that no researcher signed to be my supervisor. Since resigning from the supervision of that tyrannical professor, I actually have taken multiple courses and studied topics of those researchers I approached in the hope of being able to work with them. It’s just because I wander from topic to topic, I don’t make concrete progress towards my thesis.
I also have been invited to talk with the director, and he said even if I don’t have a supervisor, I can work on my own topic, like how he did something different from his PhD supervisor’s research. But the program’s head didn’t say I can do that in the beginning, so I spent time wandering from topic to topic of different researchers. However, I think even if I really work on my own topic without a supervisor during these months, if I don’t make a publication, and if no researcher in the faculty can understand what I do, how can they judge if I have made scientific progress?
I recently made another attempt of getting a supervisor by approaching a researcher in General Relativity and Astrophysics, the department closest to my MSc research. While my MSc research is about spinor formulations of general relativity, his research is about the application of General Relativity to Astrophysics. He introduced me a project as an extension of one of his papers, and since when he did this, it’s about one week away from the time the director said to kick me out of the doctoral school if the program’s head didn’t say I can stay, he said I have to prove my skills to be able to conduct that research project in one week to talk about collaboration with him. During the first week, I could not think very well due to being sick - I think I was infected a cold in the hostel I stayed - then in the second week I sent him a note showing a result he wants me to show, but he didn’t reply me and when I visited his office next day, I didn't see him. I don’t know what he thinks about what I sent to him and whether he would talk about collaboration with me.
Nevertheless, can they kick me out of the doctoral school because I cannot find a researcher who is willing to sign to be my supervisor after resigning from the original irrational supervisor? Actually I feel I am a victim of being placed under such an irrational supervisor - I have some posttraumatic symptoms after being exposed to his extreme negative criticism - but now it's like they think it's all my mistake and want to kick me out of the doctoral school.<issue_comment>username_1: A professor to supervise a student's research project is the most important relationship in a doctoral program. I don't see a feasible way forward without one. The whole point oh a PhD is to receive training in research; minus an advisor, a student isn't receiving training in anything.
Different programs are likely to handle this situation a bit differently, but I think it would be treating the student most honestly and fairly to ask them to withdraw if there is no suitable supervisor. It's almost certainly not possible to *graduate* without a supervisor. PhD transfers are rare, but some interim relationship might be possible with the goal of having the student move to another institution.
From a student's perspective, I'd recommend reconsidering how specific their research interests are to see whether they could indeed pursue a slightly different direction under an available supervisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The key points about the timeline of your story that I gather are
* You have 4 years to complete your PhD.
* You are currently a little more than one year into your PhD.
* You have not had an advisor for 9 months (February until now, November). During that time, you've had multiple conversations with top people at the school that you need to make progress toward your degree.
* You started working with a professor a few weeks ago, who gave you one week to complete a task. You finished the task in two weeks.
* You are now urgently waiting for the professor's response because of the school's deadline to find an advisor is approximately now.
I think you are indeed in serious danger of being asked to leave the program. It sounds like you have been told you were in danger, the steps you needed to take were explained, and through a combination of being very rigid on what you want to work on and not being decisive enough to commit to the opportunities you found, you have not completed those steps.
If you want to resolve the situation, based on what you wrote I think the best chance you have is to make it work with the new GR and Astrophysics advisor. But, professors are busy and you took extra time with the task assigned, without communicating in advance that there might be an issue. So, they may not be inclined to respond immediately. I would wait at least a week before sending a reminder email, otherwise it will come across like you are bugging them. If you need the professor to talk to the head of the school on your behalf, you can try sending them a polite, short email asking if they would be willing to do this for you. If this works, then longer term, talk to them about what their expectations are for progress, and consider being flexible to work on projects in their area of expertise.
However, I just want to be realistic, there is a chance that the situation has already passed the point of no return. The school indeed can ask you to leave if they aren't satisfied you are making progress toward your degree.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Can one be kicked out of Doctoral School because of not being able to find a supervisor?
>
>
>
This depends on the rules of the school / university and the university law of the country. Since they have (apparently multiple times) actively threatened to dismiss you I think you should operate under the assumption that, yes, they have the option to dismiss you. If, and under what specific circumstances, they are willing to act on this option is anyone's guess, of course. Some schools are quick to dismiss students, others basically never do it. That said, *if* kicking out students is a somewhat common practice at your school, then "not finding an alternative supervisor after a conflict with your original supervisor" seems like as good a reason for dismissal as any other. I doubt that the school has an obligation to arrange a replacement for you, and if you can't find a supervisor then dismissal from the program is the only real alternative course of action I can think of.
However, the other question is whether there is even much point with you continuing this PhD program in the first place. You already lost 1/4 of your research time and it looks like nobody in the department is willing or able to work with you on the kind of research you are interested in. Maybe you would be better served using your remaining time in this doctoral program to looking for alternatives (in industry or in a different PhD school)?
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/09
| 716
| 2,888
|
<issue_start>username_0: First of all, I am not asking whether it is ethical to round one's GPA. I essentially rounded my GPA by accident and want to know the possible consequences of this.
I applied to the NSF GRFP. Recently, I read that when and how to round one's GPA can be subtle questions, but at the time I wrote the application I did not realize that. The GPA on my transcript is 3.887 but I wrote 3.9 on the application, not thinking twice about it because I was just using typical rounding rules. In addition, I kind of thought that, since reviewers will see my transcript, it didn't really matter if I wrote 3.88 or 3.9 because they will have the official GPA in front of them anyway.
Now I am worried this will negatively affect my application. There is no GPA "cutoff" of 3.9 for the GRFP so it won't disqualify me or anything, but I wonder if it will change reviewers' opinions of me.
Please tell me - what would you do if you saw this on an (otherwise very strong I think) application? Would this make you more likely to reject the applicant?
Thanks.<issue_comment>username_1: In a way, it doesn't matter at this point and so you shouldn't worry about it. Save your energy for things you can control.
But I think you *really* shouldn't worry about it, because this is almost certainly not a big deal. I've submitted a lot of resumes for academic jobs (and even got offered some of them) and never once thought to look up rules around rounding my GPA to more than 2 digits. I also agree with your original logic. Anyone who wants to know all the digits will look at your transcript, not your CV. It would take a very special kind of reviewer to assume the difference of 0.013 points (0.3% of your GPA!) is because you *lied* and not because you *rounded.*
The only situation I can possibly think of where the extra digits might matter, is if they have decided on a hard cutoff that your GPA must be greater than or equal to 3.9 for them to consider your application. But... I really doubt this is the case. If they really do have a policy like this, I assume they will check your transcript (lest they risk giving a fellowship to... gasp!... *GPA rounders!*), in which case what you wrote in the data entry field won't matter.
I know waiting to hear back from a fellowship can be very stressful, but try to keep busy with other things instead of thinking about it. Easier said than done, I know.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It doesn't matter since there is nothing you can do about it now. I personally believe in 'playing safe' especially when I'll have to pass through the hands of others. You see, you're not there so what you put on paper should be advised. Just be careful next time because people formulate different opinions based on what they see.
All the same, to answer your question, if i were the reviewer, it wouldn't matter to me.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/09
| 614
| 2,691
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a part the required statement of teaching associated with an academic job application, I need to explain my "pedagogical practices, observations, and advances". I searched a bit and figured out that pedagogical practices are fivefold, say, constructive, collaborative, reflective, integrative, and inquiry-based. However, I have the following ambiguities.
1- May I explain my experience in all of those five approaches and claim that my teaching style will be a mixture of all of them, or I better pick a subset of them to focus on?
2- What are those "observations and advances" part?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe this is asking about your teaching philosophy. It is a combination of all that you believe teaching and learning should be about. If you've had a teaching experience, what downsides have you observed and how best did you solve or will try to solve them, should you have another chance. It gives a complete overview of what you see teaching and learning to be.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Based solely on the common meaning of words, I would think that "practices" is what you do/have done, "observations" is what you have seen/noticed, and "advances" is what you think you do better now compared to your early practice.
As to the five elements of practice you list, I don't see a source, so it is difficult to say if this breakdown is a commonly accepted pedagogical theory or not. In any case, since it appears you only just searched for it in response to writing the application, it would be somewhat insincere (premature?) to say that your teaching practice will reflect all five elements. It would be better just to describe your actual teaching practice as it exists, and explain the approach you take to teaching. If there are elements of overlap with this theory you found (from some mysterious source) then so be it, but don't overdo it trying to conform your description to the theory.
For the "observations and advances" part it would be useful to explain what important things you have observed in your teaching (e.g., what worked well, what went badly, etc.) and how you have improved your teaching as a result. If you have had any experiences where you tried methods that didn't work, or you changed some aspect of your teaching and got better/worse results, etc., it is worth mentioning this as part of your overall explanation of your preferred practice. Aside from wanting to know that you are a competent teacher, the admissions committee is going to want to see that you are a reflective person who can take in feedback on your teaching and adapt your methods to improve over time.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/09
| 399
| 1,724
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for for a PhD psychology program. Does it mean my clinical work, or other awards and leadership recognition's during my education?<issue_comment>username_1: From my perspective, the committee wants to know your overall personality besides all the grades and coursework you send them.
Imagine getting a new family member: you do not just want to know just their grades; you also want to know how they are "non-academically" because they will have to spend the next 3-5 years with you. Such achievements do not have to be awards of honour. Any certificate of participation in non-academic activities can show your overall engagement and give a glimpse of your personality.
Perhaps they want to see if you went the extra mile to do something for society using what you learnt in college? Maybe you ran a marathon? The question is open ended!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is the opportunity to showcase interesting things about yourself that would otherwise not fit into any box. I use this for two main purposes:
**Context**: If you were a collegiate athlete throughout undergrad, it puts your other academic achievements into context. Similar things can be said about volunteering work, such as organizing conferences, talks and activities.
**Personal traits**: It can also reveal desirable qualities by showing that you excel at something objectively hard, but unrelated to academia. People who excel at one thing usually have the qualities to be good at other things, given time and work. For instance, I always mention that I am an international level strategy games competitor. It had always been discussed in a positive way in every interview I've had.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/09
| 3,212
| 13,745
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc in math who defended his Ph.D. a year ago. I have 4 papers where three of them were written by me(only author). From time to time, when I don't understand some part of a paper, I send an email to the author and ask them about it. I have been told since I was a student that I should not be ashamed to ask questions, but sometimes I have a bad feeling after asking questions that why I asked questions or I was so stupid that I didn't think about it. I have always tried to think a lot of my questions before I asked them, but I still have this feeling when I was pointed out the answer.<issue_comment>username_1: While asking questions should never be discouraged, there are *good* questions and there are *bad* questions.
For your case in particular, reading a paper and not understanding part of it, there is a due diligence involved in trying to find the answer on your own, or asking for help from a more appropriate person, than to just write off a note and ask the author.
Your first pass should be to go to the papers cited by the paper you're having trouble with, and see if that clears things up. Next, it might be wise to ask local colleagues, peers you have an established working relationship with, or your postdoc mentor, before asking the author. Indeed, the exercise will almost invariably result in a better formulated question for the author by the time you get around to asking it.
Other times, your experience may tell you that there is no person you can go to *other* than the author to get your answer -- then, by all means, go to the author.
If this is a frequent issue for you, I suggest forming a journal club that meets periodically to discuss agreed-upon papers might be a valuable thing for you to organize. It might help you develop some more insight for how you approach papers. These can be valuable forums for everyone from advanced undergrads to expert emeriti. It would be very appropriate for a post doc to try to form such a group.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you may be experiencing [impostor syndrome](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome). It's the feeling that you don't really deserve your accomplishments and that you could at any moment be exposed. Most people will experience it sometime in their lives but high-achieving individuals are especially predisposed by their inclination to compare themselves unfavorably to even more high-achieving people.
You've achieved a PhD and you're published. Think of how many kids you knew in high school that have achieved that. It's possible you're the only one. You should feel great but you don't because you compare yourself to other researchers you assume are better. Still, there's every possibility that when they see your questions, it may race through their minds to wonder if you've discovered their papers weren't that good after all. The impostor syndrome can happen to anyone but high-achieving people are especially susceptible.
If this continues to bother you and your access to healthcare allows, you might ask your primary care provider for a referral for some counseling or perhaps a support group. Good luck on this but I suspect you're doing great and having trouble giving yourself credit for having earned your achievements.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As author, I'm usually happy to be asked questions about my work. So I do encourage it, and people who do it shouldn't feel bad. Generally I feel that I'd be fine with more people asking me something than actually do. It gives me a good feeling that somebody reads my work and really tries to work through it, and occasionally people point out mistakes (or a question leads to my finding a mistake), so that I can also learn from this.
However people need to understand that my time is limited. Very occasionally people have overdone it, and asked things where I felt that (a) questions were asked that reveal that basic understanding of the field is missing that would be required before reading specialist papers, or (b) people think that because I wrote something about a method that they use, I would give them detailed support applying it in their specific application, or (c) people read only the first 5 pages and ask something that is explained later, or (d) people start with a good question and when I answer they start to think they can ask me all kinds of stuff that is only loosely related to the paper.
I think that's a fairly exhaustive list of questions I'm not so keen on.
I should also say that both answers by username_2 and username_1 are really good and show you two very different ways of thinking about the issue that both make sense and complement each other. Many people are too ashamed about asking questions and tend to feel bad about it when they really shouldn't. On the other hand it is worthwhile to make good efforts to clarify things for yourself or with people with whom you talk more regularly before asking the author.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Others have made the point that you shouldn't feel bad. I would like to add that if you do feel bad, you can use those bad feelings to increase your empathy with your students (assuming that your position involves teaching). Once you have a Ph.D., it is easy to fall under the curse of knowledge and forget what it is like to not know something which you suspect might be basic. To combat this, it is a healthy thing to be regularly confronted with evidence of your own continued ignorance of areas outside of your domain of expertise (or even within that domain).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes it's normal and I'll explain your (flawed) logic for feeling bad, because it is likely the same as my (flawed) logic.
When I ask a question, my question is either:
1. Stupid, or
2. Not stupid
If it is stupid (and my inner imposter says this is likely), then I have just made a fool of myself and displayed my stupidity to "everyone". I will feel bad about that.
But if it is not stupid, then maybe I have made a fool of the authors. I have found a flaw in their work and they will feel bad. A major social faux pas. I will feel bad about that (even if it ultimately results in better science).
So to save time, and in the knowledge that I will inevitably feel bad in the future, I start to feel bad as soon as I've asked the question. From that logic, all questions are bad.
**BUT**
If I consider myself as the answerer rather than the questioner...
If the question is a basic question, then maybe I didn't communicate my ideas effectively. This asker should not feel bad because they've helped me communicate better, or they've given me an opportunity to talk about my research. **If I have time**, I'll respond and provide them with some resources and add their question to my mental "Ways my research might be misunderstood" list so that I can communicate better in future.
If the question is not basic, they've given me something to think about. Maybe it's a flaw I'm already aware of, maybe not. If it's an in-person question, I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "I didn't think of that". If it's an email, I might think about it for a while and respond or act on it **if I have time**.
If I don't have time, I will likely do nothing. But I'd like the asker to trust me to make that decision and forgive me if I don't respond. I don't want them to feel bad about asking the question.
The question means that someone has read my output and thought about it long enough to ask (and hopefully try to answer) a question. The worse reception is a large round of indifference - even controversy brings acknowledgement. Ergo, questions are good.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I find that asking a good question sometimes helps to actually understand what you are asking.
I have this a lot on SE (especially SO) where I am building my question with the explanation of what I understood and what I did not. Often I would end mid-question with an epiphany (I actually can answer the question myself), or realize that my question does not make sense, or realize that I do not even know what I want to ask.
So yes, ask the question, but make sure to elaborate on what you understand and what not, in details.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Yes, it is normal. Many people have this problem; the assumed logic is that by asking a question you demonstrate that you are lacking knowledge or the mental resources to come to your own conclusions. Together with the fact that the whole point of being in academia (and maybe to a lesser part businesses) is to build a lot of knowledge, one might feel that one is inferiour for asking questions.
Also, some people with less than optimal social skills then may turn this around and mention your question specifically in a way which throws salt into the wound. Some people with less insight may actually think that you're a lesser person for it.
All of this is true from a psychological standpoint, and still, objectively, being able to ask question is almost always a great ability. Obviously, first, you may get an answer and learn something much quicker than figuring it out yourself. Secondly, there are things that you simply cannot know without asking (for example, about predilections or opinions of other people). Third, asking questions and actually thinking about the answers is great for general conversations - it avoids those kinds of discussions where everybody is just spewing facts and trying to "win".
As to how to do it... of course you can spend time on wording your question right - this may be worthwhile in an asynchronous setting, i.e. when asking by mail. Try to ask in a way which makes it easy for the other person to understand what you actually mean. Avoid too much verbosity or vagueness. If you have multiple questions, either separate them clearly, maybe through bullet points, or ask them serially (after you get the answer).
When asking questions in a social setting, i.e. in a meeting or discussion, just do it. There often is no time to think long and hard, and overthinking can lead to weird things being said. If it is a group setting, and you think the question is interesting for others, ask in front of the group; if instead you think there's really nobody else who could possibly be interested in it, maybe try to catch the other person later.
As to the bad feeling - at least for me, it still crops up occasionally, when I ask a particularly "stupid" question in front of a particularly important (to me) person, but I have a lot of practice meanwhile, so the feeling now goes away very quickly. I recommend to practice this skill - both the asking, and then being able to live with it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: There are already many great answers, and I would just add that in my opinion and experience low self-esteem leads easily to this type of problem. If you frequently end up self-criticizing yourself and your actions (even the good ones) also in other parts of life, then low self-esteem could be also affecting you. There may be no quick fix, but over long term things can get better. In the meantime if this would be truly the cause of your "problem", then acknowledging it can already help a bit.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: A simple reason you may feel bad is because Academia is both collaborative and competitive. Working with others is encouraged, but it's also about "pecking order" and "survival of the fittest". And the further you go, the stronger the competition. The stakes (and the dynamics of the relationships) are not the same for a student and a post-doc. In fact an established academic may be happier to answer the same question from a student (potentially, a future recruit for their research lab) than from a post-doc (potentially, a competitor for their next research grant).
Bearing that in mind... By asking a question, you're making yourself vulnerable to criticism. You are highlighting your weaknesses. It is however an opportunity to learn. What you need to balance here is your thirst for knowledge (good!), and your (perceived) social standing within your community (important, but can conflict with the former).
Every question you ask is an opportunity to learn, but also a source of fear (not just a "childish" fear of looking foolish, but the very rational fear that negative perceptions from your peers may affect your career in the future). You have to learn to manage that fear. It's part of "growing up" as an academic. By becoming a post-doc, you are entering new territory. It's quite normal to feel cautious. However, I do find that keeping a youthful enthusiasm about asking questions can be a good long-term survival strategy. Seeming "harmless" is not necessarily a bad thing. It's actually a good filter for forming future collaborations. You don't want to work with people who sneer at "stupid questions".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Something that one of my lecturers at university first said, to a class that I was taking, has always stuck in my mind, and that was:
>
> If you are thinking about asking a question about something that you don't quite understand, don't feel shy about sticking your hand up and asking because you can be sure that at least someone else is wondering the exact same thing!
>
>
>
This has stood me in good stead and by always remembering that, I have never hesitated in asking for clarification of an issue.
Conversely, from the point of view of the lecturer, this feedback also indicates that (at least part of) the audience is actually engaged in the discourse and are not just dumbly letting it waft over them.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/09
| 1,082
| 4,760
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose a faculty member has external funding for PhD students (who would otherwise have TA positions). How do they decide which of their PhD students get funding? For instance, I've seen faculty who give priority to their most senior students or who rotate funding between all students. Are these choices at the discretion of the PI, or does the department/university/funding agency have some fine-grained control?
In particular, are there constraints with regard to non-discrimination in the same way there are when hiring students in the first place?
I'm in the US, but would be interested in hearing responses from different academic cultures as well.<issue_comment>username_1: Faculty members in US can always choose their doctoral advisees from among admitted students. For most, they will already have some experience with the student through classes or other interactions. So, the faculty member, perhaps in consultation with the head or even post-docs working with them would be the most likely way to determine who gets RA funding from the grant.
It doesn't make sense, in US, for a student to be imposed upon a professor, nor to have other determine who does research with them. The RA position assumes that the student will have certain research tasks in that group.
How they decide is up to them, but in some cases it might be that they choose someone "interesting" who can't get other funding for some reason. In other cases it might be that they choose the person with the most promise for the present and future.
A somewhat less frequent option, I think, is when a faculty has a research/study group in which they work closely together and perhaps have a weekly seminar. In such a situation, a senior professor might defer to a junior one on choosing a candidate even when the senior professor holds the grant. I've seen similar things happen in a particularly collegial faculty.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect this is too varied to give a good answer, but here's the general sense in my department, which is not a "wet lab" department where cheap labor is needed from grad students.
1. Any funding body rules. The only major one I'm aware of is citizenship, as mentioned in the comment.
2. The university and college (a collection of related departments) do not have any rules like "seniority first." If there were anti-discrimination rules, this is where they'd live.
3. Then, it is up to the PI's discretion. **(a)** First, they will fill things they need done, e.g. experience with certain equipment. Then, **(b)** students dissertating or close to it first (if they have the money to not need the students to actually do anything). Faculty will also fund **(c)** first year students so they do not have to TA as they are getting settled their first year.
4. Finally, the department will hunt around to find funding for students that don't have TAships or other funding. I know many grad students who have RA'd for a professor that isn't super related to them, or split two appointments between two faculty.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Firstly, anti-discrimination laws are not generally restricted solely to hiring decisions; they apply more generally to *any type of decision-making* that has consequences for the employee/student in an employment/educational context. So in jurisdictions where anti-discrimination laws are present, it is likely that they would apply to the allocation of research funds to students. Usually this would mean that the person allocating the funds cannot discriminate on the basis of protected characteristics like age, race, sex, etc., unless some legitimate legislative exception is met. In the USA this matter is covered at a federal level by Title IV (education) and Title VII (employment) in the *Civil Rights Act 1964*. There may also be applicable state laws depending on the jurisdication the university is in.
In terms of the locus of decision-making, it is usual that the PI on a grant will have discretion to allocate the funds as they wish, but obviously they are still going to be required to abide by applicable laws and university policies. In particular, the department would not generally micromanage a decision by the PI unless they have reason to believe that a legal breach would occur otherwise. As to the particular methods of allocation you have mentioned, both are probably okay within the scope of anti-discrimination law. Rotating funding between all students is non-discriminatory. Giving priority to senior students might argualy raise a question of age discrimination, but it is probably okay, and courts have tended to allow decisions based on "experience" without considering this to be age discrimination.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/09
| 998
| 4,353
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it possible for an F-1 visa holder who is an international PhD student in the US, work outside of the university?
Also, is it possible for him to establish a company and work for his company during his education instead of doing TA/RA/GSR things?<issue_comment>username_1: Faculty members in US can always choose their doctoral advisees from among admitted students. For most, they will already have some experience with the student through classes or other interactions. So, the faculty member, perhaps in consultation with the head or even post-docs working with them would be the most likely way to determine who gets RA funding from the grant.
It doesn't make sense, in US, for a student to be imposed upon a professor, nor to have other determine who does research with them. The RA position assumes that the student will have certain research tasks in that group.
How they decide is up to them, but in some cases it might be that they choose someone "interesting" who can't get other funding for some reason. In other cases it might be that they choose the person with the most promise for the present and future.
A somewhat less frequent option, I think, is when a faculty has a research/study group in which they work closely together and perhaps have a weekly seminar. In such a situation, a senior professor might defer to a junior one on choosing a candidate even when the senior professor holds the grant. I've seen similar things happen in a particularly collegial faculty.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect this is too varied to give a good answer, but here's the general sense in my department, which is not a "wet lab" department where cheap labor is needed from grad students.
1. Any funding body rules. The only major one I'm aware of is citizenship, as mentioned in the comment.
2. The university and college (a collection of related departments) do not have any rules like "seniority first." If there were anti-discrimination rules, this is where they'd live.
3. Then, it is up to the PI's discretion. **(a)** First, they will fill things they need done, e.g. experience with certain equipment. Then, **(b)** students dissertating or close to it first (if they have the money to not need the students to actually do anything). Faculty will also fund **(c)** first year students so they do not have to TA as they are getting settled their first year.
4. Finally, the department will hunt around to find funding for students that don't have TAships or other funding. I know many grad students who have RA'd for a professor that isn't super related to them, or split two appointments between two faculty.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Firstly, anti-discrimination laws are not generally restricted solely to hiring decisions; they apply more generally to *any type of decision-making* that has consequences for the employee/student in an employment/educational context. So in jurisdictions where anti-discrimination laws are present, it is likely that they would apply to the allocation of research funds to students. Usually this would mean that the person allocating the funds cannot discriminate on the basis of protected characteristics like age, race, sex, etc., unless some legitimate legislative exception is met. In the USA this matter is covered at a federal level by Title IV (education) and Title VII (employment) in the *Civil Rights Act 1964*. There may also be applicable state laws depending on the jurisdication the university is in.
In terms of the locus of decision-making, it is usual that the PI on a grant will have discretion to allocate the funds as they wish, but obviously they are still going to be required to abide by applicable laws and university policies. In particular, the department would not generally micromanage a decision by the PI unless they have reason to believe that a legal breach would occur otherwise. As to the particular methods of allocation you have mentioned, both are probably okay within the scope of anti-discrimination law. Rotating funding between all students is non-discriminatory. Giving priority to senior students might argualy raise a question of age discrimination, but it is probably okay, and courts have tended to allow decisions based on "experience" without considering this to be age discrimination.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/10
| 977
| 4,316
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in industry now. I'm applying to PhD programs but don't want to be under a lot of stress so that I can have time to slowly think deeply about problems and explore stuff without having pressure to deliver papers and results. And I want to be able to do other things. Any tips on finding universities and advisors that aren't too stressful? In industry it's generally well known what companies work their employees hard (Amazon) and what companies are more chill (Google).
Any university recommendations?
Computer Science, USA<issue_comment>username_1: You're in the wrong line of business. Graduate programs are populated by those people who were at the top of their class as undergraduates, and professors were at the top of their class of graduate students. These are the people who are inherently competitive and driven in what they do.
That does not mean that every research group and graduate supervisor is toxic. For sure, some research groups are riding their graduate students pretty hard; others have more humane approaches. But in the end, every faculty is evaluated on the number of papers and grants they get published and funded, and that does put inevitable pressure on graduate students as well.
In other words: You will neither be successful nor happy in graduate school (or academia in general) if you are looking for a "chill" environment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This isn't the answer you want to hear, but it's the answer that's true: there's just no such thing as a "chill" PhD program. There's lots of variation in the amount of pressure that different programs place on students, but no matter where you go, you've got to work hard. The process of obtaining a PhD is notoriously difficult, and there will, let me repeat, *will*, be occasions where you're clocking in long days and long nights to make your research and writing deadlines. Getting a PhD is exhausting, difficult work and there just is no way around this. If you don't want to put in that level of work ethic, you're just not going to make it in academia.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: As a thought experiment, let’s pretend for a second that there was at some moment in time a reputable CS grad program in the US that was “chill” like the google environment you’re describing — a place where people can just have a fun, stress free time working on the research they love, knowing that expectations in the program are low enough that they could get out with a PhD even while putting in minimal effort.
Well, what do you think is the next thing that would happen? *Everybody and their cousin would be applying to this program*, that’s what. After all, your preferences aren’t really that unique — there are a lot of people out there who like chilling just like you and dislike stress, just like you. And that includes some very smart, passionate people who actually would turn out to be very hard workers even when you don’t apply a lot of pressure on them.
So, the next thing that would happen after that is, the faculty running the program will find themselves inundated with a veritable bonanza of smart and extremely accomplished applicants to pick from. So, getting into the program will become insanely competitive. Once in the program, students will suddenly find themselves constantly comparing themselves to their other also very accomplished peers, and suddenly feel very motivated and driven to work hard so as to distinguish themselves in such a high-achieving environment. The faculty, realizing they have a great group of grad students on their hands, would realize what a tremendous resource that is to advance the research they are passionate about, so would raise their own expectations and encourage the students to work even harder. Doing anything less than that would just be throwing away the amazing human capital they’ve been put in charge of managing.
And that brings us to precisely where things stand today: grad programs are highly competitive environments where highly motivated, passionate students work extremely hard to meet the very high expectations imposed by the program and the academic discipline they are operating in. Sound familiar?
Well, good luck with your applications anyway, I hope you find what you’re looking for.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/10
| 2,997
| 12,027
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have posted here before about the issues with my PhD, but now I get the feeling that I am suffering from burnout and I need to know what to do next. My degree is costing a lot of money and I feel like I have no interest in it any longer. I am currently five years in to a seven-year part time PhD.
I am supposed to be collecting field data for a write-up but I have not done any work for a year. The last serious work I did was around October 2020, but over the last 12/13 months I have handed in hardly anything to my supervisor. She has been very understanding [though sometimes growing impatient, understandably]. The thought of doing any fieldwork or collecting any field data seems crushingly dull. I schedule appointments with people then make excuses not to turn up. People write to me and I don't reply. I don't want to read any academic texts. I have grown terribly cynical about academia in general and see it as self-servient, incestuous nepotism.
I would like to finish the degree, but I have two years left and nothing about the degree makes me want to continue with the data collection process. Should I quit? Should I carry on? Should I explain my feelings to my supervisors [probably a bad idea]? I don't really know what the right thing to do is. Maybe I should soldier through and just hope for the best. Any advice would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: There is an alternate explanation than burnout. Burnout mostly happens when you work too intensely for too long. Let me suggest that the work you hate doing is indeed *boring*. And you may be a person, like myself, who really hates being bored.
Let me also suggest that you find a way to get on with it so that you can get past the boring stuff. One way to do it is to intersperse it with things that are more interesting. Spend a few hours (or days, if necessary, depending on the work) with the fieldwork and then a few hours (or whatever) on something that is more interesting.
If you work too intensely on the boring stuff you may actually get burned out.
"Something more interesting" might be planning and background work on the next project you like to undertake. Your advisor might be able to suggest a few possibilities, but you may also have a cache of ideas that you haven't been able to follow up on that you might start thinking about. It might be a side project that helps your career, even if it doesn't contribute directly to your dissertation.
Maybe it's just physical exercise. I used serious but non-competitive biking (fast club rides) during my doctorate to help keep my head clear.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I am really not that interested and the whole thing seems so daunting.
>
>
>
This is what you wrote [two and a half years ago](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131936). I am sorry to hear that things have not improved. I can guess that there are many factors that led to this, some of them external - but still, after stagnating for 2.5 years, it may be time to make some changes.
>
> Should I quit?
>
>
>
It kind of seems like you already have. You haven't done any work in over a year, and even before that, it seems like there were some periods of inactivity.
>
> My degree is costing a lot of money
>
>
>
Eek! I guess this explains why your supervisor is putting up with this -- so long as she is not paying you, it really doesn't matter to her whether you make progress or not. If you are in a place where you can easily afford this, fine, I guess. But if you are going into debt, as many grad students are, I would urge you to consider all your options.
>
> Should I quit? Should I carry on?
>
>
>
Only you can decide this. But, I certainly do urge you to make changes one way or the other. I recommend two things.
First, decide whether you still *want* the degree. Discount the time already spent, and calculate whether the remaining time, effort, and money is a reasonable cost for the degree.
* You've made some comments about hating academia. Further, it sounds like you might be in a field where non-academic jobs are not really a thing. From that perspective, finishing the degree seems like an expensive exercise in futility.
* But perhaps there are other days when you like academia and/or you think you have a realistic path to a job that will use your PhD. In this case, finishing the degree could make more sense.
But it is time to decide one way or the other; clearly, your strategy of moving forward and hoping things become clear on their own has not worked out.
Second, if you decide that you want the degree, come up with a realistic plan for getting your degree, and map this plan to a schedule so you know what you need to accomplish in each quarter between now and graduation. Meet with your supervisor and get her buy-in on this plan.
* Hopefully, getting this plan written down will let you break your logjam.
* But it's also possible that trying to make this plan will reveal that there's no realistic path to graduation. Or, it could be that you commit to a plan but the deadlines come and go without progress.
Either way, the right option should become clearer.
>
> Should I explain my feelings to my supervisors [probably a bad idea]?
>
>
>
"Explaining your feelings" might not be necessary / advisable, but I do advise trying to reset this relationship. Frankly, she has probably already assumed that you are going to leave the program. It might not be necessary to formally broach this at all; if you show up for a meeting with a ton of progress and sharp questions (and the "plan" I mentioned above, for her review), she will figure out that you have recommitted yourself. Or, if you want to get her opinion on your prospects and options, you could do that too. But I would try to keep things fairly technical and fact-based (e.g., words like "options" or "opportunities" or "alternative directions") and avoid being overly emotional (e.g., words like "boring" or "overwhelmed" or "cynical").
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Far more than most people realize, mental health, which includes the will to live and to pursue one's goals, is related to physical, social, and spiritual well-being. As the latter two of these are more personal matters, which I invite you to consider as a part of the whole, I will focus my suggestions more on the first of them.
**PHYSICAL HEALTH TIPS**
Depression, boredom, and malaise all have some similarities, and the following tips can help to overcome them. The relative importance of each one will differ among individuals, depending on their strengths and weaknesses.
**Rest:** Get on an "early-to-bed, early-to-rise" schedule. One hour of sleep before midnight is worth two afterward. This is because hormones that regulate metabolism are principally produced between the hours of about 9 p.m. and 11 p.m., and only when one is asleep and the lights are off.
It may take some time to adjust to a new sleeping schedule. Do not be quick to give up trying. You may find it easier to sleep at the correct time if you have not taken naps during the day. Naturally, it helps greatly to switch off your internet-connected devices at sleep time, lest they keep you awake.
**Exercise:** Regular exercise is hugely important. It regulates one's metabolism, moderates the appetite, helps to cleanse toxins from the body, releases and consumes the "stress" hormones (norepinephrine/adrenaline), and improves one's ability to rest well at night. There is no substitute for taking a long walk in the cool of the day and having some time for reflection along with it.
**Nutrition:** Certain vitamins and minerals are especially important for the health of the nervous system. When one is "burned out," it is often that the brain and nerves are weakened by strain and need some rejuvenation. B-vitamins are near the top of the list, with vitamin B12 being especially valuable. If you choose to find B12 supplements, look for methylcobalamin (the most common form is cyanocobalamin, but this is virtually useless, studies having shown 98% of it is eliminated from the body within 24 hours). It is not possible to overdose on B12.
Healthful fats, including linolenic acid and linoleic acid, are important for good nerve function. The myelin cells that form a sheath surrounding nerve axons are fatty cells. Olive oil, being less processed and more natural, is one of the best sources of oil.
**Detoxification:** Toxins in the body can hinder normal function and bring on depression or malaise. Avoid them as much as possible, including cigarette smoke, alcohol, mercury (Hg) or its vapors or amalgams (dental fillings), lead (Pb), etc. If you feel this may be a significant source of trouble in your case, a certified toxicologist should be able to assess your body's toxic burden and help develop a plan of therapy to remove the toxins.
Avoid caffeine. Caffeine increases the stress in one's system. It increases blood pressure and heart rate and opens the lungs, making one feel more alert and awake--but at the same time causing the body to function in a sort of "emergency mode" in which energy is borrowed from the future to meet present needs. When the addictive drug is gone, one's energy levels drop below normal. Caffeine is a common ingredient of beverages, including coffee, tea, energy drinks, and many sodas (e.g. Coke and Pepsi).
**Sunshine:** Sunlight helps the body form vitamin D which is an important hormone with respect to emotional and metabolic health. It is especially important in combating depression. Along with exercise, getting some sun serves to relax the body and induce sleepiness, making one's sleep at night more refreshing.
**Water:** Everyone knows the importance of water, but few realize how important it is to the brain. At night, when brain cells are less active, they shrink slightly in size, which opens a larger channel between them for the flow of fluids which removes the waste byproducts from their day's activity. Drinking plenty of water helps to cleanse these toxins from the brain, especially at night during sleep. Personally, I have found that a good glass of water before going to bed is worth an hour's sleep, even if it causes me to get up during the night.
**Socio-emotional Health:** It is important to one's own well-being to feel like a useful, valued part of society. This need cannot be met through self-centric activities; it can only be filled through focusing away from oneself to the needs of others. Find someone to help, someone whom you are able to assist. Whether or not you are thanked, you know that you have done something good and it will boost your own sense of self-worth--but hearing the appreciation for your efforts will really improve your morale.
**RECOMMENDATIONS**
Unless you know that this time of year is critical to some particular data-collection process in which you are engaged, I would suggest you take anywhere from a week to three weeks as a mini sabbatical during which you focus on your own well-being, in agreement with some or all of the suggestions made above. Give your mind a rest; it will be able to accomplish much, much more when it is refreshed. During this break period, make sure you have some time to reflect--away from the internet, social media, or other distractions.
Once you have had opportunity to put your mind back on track and to reflect on your goals for the future, I think you will be in a better frame of mind to tackle the final steps for finishing your degree. You already sense the wastefulness of all your past efforts if you end up short of your goal. The very fact that you presently seem to have lost your focus is indicative of just how strenuous those past efforts were. Don't let them be for nothing!
You can do it! After a bit of rest, buckle down and finish your work. You will be very glad that you did. Make it a goal to finish *early*. Once it's behind you, then you can go on to more pleasant things.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/10
| 3,649
| 15,845
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am trying to self-study a graduate-level physics book that was recommended to me, but it doesn't have any exercises. Also, it's a specific enough topic to where I can't really find any other textbooks that cover all of the same topics. What are some good ways to learn this book besides just reading it?
Update: [this](http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-1-4939-9084-9) is the book. I do have some colleagues in condensed matter generally, but none in this specific field.<issue_comment>username_1: Invent your own exercises sparked by what you've read, then try to solve them. When you read something, try to ask yourself what it's good for. What can you do with this that you wouldn't be able to do before? Can you demonstrate it? I'm not a chemist so I can't answer in your domain but if it were in mine in computer science and I was perhaps reading about a new algorithm, I might try to code it and see if I could make it work.
Think of it as if you were going teach this material in a class where you can't just assign problems out of the book, you need to create projects and write your own exam questions. You would just dive in and do your best to create some interesting problems.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: (I'm in mathematics...) My advice is to not think in terms of "exercises", in the traditional sense of posing some sort of "challenge" which can allegedly be "responded to" using the ideas of the preceding chapter. :)
Rather, I strongly think that it's better to think in terms of "examples" ... of the phenomena discussed, not only in the "chapter" or other body of material at hand, but also phenomena that may not fit exactly into a limited range that is perfectly addressed by just one particular method/idea.
In my own little world, I've often found it extremely illuminating to try to conceive of the simplest-possible version of a general issue, on the principle that if a "trivial" (in math-style talk) version is not solvable or comprehensible, the fancier versions are ridiculously out-of-reach. Further, in the kind of math I do, there are often no alternative understandings for relatively fancy things, so it's hard to do sanity checks... while for "trivial" (math-talk, again) examples, there can be alternative viewpoints that do provide sanity checks.
And, from a teaching viewpoint, beyond a certain point it's really hard to compose exercises that are do-able without considerable run-up beyond "theory". That is, again, examples.
And, seriously, the intellectual model that exercises "are a thing" is a bit odd. :)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I've found that writing up detailed notes on a topic I've been reading about is invaluable for exposing what I do and do not understand about a topic. It also sometimes has the side benefit of letting me come back to something more quickly after I've been away from it.
For this to work, these must be *topic* notes, using your own organization of the topic informed by what you read, *not* notes on a particular item you're reading. If you find that the organization of your notes directly parallels that of a book or paper, you're not doing it right and will likely come out little better than if you'd just taken a highlighter to the document you were reading.
(Another warning sign may be being able to write the notes very quickly for a topic, unless you already feel qualified to teach that topic. For complex topics that are new to me I typically spend at least twice as long writing and reworking the notes as I do reading the source material. This time may include devising and performing small experiments or simulations to help me confirm that certain things I've written down are correct.)
It's of course hard to give concrete advice on how to build an organizational structure for your notes; doing this is similar to sketching an outline for a textbook. (That this is difficult is exactly why the technique works.) If you're having difficulty getting away from the organization imposed by the particular document you're reading, it may help to find a couple of other documents that have at least some coverage of the same area, sketch out the organization of all three (or more), and then combine and change those until you come up with a new organization for your own notes that subsumes all the information from all three documents. What you should eventually find is that, despite coming from different sections of the source documents, these separate but related pieces of information end up together, illuminating each other, in your notes.
I certainly don't have any examples from chemistry, and it's hard to say how well examples from other fields will work for you given that they have to be fairly technical and moderately deep in order to actually to demonstrate the process. But in case it helps, you can have a look at [my notes on analogue video](https://github.com/0cjs/sedoc/blob/74f1871035349d84a92158824d8f844cbc15ffff/8bit/video.md) as an example. The information here comes from at least twenty different sources and most or all of the sources from which deep details came were specific to a particular video format (NTSC, PAL, RGB, etc.). I had to identify the "high-level" commonalities between all of these and then come up with new sections for each of these, integrating the information from various parts of the source documents.
For example, all the video formats have logically separate display and synchronization information, and the synchronization signals are always logically separate horizontal and vertical signals. However, some formats transfer horizontal and vertical sync over separate wires, others combine the two, and the sources for the latter often discuss the combined version as just the "sync" signal, without really going much (if at all) into the logical separation between the two. In my organization I have separate sections for horizontal and vertical sync containing *all* information I have about each (whether the information came from a separate sync or combined sync source), and yet another section describing how the two are combined (and any implications of that).
I don't know how much that helps, but perhaps you can at least take away the idea that taking apart source information and putting it back together in a different way is the key to this technique.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Setting your own exercise (as already mentioned) is a good method.
Also consider more generally the Feynman technique:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feynman_Technique>
In order to truly master a topic, you need to be able to teach it. So try and produce your own teaching materials, such as a summary, a diagram, an exercise, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: One question would be what level of a student are you, and why are you reading this particular book? Based on an earlier question you've asked, you appear to be an experienced undergraduate or a beginning graduate student. So, what are you expecting/expected to learn from it? Further, how are you accustomed to learning?
Since the book does not provide exercises, I can well believe that the book is not a textbook, but rather a monograph ("a detailed written study of a single specialized subject or an aspect of it"). Not surprisingly, one uses a monograph differently from a textbook, and undergraduates rarely encounter monographs as a learning tool. So, you are correct to wonder just how to deal with it.
I would argue that monographs are written for researchers and are approached very differently than an undergraduate would approach a textbook. For an undergraduate class, the textbook is, in essence, the stuff you need to learn, and then demonstrate on an exam, and is written (mostly) by experts in how to teach the material to undergraduates. The exercises are the practice to help you learn the material and learn how to do the questions that will be on the test.
By contrast, the monograph is a whole bunch of detailed information presented by an expert in the field to present it all in one place to somebody new to the field but interested in becoming expert. There is no expectation that, by reading the book through once, you are suddenly an expert. There is no exam at the end of the ‘class’. Instead, the monograph is useful in several different ways, some of which only emerge over time.
So, how do I generally approach a monograph? Remember, I’m not an expert (yet), but am interested in the subject matter, likely because I see a need to understand it for my own research path. Maybe I will end up diving really deep, maybe not. First step is to look over the organization of the book – what does it actually cover, what order does it go in, are there technical (journal) references readily available in the text or as end notes. This step is to evaluate the relevance, and sometimes I don’t proceed from there. Now, in your case, the book was recommended to you, and if by your advisor the ‘recommendation’ is more than a suggestion.
Next, I read the first chapter. Often this is an overview of what the monograph covers, and I may have already skimmed it in my first step. But this is the time to pay a bit more attention. Is there jargon I don’t know, is the point of the monograph detailed, is the subject of the monograph placed in context of the field?
Assuming the first chapter is an overview, it is time to start into the meat of the monograph. But, I’m not reading for all the gory detail, but I’m also not just skimming it. What does the chapter cover, do I get the general idea, am I totally stumped? If totally stumped, then it is time to put the book down and go find a textbook with more basic stuff in it to review. If I’m getting the general idea, great, but may still choose to skip over more detailed parts for now. If that chapter goes well, I continue onward as long as things seem OK and interesting.
At the end of reading, I am not an expert. I do now know the areas that the monograph covers, and where in the book they are covered. Maybe I’ve looked up a few of the papers in the references. Maybe a section or two has really caught my eye as being directly applicable, and those I’ve probably read more carefully already. Am I done now? Perhaps, but it is time to evaluate what the next steps are, based on why I’m reading the book in the first place. Do I need to read more background material? Do I want to go and talk with somebody to clarify something? Did something really catch my eye? Evaluate where you are and what to do next.
Sometimes the book goes on my shelf and is not touched again. Sometimes it migrates to my desk since I keep referring to a specific section in it. Sometimes it gets pulled down a read through again, more thoroughly. It all depends on what your specific need is for the information.
This is, in the end, not all that different from how I approach journal articles. Something catches my eye and I download it. I’ll skim the abstract and the intro, glance at the experimental section and the figures, skim the final section. Often that is all and the paper gets filed away in case I need more info. Sometimes it gets read more carefully, sometimes I look up some references, sometimes I discard the paper.
Ultimately, as you transition to graduate work and research, you start learning differently. You start evaluating for yourself what you need to know, and how deeply. Frankly, it starts being a lot more fun. Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Many textbooks come with examples of implementations of the concepts covered, for example a dynamics textbook will likely show a step by step derivation of the dynamics of a double pendulum. My suggestion is to try and follow those steps and replicate the examples on whatever platform is suitable (for dynamics you could use matlab, mathematica or python, or even pen and paper!)
You can then check your output against what the textbook shows and see if it matches.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Once, I took a graduate-level physics course, in which the book had no exercises, and literally what the professor did was to stand at the front of the room and read the book to us. To this day I'm unsure why I went to class (he wasn't interested enough to take attendance). There were just mid-term and final exams to determine our grade (I forget whether I got an A or B).
What I found really helpful was, after learning a chapter, to go back and start at the beginning. Usually, you understand the beginning of the chapter very differently after you have learned the whole thing.
Also, as others mentioned, it's very helpful to make notes that summarize the topics in a way different from how the book organizes them. Though, in a pinch, even summarizing the way the book organizes it has value. If you're interested in remembering it, *writing* your notes works better than typing them. (I later took graduate courses in Science Education that explained why.) By all means, feel free to type them after writing them; that's probably even better than just writing.
Here's an interesting idea: once you've studied (not just read) a chapter, look at the Wikipedia entry for that topic, and see if there's some way you can improve it. That's maybe a more modern version of the Feynman method. Even if you can't improve it, looking for a way to improve it is a good exercise.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Make your own exercises. Your physics textbook doesn't have them, but it probably has examples? Exercises is just more examples. Change some or all of the parameters, do the math.
A physics book may have one example of a ball rolling down an inclined plane. To make an exercise, change the angle and height of the plane. Consider a ball of different weight, consider doing this on the moon where the gravity is weaker. If the physics is advanced enough to include friction/drag, then change the friction coefficient too. Find out how long time various balls takes to roll down different planes.
Similar for all other problems. They provide one example, your exercise is to work out examples with different numbers. If the book doesn't give examples at all, make your own. Make up problems so you get to use each and every formula a few times.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: I'm confused. You read the book. You try to understand what is written. You look at the new material and find analogies to what you already know and make note of what is new.
I must say that I nearly never did any exercises that were not assigned (in either undergrad or graduate school, both in Chemical Engineering). Relying on examples and exercises is really not how I learn. I respect that we have different learning styles, but reading and understanding is key to formulating the view you you end up having of a subject. It's the same whether you are reading a book or reading a paper.
I once took an entire graduate class that included exactly two examples in class; and the second one started with the prof saying "Consider a system in N-Space". It was a class on State Space Control Systems (from the department of Electrical Engineering - *hint to others*: never take a graduate level Electrical Engineering class without ever having taken any other Electrical Engineering classes before). I was *very* proud of that B.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_10: When I was in grad school, we would be so happy when the professor assigned a Dover book as the class text. Dover sells prints of older textbooks that have fallen out of copyright and so cost about $20 a pop.
It's never bad to have different authors' take on the subject, especially when it comes to graduate level topics.
Looking at their selection, it looks like the Goodstein book might be a good choice.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/11
| 3,561
| 15,436
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm legitimately looking for advice and to try to take control of my life and my job prospects post-graduation, but also feel that I can't portray the challenge of my situation honestly without recognizing that my supervisor really does carry quite a lot of blame here.
If it helps, she is pretty universally recognized as terrible at her job at this point: Everyone I have ever known who has worked with her has had challenges, with several of her former students straight up refusing to work with her ever again, and the chair of my department disclosed to me when I spoke to him about my concerns that she received a zero on her last performance evaluation.
Anyway, I am currently nearing the end of my PhD degree (criminology) and am worried about how a poor history of publishing and working with my supervisor will reflect on me when I look for work after completion.
In short, I have had a very, very challenging time working with my supervisor, who has been extremely negligent throughout the course of my degree and to an extent that I didn't fully grasp the scope of until it was too late for me to change supervisors.
Among other ways in which she's impacted my degree progress, she spent years promising me a data set that she never delivered on (forcing me to completely redesign my study five years into my degree) and waited 18 months on signing paperwork that would see me paid for a policy report I wrote with her, only for that report to never be published.
In nearly every meeting I have tried to have with her, she has made clear to me that she is too overworked and/or in too much emotional distress (she is currently going through a nasty divorce) to have time for me right now, and can I please check in with her later. I won't go on - but it's been quite a lot of this, for several years now.
My department is aware of these issues with my supervisor, but they haven't been able (or, probably, willing) to do much to help me, beyond assisting me in restructuring my committee. I have managed to restructure my research to the point where completing my degree finally feels like a possibility, although my dissertation is pretty bad.
What I am concerned about now is the extent to which my poor experience with my supervisor will impact me while I'm looking for work. I don't have a lot to show for the work I've done with her, as she did not take the necessary steps to see many of our projects through to completion. Combined with the fact that I'll be producing a poor dissertation I don't feel confident publishing, I am worried that this entire experience will give me a fairly worthless PhD degree that I can't sufficiently back up with the skills and experience that I should have earned while in my graduate program.
The truth is, though - I do actually feel that I am a very competent researcher and teacher. I have a lot of experience working independently and "figuring things out on my own" (grant writing, web design, reference management software, statistics software, etc.) due to her negligence. I just worry about not having the output to back any of my claims to be good at these things up when I'm interviewing.
Is it at all acceptable to bring up a bad relationship with a supervisor in a job interview? How much can I expect this to reasonably impact me while job searching, and What are the best ways to compensate for this and sell myself for my abilities? I'm prioritizing work in industry (research and policy-related) over academia, if that changes any answers at all (this experience has burnt me out too much).<issue_comment>username_1: Blaming others is rarely a positive strategy, and it is usually not a good idea for student to criticize their supervisor, or for that matter for supervisors to criticize their students.
The general opinion (at least in physics academia) is that good people find a way to do good work. Possibly the work is not as well received, or as prolific at it could have been, but as a PhD graduate you’re supposed to have demonstrated some research independence. Thus I would stay away from pointing fingers, and instead focus on the quality of your work, how you could improve or expand it if you had greater access to data or resources, and how other future projects that could be realized in a different (and presumably better) environment.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: When you go for a job interview, they don't really care about your past achievements. They are really trying to judge what you are capable of achieving in the future.
You will be asked about previous work, but your results are less important than demonstrating the skills that will be necessary for the job. They will probably prefer to hear that you had to work independently, rather than being spoon-feed by a supervisor.
An interviewer may ask about how you dealt with problems. They want to hear that you showed initiative and perseverance, and didn't just give up or wait for someone else to solve it. You can also talk about what you should have done, with the benefit of hindsight.
You may also be asked questions that sound like direct criticism. If so, they do want to hear the reasons why, but they also want to discover how you handle criticism. Don't be defensive and blame everything on other people, talk about what you've learnt and what you'd do differently next time.
With a bit of preparation, you should be able to portray yourself as a stronger candidate because of your experience of adversity.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To put it short, removing the elephant in the room, you think you are a good researcher and teacher, you learned all the tools to do research, but your research is not good enough?
You are on very solid ground, unfortunately the project(s) you were following did not go anywhere. But you can always present proof of the work done, you can say (and write in your CV) that you wrote that policy report: it is not published, but clearly it is under final internal review just before submission, or at least this is the stage you left it.
But there is one thing that you can work on, and it transpires from your question, you are worried somehow to be judged. Unfortunately, this is a reflection of your feelings towards your advisor, where you think that there is **a lot** to be judged (and acording to the background you describe you are right, unfortunately) but stop it from dominating your thought.
For example, you say you do not feel confident about publishing your results. Clearly, low-impact results will not land you a publication in an high-impact journal, but the results are only 10% of science. 90% of science is how you got to the results, and that's where you can prove yourself.
Think about this: if the research is good/interesting, it will be read independently from your marketing or the evaluation on your person (horrible advisors and horrible academic got plenty of citations ... independently from their moral status). If your publication is "bad"/uninteresting, it will not be read. The peer reviewer will not judge you, future reader of the published publication will not judge you. The publication will be simply ignored.
But you can still prove you published some research, and you can prove you did all you could do to make it correctly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As an opening observation, while it is a great shame to have had a poor experience with your supervisor, and the lack of progress that this entails, at the end of the day, it is only 3-5 years of your life and career, and you can certainly recover from that. So I would start by looking at this as a situation where you had a setback, but that is just a small part of what is hopefully a long career.
As to how to approach this in a job interview, you are right to seek assistance because it is something that is fraught with danger. On the one hand, it is certainly acceptable to disclose setbacks and difficulties that you have overcome. However, your interview panel will not be in a position to assess whether your diagnosis of your former supervisor is accurate, so it raises the "red flag" of a person who assigns blame to their previous supervisor in circumstances where it is unclear whether that blame is warranted. Irrespective of whether you decide to raise this issue, in the circumstances you have outlined, I would *strongly recommend* that you seek a written reference from the chair of your department, particularly since this person can attest to the fact that your supervisor did not assist you properly during your candidature. You should also consider listing the chair as a reference in your application. This will allow the interview panel to hear about your circumstances from a senior academic in your field, who can attest to the difficulties you have overcome.
Furthermore, if you choose to raise this issue at all, I would refrain from giving any long or detailed explanation of the circumstances. Even your exposition in this question is TL;DR --- most people will gloss over it and just understand that you had difficulties with your supervisor. An interview panel will not be able to assess the merits of your viewpoint, so you are better off just saying in general terms that you had some delays and difficulties in your PhD candidature and you exhibited the perseverance to overcome them (and get the chair of your department to act as a reference to back this up). In terms of compensating for this, it generally helps if you are able to exhibit a sympathetic view of your supervisor, notwithstanding your difficulties. This might entail recognition of the difficulties and competing priorities that your supervisor was acting under, and showing an understanding that you were just one of many job-tasks that your supervisor had to deal with. If you can demonstrate that you are sympathetic and thankful to your supervisor, notwithstanding her deficiencies, it will go a long way towards showing that you are the kind of person who can understand the challenges that your managers will face in assisting you during your career, in circumstances where they have a number of roles and tasks.
Finally, notwithstanding that you had a bad time with your supervisor, I recommend that you try to adopt a gracious and positive attitude towards her for whatever work she undertook in supervising you. Professional academic jobs can be difficult, and not everyone is good at their job, but people generally try their best. Thank your supervisor for the time she devoted to your candidature even if she made a mess of it. If she is receiving bad performance reviews (as you say in your question) then she is probably under a lot of stress, and some thanks for her effort (even if the results were poor) may go a long way to helping her cope with difficulties in her career. And who knows, you might be a struggling academic yourself one day, and you might also want that kind of charitable attitude from your own students!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Your best bet, when moving from academia to industry, is to demonstrate transferable skills. No one (outside of academia) really gives a toss about how many publications have your name on it.
Whining about your supervisor won't impress any recruiters (no matter how justified your grievances may well be!). Everyone has to deal with rubbish bosses/colleagues from time to time.
What you need to do is (without sounding bitter/nasty) highlight how you managed to deal with a challenging situation: how you developed greater autonomy, how you adapted your strategy to changing circumstances, how you had to think out of the box to find extra resources, etc.
Make sure you play the ball, not the player. Be factual about the challenges you faced, without rubbishing your supervisor as a person. Be magnanimous, and focus on the positives, e.g. how you did manage to finish your PhD in the end.
Good luck, and don't look back. Focus on where you want to go from where you are.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The strategy for getting back on track will depend on whether you are going for a job in industry or academia. You say at the end:
>
> I'm prioritizing work in industry (research and policy-related) over academia, if that changes any answers at all (this experience has burnt me out too much).
>
>
>
This implies to me that your goal *was* academia, but you are now thinking about industry mostly because of this bad experience. You should at least try to look for academic jobs, and not assume that you wouldn't be competitive. This also probably varies from field to field, but I would not necessarily assume that industry is a better place to be if you are feeling burned out! If you're feeling burned out, concentrate on getting yourself in a good place to apply for jobs, regardless of which path you take.
The best thing you can do for any job is document your experience and accomplishments. If you have experience teaching, make sure to put together a teaching portfolio for possible academic applications. Line up references. If your chair or department helped restructure your committee, make sure that you get letters of recommendation from your other committee members. If you learned particular methods make sure that you can talk about them intelligently and talk about how you applied them in your dissertation. This is concrete evidence of your capability. I didn't publish a chapter from my dissertation until a couple of years after completing my PhD, but I was still able to talk about the methods and research in job interviews.
Applying to Industry Jobs
-------------------------
Getting back on track for an industry job *probably* will not be as difficult as you think. In most industries, having the credential and strong references is the most important thing. (Obviously, the credential implies specific knowledge and training.) Having publications is probably helpful, but you can also say (and intend) to prepare chapters for publication.
Applying to Academic Jobs
-------------------------
If you intend to apply for academic jobs, there are still a few things you can do.
1. Even if you have no publications *yet*, that doesn't mean you never will. Start trying to turn your dissertation into journal articles. Put these anticipated articles on your CV as "in preparation".
2. You say you have gotten good at grant writing. Does this mean you have grant awards? This goes on your CV. A history of grant awards is well-regarded.
3. You have experience teaching. Apply to teaching positions. You will have the resources of a university, can continue to network, and work on getting new research underway while you work on #1 (getting your old research in publishable form).
4. As already mentioned, get letters of recommendation from your committee members other than the problematic supervisor.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I work in industry. Our recruiters often instruct candidates to use the STAR approach to answer behavior questions. For example:
* **S**ituation: Did research on criminology. Did not get the promised dataset.
* **T**ask: analyze [Hannibal Lecter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silence_of_the_Lambs_(film))'s behavior.
* **A**ction: collected different data to unblock yourself; met Hannibal in prison.
* **R**esult: publish papers.
Just state facts, don't blame anyone.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/11
| 546
| 2,332
|
<issue_start>username_0: I just submitted my doctoral thesis yesterday. I finished my project two years ago and published it in a high level journal. My supervisor asked me to give the co-first author position to a postdoc, although there isn't any input from her. After a long time of struggeling, I agreed, because otherwise she will not support me in getting my degree smoothly and will refuse to write a recommendation letter for postdoc applications. After that, she still asked me to do many experiments. These experiments are for her funding, for other colleagues, and all not related to my project. She took four months to finish proofreading my thesis. Actual working time on it is not more than 24h. Now she asked me to come back for experiment after I start my postdoc training, otherwise she will not support me in the future if I want to find a scientist job.
She said she would not write me a reference letter if I didn't come back. Now I am leaving for postdoc training. So I want to know how important the letter is for a job seeking? Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, a letter from your supervisor can be very important until you land a permanent position, say as junior faculty. But if you have a sufficiently rich CV then it matter less.
But, I think you are clearly being abused. The steps you take should be "away" from this person. Alternatively they need to be stopped from this sort of unprofessional behavior. And, unfortunately, you probably aren't in a position to make that happen without hurting your own future. Pretty much everything you describe is misconduct.
If she is funding you at the moment, however, she may be right in asking you to do some things unrelated to your project since they won't interfere with it now. Such things could be benign, and even advantageous, if they weren't accompanied by coercion and threats against your career.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I want to know how important the letter is for a job seeking? Any advice?
>
>
>
**No**, a letter from your supervisor is **not** essential in most normal circumstances to get academic jobs. You do need good letters from senior academics. But getting a job depends on many factors, and having your supervisor as a reference is only a tiny one, and hardly an essential one, if at all.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/11
| 295
| 1,310
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering if postdoctoral positions come with unemployment insurance. I specifically want to know about this in UK and Canada. I know research positions in Germany for instance benefit from public service rules. Therefore, one can claim insurance in Germany after postdoc contracts end.
More specifically,
1. does EPSRC-funded projects in the UK include unemployment insurance?
2. does Mitacs-funded projects in Canada include unemployment insurance?<issue_comment>username_1: A UK postdoc does not come with any dedicated 'unemployment insurance'. However, a postdoc who has reached the end of their contract would (unless otherwise ineligible) be able to claim [government unemployment benefits](https://www.gov.uk/browse/benefits/looking-for-work).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For the UK, your visa is connected to your contract. Once the contract ends, you must leave the country (unless you have found another contract and obtained another visa). If you legally stay in the UK long enough through a series of contracts to get residency/citizenship then you would be eligible for benefits like anyone else. There is no real concept of 'unemployment insurance' because your unemployment benefits are not associated with your employer in the first place.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/11
| 550
| 2,394
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student and I'm collaborating in a project with a more experienced researcher. This is the first time I collaborate with anyone, so I'm new to this. Recently, in the subject we are investigating, there were two related things to be studied. I started one and he started doing the other (we didn't actually agreed to split, it happened naturally).
In our recent meetings he mentioned that although he nailed down what specific thing must be calculated, he's struggling to find the time to do so. Now, since he is much more busy than I am, I considered offering to help with this and carry out this specific computation. Still, I'm afraid if this could be discourteous in some way.
So, when we are collaborating with someone in a specific project, and there's something the other person is doing and that person is not having the time to finish some lengthy/tedious step right now, is it fine to offer to help with it?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can help in any way you can. It would seem very odd to me if there were a field or situation in which this would not be proper.
Of course, if you are taking a course and have been assigned specific tasks by a professor it would be different, but you don't suggest that is the case.
It is the nature of collaboration to work together on a project.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Offering is indeed fine. However, one thing to avoid is having it come off as an attempt to "steal" someone else's project/glory. If the collaborator is another graduate student, this was their first/only shot at a first-author paper, and you take over enough calculations to switch the balance of contributions, they might well get upset. But if you're already the intended lead author, the calculation is a smaller part of the paper, or (as in your case) the collaborator is a more experienced researcher, this should be less of a worry. All in all, having an idea about the collaborator's goals helps in knowing how to approach them and phrase the question.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: One very important point is that "*he nailed down what specific thing must be calculated*". This implies that he has already made a key contribution, and if so then there is no problem with helping him with other things like calculations, as any key contributor already deserves authorship.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/11
| 530
| 2,412
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to apply for a postdoc position in the US. Application requirements include a cover letter and research statement.
I am not a native English speaker and in my department, unfortunately, there is no natives. My question is whether (i) it would be useful/necessary to have both texts checked by a professional copy-editor for grammatical correctness, or (ii) whether I should send them uncorrected.
I understand that '(i)' would facilitate the understanding of the texts. However, '(ii)' would more honestly reflect my level of written English communication.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no reason that you shouldn't have someone else give you advice. But hiring a proof reader might not be necessary. Your advisor can give you advice on content, which is more important, and they or another faculty member might give you advice on the language issues. Your advisor might even give you advice on the question you ask here. If such things are common where you are it is probably harmless.
You need to be able to communicate effectively in the job environment, of course, and will probably have to undergo an interview.
You want your application to be clear and understandable. The worse your writing, the harder it will be for you to break through. Your writing here seems fine, actually, though it is pretty short. Keep it pretty formal, which might be harder or easier, depending on how you learned English.
And, Spanish is the second most used language in the US.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, you should not let someone edit your letter. As you said yourself, it "would more honestly reflect my level of written English communication." It is OK that you polish your English publications because you need to explain your research process and conclusions as clear as possible, you present your work in public. But the goal of a cover letter is to introduce yourself, your experience, your goals, why you want to apply for this position. It is about you as a person and researcher, and an editor will remove your individuality, I think so.
If you want to check some grammar moments, spelling, for example, you can install the Grammarly extension to your browser - most of its functions are free. Even if you make some little mistakes, an admission officer knows that you are not a native speaker, so it will be OK.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/12
| 1,357
| 5,757
|
<issue_start>username_0: I remember that I had a course in college called "Integration Project" and we had to do surveys, I went to the local mall to do surveys to people, everything fine. Then I discovered that my other team members were falsifying the survey responses because of lack of time.
The results of the survey wont be published in journals or a thesis, etc. It is was just for the course.
I know that data falsification in thesis or master's degree are really really bad, but how about in simple college courses?<issue_comment>username_1: It is rarely a good idea to bring legal **analogies**, but I consider this to be one of those rare cases. Notice, I am in no way implying any **particular** legal connection of falsifying data to particular crimes.
---
Let's consider a typical US criminal law, and take Connecticut as an example. [Connecticut's laws define various crimes](https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/criminal-defense/felony-offense/connecticut-felony-class.htm) which can be of different classes (A–D, unclassified). Class A crimes constitute the more serious types of crimes and carry longer sentences and large fines, while Class D crimes are the least serious kind. For example, Class A felonies can lead to a life sentence, while Class D felonies can lead to a small fine. However, **no matter what class** does the crime belongs, **it is still a crime**.
Similarly, **data should never be falsified**. However, the seriousness of the offense and the consequences (in case, it is discovered) would differ. The impact and, maybe even more importantly, *mens rea* (guilty mind) of the falsification from a first-year B.Sc. student is different from an established researcher.
Moreover, one could argue that more serious crimes usually originate from less serious ones (discovered or undiscovered); therefore, it is extremely important to have students educated about the Code of Honor and the importance of research\educational integrity as early as possible.
To summarize, falsification of data is always really-really bad. The severity of the consequences might vary. But, as it is with **any** criminal record, it makes it very hard to overcome this event in the future, potentially closing some roads forever. And even if not caught, this might lead a student onto a dangerous road, and I would strongly advise against it, no matter how much immediate benefits such data falsification might offer in a moment.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: ### What's the purpose of the assignment?
If we're talking about an undergraduate course, I think that it would come back around to the purpose of the assignment. What is the purpose of the assignment? Often, assignments are meant to teach as well as to assess; if this assignment had your team performing interviews with random people (presumably after the professor got IRB approval for that particular piece of assessment), then you have to ask yourself why the professor was intending for you to do so. Was teaching surveying and interview skills the primary part of the assessment, or was it a secondary part, with the primary thrust of the assessment based around your analysis of the data you gathered?
Assuming that my university's academic dishonesty policy didn't have explicit instructions on how to handle this (in which case I would, of course, follow them), then I think that my response as an instructor would vary depending on the purpose of the assignment. If the primary purpose of the assignment was to teach and/or assess the students' interview or survey skills, they'd just get a flat 0 for the assignment, because they haven't done any actual surveying. If the surveying was just a secondary part of the assignment, I'd give them a 0 for the part of the assignment that involved the survey - and I'd probably rethink including a survey section on that assignment when I ran the unit again the next year, and would likely just give the students data to analyze.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: In the context of an assignment for academic coursework, it is likely that data falsification would constitute a breach of the rules of the assignment and so it would be regarded as a species of academic dishonesty in the coursework, similar to cheating on an exam. Since the work is not published this would be considered a much less severe instance of academic dishonesty than falsifiying data in an actual study. Nevertheless, it is not good practice for students to get into the habit of cutting-corners and dishonesty in the context of coursework.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Fabricating data would be clear academic misconduct in *any* college course and if brought to the instructor's or school's attention, would normally result in penalties. At Michigan, for example, a typical penalty for misconduct would be a zero on the assignment and a 1/3 letter grade deduction on their final grade. If the assignment was a major part of the grade, it was an instant fail. If the misconduct wasn't discovered or didn't happen until they'd already received a final grade, the usual penalty was community service.
The question for you is whether to report it. Michigan is an honor code school that asks students to report suspected misconduct, which answers the question for Michigan students, at least as far as telling them what they're *supposed* to do. If your school doesn't have a policy requiring that you report misconduct, it's a more personal question. When do *you* think you have an ethical duty to report wrongdoing? You might also consider what could happen to you if the misconduct is discovered and reported by *someone else*. Could you be tarred with the same brush as your dishonest teammates?
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/12
| 668
| 1,888
|
<issue_start>username_0: in APA 7, How do I cite works that have text cited previously.
For example:
Author Smith (2020) has a sentence in published works:
>
> This is an important sentence (Jones, 2010; Franks, 2011; & Gates, 2014)
>
>
>
I want to use this sentence.
I'm a little confused on APA 7 rules. Does it mean that this is correct?
>
> This is an important sentence (Smith, 2020)
>
>
>
Or
>
> This is an important sentence (Jones, 2010; Franks, 2011; & Gates, 2014)
>
>
>
Or
>
> This is an important sentence (Smith, 2020; Jones, 2010; Franks, 2011; & Gates, 2014)
>
>
>
and if I have to include Jones, Franks, and Gates, does that mean they go in the reference section as well? Does a reference section grow because of this, even though I didn't actually refer to them directly?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: You are focussing on a secondary issue. The primary issue is that you must use quotation marks because you are not paraphrasing.
>
> "This is an important sentence (Jones, 2010; Franks, 2011; & Gates,
> 2014)" (Smith, 2020)
>
>
>
You can decide to omit the citations from the quote but I would not advise it.
However, I would probably not make the citations part of the quote:
>
> Smith (2020) highlighted "This is an important sentence" and cited
> studies by Jones (2010), Franks (2011) and Gates (2014).
>
>
>
Or maybe:
>
> Based on the work of Jones (2010), Franks (2011) and Gates (2014),
> Smith (2020) concluded "This is an important sentence".
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the sentence is important, then (Jones, Franks, Gates) should also be explored as additional sources. username_1's answer is great, but if that comes up frequently, then consider reading all the sources and forming your own opinion instead of citing another author's opinion on other sources.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/12
| 451
| 1,960
|
<issue_start>username_0: For starts, I'm a math major and physics minor.
**TLDR**:
I'm applying to math graduate schools. Should I submit a letter of recommendation from a physics professor?
**Longer version**:
I'm applying to math graduate schools. More specifically, I'm applying to math programs that do research in the realm of mathematical physics (e.g., string theory & algebraic geometric, TQFT, ect.). As typical, every school I'm applying to wants three letters of recommendation (LOR). I currently have two strong LORs from math professors. I could get a third LOR from math professors, but admittedly it will not be strong (i.e., it would be the standard "he made an A", "was a good student", and since I wrote lecture notes for the course they would perhaps mention this).
On the other hand, I took a physics course (Lagrange mechanics), and always scored around 40 points higher than the class average. The professor commented on my scores a number of times. So, I'm curious, would it be worth submitting a LOR from this physics professor, or should I just get another LOC from a math professor? Also, it seems to make sense to show the graduate schools I do well in physics, since I'm interested in mathematical physics.<issue_comment>username_1: You want letters of recommendation that say the most about what you will bring to the program. In this case it seems clear to me that a strong physics letter for a program in mathematical physics is (much) better than a ho-hum good third math recommendation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You should pick references who know you best and can report observations of your performance in greatest detail in support of their recommendations. An LOR from a physics professor who knows you well and can describe your performance in a course in Lagrange mechanics is perfectly appropriate for someone interested in graduate work in mathematical physics. Good luck.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/13
| 1,912
| 7,990
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently into a very worrying situation. I landed a position as a PostDoc about 2 years ago, to join a new project and I was really excited about it. However, ever since I started, I have found myself with difficulties to obtain results, to the point that in these two years I have not been able to publish anything at all. I have been mostly struggling with worthless calculations and technical problems that all at once, have pushed me back from making any progress.
This situation has created a bit of anxiety on me, even after all constant signs of trust that I have received from the project's PI: she was from the beginning aware that this was a difficult project to work on. Even with that, we have not interacted a lot, but I would say in general she has always trusted me. The situation has always been in my mind like I am not the right person for this project, and this added to the lack of results is making me face the truth that sadly and academic career is not made for me after all. I feel discouraged about this, but also uncertain about my future, since even if I would look for jobs in industry, my big publications gap does not really stand out to any hiring commitee. I am currently working on two different projects suggested by my PI, one of them can possibly lead to a publication soon and the other is a bit more uncertain... But after all I have experienced, I do not really have a lot of hopes, I have even considered attending professional help.
Are there any PostDocs that have suffered a similar situation? And more importantly, do you have any tips on how to handle it? What are the right choices to make from now on given that my contract will expire in some few months?<issue_comment>username_1: The OP mentions something positive here: trust from the postdoc advisor (and vice-versa I assume).
Publication output is one of the most important measures of success in academia. Industry generally has different measures of success.
It appears the relationship to the postdoc advisor is good. It might be worthwhile discussing the situation with them and asking them if they are able to write a positive recommendation letter for industry jobs. In such a letter the lack of publication output could be excused by the nature of the project, but hard work ethics, skills, etc., could still be highlighted.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I recommend the counseling route. I was shocked to learn of all of my peers in grad school who were in counseling. This process can be brutal, so they would seek help.
Early in my grad experience I realized that the men professors seemed to be in martial arts and women professors in yoga (don’t mean to be sexist but this was the pattern I noticed). Again, even for professors the job is brutal.
So self-care is important!
I agree with the other comment - have an honest conversation with PI - and maybe together you can strategize about next steps.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: While I agree with [Rolf](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/177940/75368) that speaking with your advisor is useful and with [username_2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/177944/75368) that counseling might be helpful, let me add another idea.
Perhaps it is just that you have tackled a more difficult, and perhaps more important, research question than is typical so that "success" in the form of papers takes longer, perhaps a lot longer.
In my fields (math and cs) there are open problems that have been elusive for a century. There are also problems that actually *can't* be resolved within the existing axiom systems used in math and logic.
I once worked on a problem in which I could develop results every week. It was abandoned as being without real merit. Cute, but trivial. I then worked on a problem that was so difficult that I couldn't get any real handle on it at all. Like cracking diamonds, not eggs. I abandoned that one as well, since I needed to actually finish my degree.
But you may need to try, with your advisor, to decide whether the problem is really amenable to solution in a limited time frame (length of a post-doc). Some problems are fine to tackle (part time) for a tenured professor, since there are no real time limits on finding a solution as long as you can be productive in other ways.
But, research on a schedule isn't possible. It isn't anything like running trains in Europe on tight schedules. If it is real research then you are exploring the unknown and it is a feature of the unknown that we don't always know how to make it known.
Think in terms of your long term goals, which include your next career move. If you can achieve that, with your advisor's help, then you are probably fine. But hard problems are, um, hard.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I don't see the situation as positively as some of the other answer authors. If the only positive thing you can say is "she has always trusted me" but otherwise "we have not interacted a lot", then that's not by itself an indicator of much.
To me it says "I'm not going to help you, if you fail it's 100% your fault". Anyone can generate *encouraging sounding* platitudes, but if there's been no effort to offer meaningful assistance, then "I trust you" sounds empty.
>
> I am currently working on two different projects suggested by my PI, one of them can possibly lead to a publication soon and the other is a bit more uncertain... But after all I have experienced, I do not really have a lot of hopes, I have even considered attending professional help.
>
>
>
Another trait found in sub-optimal supervisors is to lead those under them to feel that it's somehow their own fault when thing don't go well. Yes a post-doc is generally a mostly-independent effort but a supervisor does have some responsibility to mentor and help. Of course not all do, and some are brutal, but a good one will.
If seeking counseling will help you identify if the "I trust you" is anything more than a platitude, or if "maybe I'm the problem" has managed to get into your head without belonging there, then go for it.
Also please consider discussing with *trusted* and impartial friends. Part of the problem may be that you've been so focused on this work that you haven't made good contact with fellow postdocs in your department (or other departments) and so have been deprived of camaraderie and support that's really important for most of us.
If that's the case, see if you can find other postdocs to start up a casual conversation with and drift to your current situation. You can ask "Does your supervisor help you when you get stuck, or do they just throw you into the water and expect you to learn to swim?" or similar.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As a voice from industry, the goals differ somewhat in that profit, product development, inventions, teamwork (with much individual effort)are key. When a product or invention is forthcoming consider yourself as being 'published'. Effort otherwise spent in seeking funding is traded for private research to aid your employer. Teaching can become a sideline. You will do much writing to department heads, team members and customers. As a personal note after 12 or more patents, I have never reread one of them after publication; the work itself is satisfying.
username_5 Nov.2021
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You have not failed anything, yet. It is possible in research that a project or even a well though out method will not lead to publication. I have several methods that I spent months on without any success.
The important aspect, in my opinion, is to let it go before it is too late. You don't have to let it go permanently. Side track to a simpler topic, one that could lead to publication easier. You may contact your supervisor for a topic like that. You could work with some other research group. Get some publications out. Then if you still wish, you can go back to the previous problem.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/13
| 3,905
| 15,768
|
<issue_start>username_0: Tenure track professors at USA R1s, ideally in STEM, help me understand: in 2021 what advantages do professors have over equivalent industry and government researchers?
I am tenure track at a top 5 university in my area. I have been building a lab with another pre-tenure professor. She is leaving, I recently learned, for a large company research scientist position. I want her to stay, but now I'm thinking of leaving, too.
I spend more than half my time simply navigating complex bureaucracy. After calling friends, I now think the red tape worse than industry or most government is typical of what other professors experience. I also learned I make less than half of what my industry friends make, and less than my government friends. I didn't see any significant 'freedom' or autonomy advantage for the professors in the group, after talking, including my tenured friends. My industry friends are controlling roughly twice the budgets of those I know in my universities. I do get to teach, which I am reasonably happy doing, and some wish they could do that. For me, I have realized, this alone is not enough.
I am now planning, I think, to look for an industry position with 2x my pay and research budget. I am going to take until after Christmas to let the decision sit, and challenge my present assumptions. I'm going to talk to more people I know on both sides of the career path, and also post this.
EDIT: As argued successfully below, Faculty have significantly more latitude in how they spend funds. I am exploring how others use this advantage in this thread:
[What are discretionary spending options that improve wellbeing for a PI?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/177975/what-are-discretionary-spending-options-that-improve-wellbeing-for-a-pi/178017#178017)<issue_comment>username_1: If government researcher means researcher at a national lab in the US, the advantage of the university professor will be tenure (once / if obtained). Researchers at national labs typically have so-called "soft-money" positions and need to regularly (with few-year cycles) bring in research money to secure their own salaries (and that of their research teams) besides any expenses for equipment, etc.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You get to be your own boss and you get to choose what you work on. Not a bad racket… not bad at all.
To expand a bit, I am tenured. I could do nothing or not much but I would find this depressing.
I mostly select the topics I want to work on (there are exceptions). Perhaps more importantly I am now in a position to select the people I work with. I now work with friends, and I can select the students who work with me (undergraduate interns or graduate students): these are very enriching collaborations. As a result I am largely in control of my work environment, which I find almost universally constructive: I only rarely have to put up with the idiot a few doors down…
I actually broadly enjoy the teaching side of things. One can do a bad job of it, but I have found over the years that preparing lectures and assignments have helped me master (or at least improve my mind on) topics that were less clear in my mind. Of course, I don’t foam at the mouth when it comes to teaching 1st year physics, but even that has its fun challenges, like finding novel every day examples.
In fact, I have more fun interacting with students than with most other faculty members (there are exceptions of course). I can’t imagine myself in an environment where I would mostly see the same people for 15 or more years: I find the energy and enthusiasm of bright young students communicative.
I don’t think you can so easily find all these upsides (for me at least) in industry. On the downside yes the money is not what it is in industry, I occasionally have to put up with people with completely different goals than mine, and academics can be pompous and fight about petty things. Truly obnoxious people can survive in academia, but rarely in industry. There are terrible meetings, but that’s not unique to academia. I do not mind some of the bureaucracy because I have autonomy, and nobody needs to approve the draft of my papers or my conference presentations.
On balance, I maintain that it’s a very good job. It’s not for everyone and you need to develop a thick skin pretty fast, but industry is not all devoid of professional rivalries either.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: They have the advantage of being able to do research (or analogous creative activity) that has no purpose beyond exploring the possibilities of human imagination, as long as that research does not require significant amounts of funding.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: The number one advantage for tenure track only is tenure, assuming you get it. There's no such thing in industry as a job from which you can't be fired for any reason or even for no reason.
Number two for people like you and me who enjoy it is teaching. I find that very satisfying and purposeful.
Number three is you get a lot more autonomy to decide what your job is and how to do it than in industry.
But if money's important, you can probably get a lot more than twice the money in industry. Three or four times as much is totally possible in STEM. But fwiw, in my experience, money is overrated. It definitely does not equal happiness. I think you should do what you love, regardless of the money.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Let's talk about money, and how money relates to choice in research.
In order to execute a research project, you need to pay for:
* Your time
* Your staff's time
* Materials / subjects / equipment
If you are a professor at a US R1 university, you typically get a 9-month salary paid by the university due to your teaching. The summer salary should be bundled into your grants but isn't really strictly necessary: it's nice to have the money, though, and funders typically want you to pay yourself.
If [an average professor makes about $100K](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/04/11/aaups-annual-report-faculty-compensation-takes-salary-compression-and-more), and you assume an overhead multiplier of 1.6, then that means you need between $0 and $40K per year to support yourself.
"Staff" typically means graduate student or postdoc, which, depending on your institution and circumstances will typically run you something between $30K and $100K for a graduate student or postdoc for a year. If you can use undergrads, then it's down at the lower end of that range or even lower. Of course, some graduate students can be supported by TAships, some undergrads will work for credits instead of money, and both grad students and postdocs sometimes come with their own fellowships, meaning that your staff may be free. So total of $0K to $100K per staff member.
In one of your comments, you state that a typically small study in your field will cost you $40-$80k to run: let's take the top of that range and consider $80K of materials / subjects / equipment cost for the year, and assume it requires one full-time person. Total project cost, then, is between $80K - $220K per year.
If you're doing the same project in industry, let's assume your salary will be doubled. But you no longer have the 75% teaching support and you don't have the option to not pay yourself. The overhead will typically be significantly higher as well: let's assume 2.5x, though the actual numbers in industry tend to vary quite a lot. Put those together and you need $200K \* 2.5 = $500K/year just to support yourself, though we'll assume you need only half your time at $250K.
Likewise, your staff will be much more expensive too, since they're getting a similar salary to you. They'll also likely be much more efficient than a graduate student, though, so you can get the same efficacy with a smaller fraction of their time. Thus, if they're somewhat junior to you, the staff cost might only be about $200K/year. The materials / subjects / equipment cost stays the same, which leaves you with a project that costs $530K/year.
Look at those ratios: **The same project costs 2.5x to 6.5x as much in industry!** Government labs are similar, though they tend to pay their people a bit less and are correspondingly a bit cheaper.
These numbers are highly imperfect rough estimates, but they illustrate the major difference in cost scales between academia and industry. **As a professor, every research action you take is heavily subsidized by the educational environment in which you are operating.** This subsidy makes it far easier to explore novel high-risk ideas, just because it's way, way cheaper. On the flip side, you also pick up a lot of project risk because postdocs and graduate students are less well-known quantities than long-term research staff.
This tradeoff of risk vs. cost is a major component of the "research freedom" available at universities. Even if we hold all else equal, it's a lot easier to get hold of $100K for trying out an idea than it is to get hold of $500K.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Some of the things I missed most about academia:
* Flexible working hours. In academia, unless you have teaching duties or similar, you are free to come at whatever time suits you. If you prefer to work from 12pm-8pm, you can do that (in my case this was very helpful when I wanted to accommodate someone else's timezone).
* Similar to the above, if you receive a visitor, you can actually take them around as an academic because you have flexible working hours. In industry, you'll have to take leave.
* University environment provides you with the likes of library access, cheap food, and professional-level talks by visiting academics. Being able to go to conferences (read: fully-funded vacations in beautiful foreign cities) is another nice perk.
* It's prestigious, especially if you are at an R1 university.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: The main difference between tech position in academia and the real world is that in academia you don't have to bring anything to market. You don't have to think about how economically viable anything you work on is. The academy also does not really think about any of the real world applications of anything really.
There is no high-pie-in-the-sky work outside the academy. Your STEM work can be revolutionary but if it has no application that solves some problem or meets some need then it is worthless. Your work must conform to this paradigm if you want it to succeed.
Can you think like a business person that is the question? Do you think you have it in you to use your tech skills to design and produce something you can sell for a profit? Do you think you can make meaningful contributions to established tech companies? Do you think you can establish the next big tech company?
Ultimately these are questions only you can answer but if you cannot work with an entrepreneurial spirit then it is probably better to accept your salary and keep your current job.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Industry researcher here.
>
> My industry friends are controlling roughly twice the budgets of those I know in my universities.
>
>
>
This sounds intriguing. What is this "budget" thing I hear about?
I have precisely *zero* budget, if this is "money I can broadly spend as I - as an expert in the field - think most useful".
* I try to attend one conference per year. Every single time, this involves walking around with a hat in my hand and trying to scrounge up the money. Yes, it has worked out fine so far, but I find the experience *humiliating*, and I am using that word for a reason.
* A few years ago, I tried to find out whether my employer, who is always very keen on showing off what a *great expert* they have working for them, would pay for a membership in an academic organization. It was on the order of 300 USD for a three year membership, peanuts. My manager approved, but couldn't release budget for this. His manager approved, but couldn't release budget. *His* manager... you get the idea. Budget was finally released by someone no less than four or five hierarchy levels above me, with 15,000 people under him. All this for 300 USD.
Yes, I understand that academic researchers have to apply for funding, and that not everything they would like to do will be funded. However, my understanding is that once they have their grant, they are reasonably free to spend it as they see fit (and, of course, as they applied for). You could argue that writing one giant proposal to get a multi-year grant is little different from applying for budget for every single trip, textbook, or webinar. Per above, I find the second approach infuriating - it really communicates that we, grown ups all, cannot be trusted to handle more than pocket money. YMMV.
Perhaps I am not doing a great job in haggling with my employer. Perhaps I should have changed employers more often, which gives you leverage. True.
Why am I still here? The take-home pay is much better than my full professor wife's. Same for the work-life balance - my manager has not once called me on the weekend, and I work much less than people elsewhere, in academia or outside.
Yes, there are places where things are different. I see Amazon sponsoring conferences and sending multiple people there (but also being a meatgrinder kind of place to work). Essentially, it boils down to knowing what is most important to you, and finding out whether you are likely to get it at the place you are looking at - whether it's budget, work-life balance, stability, or stock options. I suspect that places where you have both a lot of budget and a lot of take-home pay are the ones that also work you the hardest, but then again, that may reflect a tradeoff you are comfortable with.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Another answer, with a topic that is IMO different enough from [my previous answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/177959/4140):
Intellectual Property (IP) issues
=================================
I was recently approached by researchers from academic institution A for input on their research topic. The major problem was that they were collaborating with industry startup S. There was not one, but *two* problems my employer E saw:
* IP could flow from E to S
* IP could flow from S to E.
My employer E was fine enough with my being competent to decide what was our IP I could not divulge. The larger problem was with the second bullet point: suppose we (E) decided in a year to build something that is related or similar to what S is doing? S would face a strong temptation to sue us, especially since E is a large corporation with (allegedly) deep pockets. (Nobody will sue a small startup.) This could become even more problematical if S is later acquired by a competitor of ours, who could see such a hook to sue E over as an asset in the acquisition. Yes, there would be ways to make the collaboration work, but they would entail a lot of very enthusiastic lawyers and contracts.
(The discussion about whether I can even read a publication authored by S is ongoing. Similarly whether I can continue to review for journals, where in a double-blind review I would not even know whether the submission was from a business or an academic.)
I don't think this kind of dynamics plays out quite like this if you are an academic. Of course, if you (the academic) decide to monetize knowledge acquired from an outside party during a collaboration, whether by founding your own startup or by getting hired by someone else, IP conflicts can crop up. But as long as you are "only" doing academic research with input from an outside business, you will likely need to jump much smaller hurdles.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/13
| 1,682
| 7,111
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently applied and interviewed for a post doc position in a leading scientific institution in Australia.
I never thought I'd get the position, and the reason why I interviewed was to get more experience in speaking up. However, I got the position, and now I'm really conflicted as if I should take it.
If I accept, I'd work on an amazing project, I actually really like the project and it has everything to do with me. But I'd have to relocate. The position is for three years.
I live a very balanced life with my partner (we live together), in the town where all his family and friends live in a different Australian state. I'm not from Australia.
I've been thinking about this and if we move he'll suffer the most and I'm pretty sure it would degrade the relationship. He'll hate me for making him move, and will probably resent me. We spoke about this and he's really reluctant of going, in general he's very resistant to change, while I'm the opposite...
But then I say to myself - no, I will not accept the position because it's the best for the relationship, then I start getting upset with everything because I sort of want that particular postdoc, and I'm scared I will be the one who becomes resentful. I know that If I was alone I'd go tomorrow.
I know that academia is full of relocation problems, I'd love to hear any similar stories and what happened. Anyone out there that has gone through something similar? I'd love to hear your stories and what happened.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I've been thinking about this and if we move he'll suffer the most
>
>
>
This sounds like you haven't talked to him about it.
>
> and I'm pretty sure it would degrade the relationship.
>
>
>
Why are you so sure?
* It's only for a limited period of time. Assuming your relationship is stable, it's not like he would be forsaking his hometown and family for good.
* Again, you haven't talked to him about how he feels, and what possible ideas he might have for possibly moving for a period of time. You might be surprised.
* If it's a matter of "who needs to adapt more", then perhaps you can strike a different point of balance, involving other aspects of your life together than just the place you live.
* You might be able to arrange, say spending summers back in his hometown (or some other season where you would use up your annual vacation + perhaps take a leave of absence).
I don't have such a story personally, but from my organizational experience, female researchers often give up good post-doc positions to accommodate their male life partners, while vice-versa it's much less common. That's part of the cause for the male-female imbalance of faculty composition at my alma mater and probably many other institutions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This question is actually much less about academia, and much more about love and relationships. So while I don't think any of us here have any special expertise in the matter, we might be able to offer the perspective of (mostly older) people who have worked in academia.
In my opinion, this decision is going to be an important turning-point in your life, so you will need to think hard about it. It is essentially the point at which you decide whether you want to prioritise your career, or prioritise your present relationship at the expense of your career. There is no doubt that if you are unwilling to move cities, this will restrict your options for an academic career. In Australia, many early-career academic positions are contract positions, so it can be difficult to get academic jobs that allow you to stay permanently in one place. This does not mean that it is impossible to stay in your present location (so long as it has a university) but it shrinks your options. On the other hand, your partner's life and options are important too, so he may have reasons that staying in your present city is better for him.
The reason I say that this will be a turning-point is that your life circumstances and relocations options are likely to get more restricted as you get older. Since you are early-career (and I am assuming child-free) your options are much broader at the moment. Indeed, if you have children then you might later find yourself dealing with a "three-body problem" or "four-body problem", etc., instead of a two-body problem. So you will need to confront this situation now, and think about how you are going to deal with this issue in general.
At the moment you seem to be having only an internal discussion about this, where you speculate on reactions and objections from your partner. Ultimately, I think you will need to **talk to your partner** and have a wide-ranging discussion on your future. In particular, it would be useful to think beyond this present job offer and have a broader discussion about your future plans, where you each want to live, how often you are each willing to move (and where), whose career requirements are going to get priority, etc. This might also be tangled up with other relationship issues --- e.g., are you planning to marry, have children, etc. It is usually much better to try plan your future to some degree, rather than just stumbling into it via a series of short-term crises and reactive decisions. (A psychologist might speculate that your story about why you applied for the position is a furphy; that subconsciously you applied because you wanted to get the job and leave, but the story serves as cover to not admit this to yourself.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you've asked for stories about this problem from others, I'm going to give a second answer here telling you about my own circumstances and career. I had my first two daughters when I was very young, and I was raising them while I was a university student. By the time I graduated and was looking for academic positions, I was pretty-well locked into a single city where my children were settled in at school and everyone else in my life is present. So mine was more of a "four-body problem" (or maybe even more) than a two-body problem.
I made the decision that I would stay in my own city and restrict my academic career options to my local universities. (Fortunately for me, there are two good research universities with campuses in my city.) I have been reasonably successful in this, and I have managed to have quite a good academic career so far, but I have also taken positions outside of academia when there were no appropriate positions available in my own city. Consequently, I have become an academic and consultant, with the latter taking over in some periods of my career.
I am mid-career now, and I'm happy with my decision to stay in one place, but there is no doubt that it hampered my ability to advance within academia. My first two daughters are now all grown up, and I'm really glad I gave priority to my family over my career. They got to grow-up with their entire extended family in the same city, and they got the benefits of being settled in one place. For me it has all worked out well.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/13
| 395
| 1,835
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm curious to know if research outputs as a PhD student count by the committee for promotion from assistant to associate professor only those produced during as assistant professor.
I'll appreciate your input.<issue_comment>username_1: Only in the sense that you have a fuller CV. But most places, such as R1 universities in particular, will be looking a more recent work and evidence that such productivity is likely to continue. Old papers are less valuable for that.
At a teaching, rather than research, focused university or college the decision probably rests on other things than research, as well.
But a good CV ain't nothing. It is worth doing, and will help you get the assistant professor position in the first place.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Any work you have published will impact the total work product in your CV, so it is going to contribute to any job application you make. Works published as a PhD student are older, and in some cases they may even have accrued more citations ---by virtue of their age--- than later publications as an academic. In extreme cases someone might publish a groundbreaking paper during their PhD candidature. It is usual that all of your published works will be included on your CV and will therefore contribute to your total publication record.
As to applications for internal promotion, any sensible university will be guided to some degree by the prospects of the candidate getting a better offer at outside institutions, which will usually be affected by the total career work of the applicant. Some institutions may give greater weight to more recent work (mostly as a means of trying to infer how productive you will be post-promotion) but the promotion-decision will almost certainly still be affected by your total career work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/14
| 4,068
| 17,600
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a student of mathematics. I am greatly interested in the subject, but it seems as though my peers opine quite uniformly that I totally lack any sort of talent for it. To give you a few examples:
* One professor suggested in front of a tutor that I was mentally ill and suggested that I find a psychiatrist
* Another professor said (while I was standing at the blackboard in front of the entire class) that a five page paper was the upper limit to what I could understand
* and a third professor said that I was often asking questions that made plain to him that my mathematical ability was rather restricted and that I would one day work in the industry ("You are not the kind of person who would one day win a Fields medal.")
and there were several other such incidents, some of which I may have now forgotten. Nonetheless, my interest in mathematics has led me to consider questions in sieve theory, and I wrote them up and converted them into PDF files.
I sent the first one to a professor, whom I didn't know, but he refused to take a closer look because of what according to him amounted to an "abundance of typographical mistakes" (in all fairness, I have since discovered some). Then I sent it to an appropriate journal (here the Bulletin of the Hellenic Mathematical Society), but this is a normal journal without a fast-track option (at least none that I'm aware of), and judging by the other articles, it takes several months for them to check it.
Now my question is this: Given my extremely bad standing at my maths department (which is thus that even my fellow students fling the door into my face when I visit the department's library), how can I obtain any short-term feedback, preferably from an expert?
EDIT: I have recieved many answers, but some of them seem to be asking for more information. Therefore, let me state these things.
* I have repeatedly and unsuccessfully tried to call upon the university's institutions, which was mostly being ignored. In fact, these institutions seemed to have been biased against me, stating on one occasion without evidence that I was a liar.
* I am an outspoken atheist who has made his opinion public on several occasions, including writing an opinion piece in the university's newspaper.
* I am a member of a centre-left student association that stands for election in the university's parliament.
* I publicly played the Jazz piano in the old style, which was largely developed by the black population of the United States.
* The maths department in my university seems to be quite powerful; one of the professors told me at one of the three conversations we had (which were all quite unpleasant) that his salary was so large that discussion among staff about me had resulted in net losses for the university "in the hundreds of thousands".
Let me also, however, take the opportunity to sincerely thank many of you for your feedback. Even though I might certainly argue about some specifics, I had pondered several of your suggestions myself. On occasion, I would, however, be pleased if opinions might be formulated somewhat more diplomatically. I laughed very hard at the reference to the Dunning–Krueger effect. Perhaps you allow me then to cite the [Online disinhibition effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect).<issue_comment>username_1: >
> ... but this is a normal journal without a fast-track option ... and judging by the other articles, it takes several months for them to check it.
>
>
>
Given the circumstances you have outlined, waiting the standard period for a referee review does not seem like a terrible delay. If you are a graduate research student then you should have an assigned supervisor who will review your work as part of their supervisory role. If you don't have a supervisor (which I assume is the case) then your options are more limited. If you have the money to spare you could pay someone to review your work for you or try to find a volunteer; otherwise you may have to wait for the standard peer review period at the journal.
If you are not having any luck with your professors, you could try forming a study group with some of the other students. Ideally, if you could get some graduate research students interested, you might be able to form a group of people who are willing to do preliminary reviews on each other's work. This is not particularly easy to organise if you don't already have a good relationship with the other students, but it might be worth a shot. You should bear in mind that even PhD students are not proper experts, but they may know enough to look for preliminary issues in a manuscript and "interrogate" some of the reasoning.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your question follows the pattern of a passenger on the Titanic complaining about their dinner being spoiled by the inconvenience of the ship crashing into an iceberg, and asking how they can still enjoy a nice dinner despite this event. In other words, you have a huge problem, and a small problem, with the huge problem causing the small problem. But you are asking us what to do about the small problem, ignoring the much bigger one that is the underlying cause.
In your case, of course, the small problem is the difficulty of getting feedback about your draft articles, and the huge problem is the fact that everyone in your department seems to regard you with complete disdain and refuses to engage with you about mathematics.
The point here is that there may be a solution to the small problem (hire someone to offer you feedback, go to the ship’s kitchen and insist on your right to eat dinner, etc), but the situation you described about your department is a large, burning red flag that’s simply impossible to ignore. If you want to continue on your mathematical journey rather than sink to the bottom of the username_4 ocean, you will start thinking about how to address that dire situation. (If you want to add some related details to your question, people here might have some suggestions.) Good luck!
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_3: OK,I'll give you some feedback right now. I'm not an expert in your field at all, but based on the first two pages of "Some asymptotic laws in the theory of primes" I can say the following:
1. In footnote 1, you say you're using a non-standard name for something, implying that you know better than established experts in the field. This comes across as arrogant.
2. You mention what I assume is a standard reference in your field, telling us that reading it "might obscure one's understanding". Despite this, you go on to cite the same reference again.
3. Generally, your writing style contains features I wouldn't expect to see in username_4 or professional writing, such as the phrase "not really" and the word "NOT" in capital letters.
If you were an established expert with a good publication record, people might forgive some eccentricities and a certain attitude, or even be amused by these things. (I remember reading a paper by Abhyankar and being shocked by his informal, almost flippant writing style. But of course he was already quite famous before he wrote that paper.)
But you say you're a student. Graduate study is not just about technical expertise. It also includes learning how to fit in as a member of an username_4 community. You need to spend some time learning the community norms and establishing a reputation before others will tolerate behaviour that they perceive as eccentric.
Of course I'm writing this based on just a few minutes of reading your work, never having met you in person. I don't know whether your conversational style or other aspects of your behaviour give the same impression as your writing. If you can give us some more information here, then you might get some more useful answers. Are you currently enrolled as a graduate or undergraduate student? Have you had the chance to attend any conferences, or mingle with other mathematicians outside your institution? Have you been "in bad standing" from the first day you joined your department, or has this changed over time?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I briefly looked at your papers (linked from a previous version). I am an analytic number theorist who has written and published on sieve theory.
Your work appears technically competent, but I was unable to tell what your goals were, what you achieved, or what the relationship to other work is. It seems that you have interesting ideas but did not manage to frame them in a way that others can easily understand. If I had been the referee asked by the Bulletin of the Hellenic Mathematical Society, this is what my referee report would say.
If you want feedback, then in the long run you will need to adapt your presentation to what others expect. This is frustrating and painful, and these expectations can seem inconsistent and arbitrary. But it is probably the only way to persuade others to engage with your work.
Alternatively, you could happily work alone and not seek feedback. Creative work has intrinsic value, even if you produce it only for yourself.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: The fundamental question, here, is why is your department so antagonistic towards you? This is important, not just because it's the "bigger problem" as username_2 noted in his answer, but also because the answer changes the answer to your question.
Here are a few possible "bigger problem" explanations, and the resulting answer to your question for each case:
---
**1. You have upset someone in the department with a lot of sway with the rest of the department, who has since spread rumours, etc, about you.**
In this case, your first course of action is to reach out to the appropriate anti-bullying body within your institution. Such behaviour is unacceptable, no matter how egregious your action may have been against that person, and the behaviour of the other members of the department are similarly unacceptable. If what you did to upset the person was a real problem, then they should have similarly reported you to that body, not initiated a campaign to destroy you. And if the cause of the upset was completely innocent and minor, then all the more reason to report the situation to the appropriate body.
Once the bullying is addressed, either people begin treating you with basic respect again or you seek to move to a new institution, where the well hasn't been figuratively poisoned. Continuing at an institution in which nobody respects you is not a viable approach, no matter how self-reliant and insular you may want to be.
**2. Your own behaviour is causing general upset within the department.**
Contrary to the first possibility, this one is indicative of a problem with how you are engaging with the department. In effect, where in case 1 the well is being poisoned by a professor or other person with sway, in this case you are poisoning it yourself (likely without even realising it). If this is the case, there is no realistic method to "get" people to examine your work, etc, without first addressing what it is that you are doing to repel them.
In this case, complaining to an anti-bullying body, or changing institutions, is unlikely to change your experience, at least in the longer term - the same issues that have arisen at your present department will simply reoccur, and this will cause further issues. Even paying people to review your work is likely to only work in the short term, as you will get a reputation quite quickly.
Instead, you need to undertake some self-reflection, to identify what it is that people are responding so badly to. Perhaps you are unconsciously injecting arrogant language into your interactions, or being too flippant to other people when they speak about anything other than your work. Or perhaps you are handling criticism poorly, coming across as defensive and aggressive when people point out flaws. There are many other possible issues, and it is unlikely that anyone here can diagnose the issue - that said, if there is someone who is a little less antagonistic towards you within the department, you could approach them and ask for their perspective.
**3. You have misinterpreted signals from those around you.**
Sometimes what people say can be misinterpreted. For example, the first professor you mention may have been expressing concern about something, and honestly recommending that you seek mental health support - this is a taboo topic in many places, but there is no shame in seeking such support. And if you are already feeling a lot of anxiety and discomfort about interactions, it can come across as an accusation, rather than an attempt at support.
Similarly, the second professor might have been expressing that you had some weaknesses in your current understanding, and that you were not yet ready for the more complex arguments that are often found in particularly long proofs, etc. This may have been meant as a simple critique, but for a person with anxiety, for example, it can come across as an attack. And the third professor, as noted by astronat in the comments to your question, may have simply been trying to manage expectations - few people get fields medals, and that doesn't mean their contributions aren't worthy.
In this case, I would strongly recommend seeking the mental health support noted earlier. Again, there's nothing to be ashamed of, and seeing a psychiatrist or psychologist doesn't mean you are crazy or unbalanced. Mental health professionals are much like physical health professionals - they treat a wide variety of issues, many of which are quite common and can become debilitating if not kept in check.
In the meantime, self-reflection is again on the cards. Why are people refusing to help you, if there isn't an antagonism issue within the department? The answer to that question will tell you what to do.
**4. Their criticisms are sincere and honest.**
This is the hardest one for you to contemplate, but it is worth bringing up as a possibility. You may be showing substantial misunderstandings of basic concepts. Note that this doesn't excuse them calling you out publicly, or telling you that it's intrinsic to you (rather than simply being the current state of affairs), but it is still worth considering for yourself.
This could overlap with case 2, in that the Dunning-Kruger effect could be impacting your response to their criticisms. If you do have a fundamental misunderstanding of something key to your field, then it can be hard for you to see it, and hard to accept when someone tells you that you are wrong, because you lack the expertise necessary to understand their criticisms.
This often leads to crank-like behaviour, which can put off those around you as they view you as nothing but a crank. It is not uncommon for people in academia to become extremely wary of cranks, and disengage as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, this then drives those who are simply a little misguided towards crankism.
This, also, will require some self-reflection, but in a different way. Look back at some of the criticism you have received in the past - which portions of the criticism did you accept, and which portions did you reject? Is it possible that the portions you rejected were actually of value? You likely know more now than you did at the time - you may notice that you had rejected criticisms that you now can tell are legitimate.
In this case, your best way forward is to approach someone who may still be a little amenable, and apologise for previous behaviour - then, instead of asking them to review your work, ask for their help with filling gaps in your understanding, using the work to help guide that process.
**5. Discrimination is at play.**
It saddens me that I need to include this one, but even in academia in 2021, discrimination can be an issue. Are you black in an otherwise-white department? Or white in an otherwise-black department? Are you female, and the professors, etc, are not? Do you identify as trans? Are you vocally atheist or religious? Many of these things can influence how you are treated, sadly.
But keep in mind, this is a two-way possibility. You might be the one discriminating, and they're simply responding. You need to consider this possibility alongside the reverse.
If you are in a department with a discrimination problem, you could try approaching the appropriate discrimination body within the institution, or seek a role in a different institution that you have checked for better diversity. If you are the one discriminating, of course, you should (and I know this keeps coming up) undertake some self-reflection. Either way, the discrimination needs to be addressed before you will be able to get others around you to take your work seriously.
---
This is not an exhaustive list, but I believe it captures the most likely cases. You will notice that self-reflection is a common thread for most of the cases - this is because of the maxim that "*if everyone around you is the problem, maybe you're the problem*". I do not provide this as a criticism, but simply a reason why self-reflection may be needed - the only way to tell whether or not you are the source of your own woes is to undertake some self-reflection. And the result of that self-reflection tells you what you need to do.
In any case, as username_2 said in his answer, ignoring the bigger issue won't get you anywhere. It might give you a momentary short-term result, but you'll end up right back where you started in short order.
Upvotes: 6
|
2021/11/14
| 1,149
| 4,429
|
<issue_start>username_0: Other research-focused PIs (or aspiring PIs) how do/would you spend funding to increase your own wellbeing?
My funding stream (R1, USA) allows me some spending flexibility, and my lab is doing well. At the same time, I am a bit worn down. I am considering how I might buy myself greater wellbeing.
I plan to:
* travel to conferences more, and pay for extra time and childcare while I'm there so that my partner and I can explore and build connections
* set up outings for me and my graduate students
* pay for editing of my students' manuscripts, so that I can focus on
concepts
* pay a personal assistant, to minimize paperwork and busywork
* hire a research scientist close to my own expertise to free me to
learn more
* pay for classes or training that I find interesting
I think spending rules vary greatly, and I am less interested in what is allowed (and personally quite cautious about this). If not allowed by my university, I may well pay for a good idea myself. I'm also thinking about where perks can help my laboratory staff.
Where can money can buy an academic happiness, job satisfaction, and greater wellbeing?<issue_comment>username_1: Pay for nice office furniture and, possibly, some art for the walls. Also for someone to paint the walls if necessary.
I spent my first two years as a faculty in an office that contained a mismatched array of old desks, chairs, and metal filing cabinets. I just wasn't happy there. Then I used the last of my start-up on a matching set of surfaces/desks/book shelves and a couch. My happiness being in that office dramatically improved.
After moving to another university, buying furniture was more or less the first thing I spent any startup money on. This is how it looks now:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gSGVL.jpg)
(I will add that many years ago I also decided that I don't believe in paper any more, and so my surfaces are generally quite clean. This is the normal state of my desk, not the cleaned-up version. The only paper in the office are books and journals in a book shelf off the left.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have truly flexible funds (overhead, startup, gift money) you might consider funding a pet project that is defensibly in the realm of your study. I spent some of these kind of funds dabbling in biology by taking two trips to South America and hiking up volcanos, and another portion learning Swedish in Sweden. To answer your other post, I cannot think of another job beyond self-employed that allows this kind of thing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> 1. travel to conferences more, and pay for extra time and childcare
> while I'm there so that my partner and I can explore and build
> connections
>
>
>
In my experience additional travelling has a negative impact on my work-life balance and actually increases stress. Combining conferences with vacation would offset this but usually requires you to cover some of the travel cost with your personal funds.
>
> 2. set up outings for me and my graduate students
>
>
>
Team building is important and you should be doing that anyway. Cost can be kept minimal but there is a time investment. I suggest "retreats" where you spend about two days at a nice location and discuss stuff like your research strategy as a group.
>
> 3. pay for editing of my students' manuscripts, so that I can focus on
> concepts
>
>
>
Be careful to avoid negative impacts on quality. I would limit this to language editing, which is routinely covered by my institute. Let more senior members of your group help with writing papers.
>
> 4. pay a personal assistant, to minimize paperwork and busywork
>
>
>
Yes, do this if possible. That will likely have the strongest positive inpact on your productivity and happiness. It might not be possible, though. But you could frame this in a different way and limit the scope. E.g., my institute has an assistent for everything related to finances and funding, who also is our interface with central administration.
>
> 5. hire a research scientist close to my own expertise to free me to
>
>
>
AKA a PostDoc? I'd expect most scientists in your group to be close to your expertise.
>
> 6. pay for classes or training that I find interesting
>
>
>
... and useful. You should already have funding for this.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/14
| 1,722
| 7,273
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently enrolled in a Master's coursework program in Australia and I've just completed my first semester. I've been looking into going to law school in Australia after I'm done. I submitted my law school application and I got accepted but here's where I encountered my current problem.
I was reading over my master's application and in the fine print, it asks me to declare that I have not been excluded or subject to disciplinary action at the university level. I missed this when I was applying and that's my fault. See, I plagiarized and was found guilty during the first semester of my Canadian undergraduate degree. I plead guilty and took the penalties, which included a reduction in my final grade. There is no notation on my transcript. I never plagiarized again and felt extremely ashamed for what I had done. Now that I have become aware of this error in my master's application, I'm wondering how I tell my university about it. I do not want to hide it and I want to make them aware of the issue. Who should I contact at my university?
Also, in my law school application, it asked if I had been excluded or suspended from a course or asked to show why my enrollment should not be suspended/terminated. While there are no questions about plagiarism, how should I disclose this issue to the law school?<issue_comment>username_1: Hard questions. I can't advise you, but have several thoughts that may help.
Starting with the second question. If your reading of the law school application question is correct, you have nothing to report. You were not suspended or terminated for the cheating you did as a first semester college student.
For the first question I doubt that your current Master's program would care about this. If you have good relations with your advisor and can raise the question with them informally, try that. The academics I know would say (as you do) that the lesson learned was sufficient and that you need do nothing else.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the master's application has an obligatory item where you have to declare any disciplinary action at the university level, they may not pay attention to such kind of cases you got in during your first semester. But they can interpret it as an attempt to hide the truth to make a better impression.
I suppose that you should clarify this moment - probably, it is not so important, but your consciousness will be clear. Contact the counseling service at your university - they will provide you with the right person to resolve this situation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Contrary to some other answers here, I'd suggest that you bring it up, explain it, and say that it was done through simple carelessness, not intentional lying.
If you bring it up, I think you have a chance to recover from it. But if it is later discovered by others, I'd think the claim would be clear dishonesty, which for a prospective lawyer can be a serious issue. It would be much harder, if even possible, to recover from it in that case. Being expelled from law school makes the future pretty bleak if law is your career goal.
Note that I'm depending here on your words: "...or subject to disciplinary action at the university level". That seems to be clearly the case.
I doubt that for a graduate program other than law school the question wouldn't be asked and it would be assumed that the prior punishments are sufficient. But law school, I hope, has higher standards about personal integrity.
As to the *how* to approach it, a conversation with the chair of the admissions committee or even the dean of the law school would be appropriate. "I made a potentially serious error in my admissions materials and would like to set the record straight ..."
And, I suspect that if you had mentioned it originally, that it wouldn't necessarily have resulted in rejection, since you paid a penalty already. We've all made some errors in life. Hopefully they have helped us improve.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: First, the easy question
>
> Also, in my law school application, it asked if I had been excluded or
> suspended from a course or asked to show why my enrollment should not
> be suspended/terminated.
>
>
>
You don't need to mention it on your law school application as it doesn't ask about it.
Now how to handle the other question
>
> I was reading over my master's application and in the fine print, it asks me to declare that I have not been excluded or subject to disciplinary action at the university level.
>
>
>
And here you made a mistake. I'm going to assume there was no "Explain any disciplinary action" box you missed and it was an honest mistake.
You've got 3 options
**Say Nothing**
If your current school finds out there will likely be another hearing with more consequences. Your previous school didn't see the infraction as serious enough to put a letter in your file. We don't know how serious the allegations were.
**Ask your advisor for advice**
If you have a good relationship with your advisor, ask them for advice. Be sure to give them a detailed explanation of what happened. They'll be the best judge of how serious the issue was instead of people on the internet.
**Tell the university**
You could tell the university in a written letter. I'm not sure how your university is structured so you'll have to do some legwork to determine where to send it (admissions might be a place to start).
I would lean towards getting your advisor's opinion, but you have far more details about this than we do. I also would not expect the university to "go easy on you" for being honest. You're in the best position to decide how serious your infraction was.
**EDIT - re-read the application**
I'd be a bit surprised if your university simply didn't accept anyone with any disciplinary action. There are students like yourself who learned from the experience and changed your behavior.
There are also students who may not be guilty. In my undergrad, there was a cheating scandal where ~10 students turned in the same code. One student was making an A, the rest were D level. It ended up in front of a disciplinary committee which determined they all had to retake the class (among other things).
The general consensus among the rest of the students was someone waited for the A student to take a bathroom break and leave the computer lab then copied his code. No one had any proof of this and the disciplinary committee didn't want to say "One of you has an A the rest have Ds, A guy gets a pass."
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Disciplinary proceedings are usually confidential. If there's no note on your transcript, there's no way for them to learn about it without breaching confidentiality. What happens in Canada stays in Canada.
If you're thinking about telling, definitely don't go in with the expectation that they'll go easier on you because you came to them first. That *could* happen, but don't rely on it, and I wouldn't base my decision on it. These things can be very bureaucratic and you might just be subjecting yourself to the same sanction you'd get if they found out about it themselves. Don't make the mistake of assuming that they'll be sympathetic.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/14
| 722
| 3,102
|
<issue_start>username_0: *Alpha* and *Beta* releases are stages in [software release life cycle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_release_life_cycle). Could these terms be used to denote the stages of ripeness of an online course?
The background for this question is that I have created a website to sell and teach online courses of my own making. The courses are about preparation for a technical interview for software engineering positions, so that most potential students should be aware of the mentioned terms in their original context.
I would say that a freshly developed course is in *Alpha release* (and charge less for it) to account for the fact that some errors and glitches are to be anticipated. I would then improve the course based on student feedback and advance it to the *Beta release*. In other words, I would rather say straight that the course might need improvement based on the students' feedback and offer a significant discount to people who are willing to struggle a little bit to save money, than to lose my reputation for producing top-notch courses.<issue_comment>username_1: I wouldn't do this. You can of course anticipate errors in the material, but that is obvious and also happens in real-life courses. Those aren't alpha-courses either.
If I'd see a course that was labeled 'alpha-course', I wouldn't know directly what it means for a course to be 'alpha'. If I then read it is an alpha-release, I wouldn't want to be a test-student for some course. To you it says 'beware: there may be some small errors', but to me it says 'this course isn't useful yet'.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The problem with this denomination is that in other contexts, 'alpha' has a completely different meaning as e.g. in 'alpha-male', where 'alpha', 'beta' and so on indicate a type of hierarchy with 'alpha' being on top.
Students unfamiliar with this type of labelling might mistake an 'alpha' course as being superior compared to a 'beta' course for that reason, while the opposite is true.
Also, to underline username_1's answer, no-one really likes to be an educational guinea-pig (at least not knowingly), especially in places where you have to pay for college courses. So advertising this kind of "unripeness" of the course might not be beneficial in general.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have written several textbooks that started with drafts I wrote while teaching a course (in person, not online). I always informed the class that I was developing the material, sometimes learning it myself on the fly, and that their feedback was part of the process. I think the stronger students liked the idea. Some of the weaker ones thought they should have an instructor who "knew the subject matter".
I never explicitly labeled work as an alpha or beta release, and could not (nor would I have) charged less tuition. I distributed the notes for free when the department had funds, at copy cost (much less than a text) when necessary. I credited students as a group and sometimes by name in the acknowledgements when the book was published.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/14
| 469
| 1,987
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it necessary to have all skills asked in advertisement to get a post doc.? I have very ordinary PhD and due to COVID I spent very little time in lab , although I leant some techniques bit I can’t say I am an expert in these area but I am ready to learn and move ahead. Can I apply positions where I don’t have all asked skills? Any kind of training provided in post doc positions<issue_comment>username_1: Since the literal question is "Can I apply..." the answer is yes. Hopefully you will be honest about your skills as it would be a problem if you overstate them, only to be found out later.
But, you can't know "everything", and your training should have prepared you to learn things fairly rapidly.
Another aspect is that you probably aren't alone in having your studies disrupted to some extent by COVID.
In the book *Siddhartha* by <NAME>, the young Siddhartha gets a job by essentially suggesting that he can learn what is needed and has the skills and patience for that: “I can think. I can wait. I can fast.”
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, of course you can apply. Whether you'll get the job depends on how close you come to what they really need and how you compare to the other applicants. When writing up a job description, people sometimes fantasize about all the skills and years of experience and other wonderful characteristics of the *perfect* candidate. But if they'd like to hire anyone, they can only choose among the *actual* living, breathing candidates who apply.
So, yes, it's often possible to get a job for which you don't appear to qualify, especially if you bring something else to the table that makes up for anything you lack. But first, you have to apply and see what happens. One thing you should not do is puff your resume with false claims to make it appear you have the skills you lack. You are who you are and that will have to be good enough. Worst case, they say no or just ignore you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/14
| 480
| 2,143
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that was recently accepted for a conference. I have already submitted the camera ready version and accepted the copyright terms etc. However, I now believe my design and results are not brilliant the more I look into it. This might invalidate the main claim and conclusion. Am I still allowed to prevent it from being included in the conference program and proceedings? I realize this is not a good situation given the time and effort spent by everyone involved in the review and administration process. But surely it is preferable to withdraw it before publication if you find issues with your paper? I would prefer to go back to the drawing board and resubmit at a later date with a stronger and reliable solution. If I want to withdraw it who should I contact?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Whether it is possible to completely withdraw the paper is up to the committee, its policies, and how far things have progressed. It may not be possible to "stop the presses" on the production process. Of course, you could just not show up, but it might affect future attempts to participate.
But it may also just be a case of "buyer's remorse" where you know more than you did then about the things you say in the submission. Having second thoughts isn't uncommon, especially if you are actively pursuing an elusive subject.
There is no reason that you can't, in a presentation, give a more up to date picture than what appears in the proceedings. Some conferences will let you file an updated version of the paper after the conference for a more permanent (journal) article. I don't know how common that is, however.
But, the fact that you have learned some things, assuming you aren't self deluding now, since the paper was first submitted, is a good thing.
FWIW, a lot of writers look back on their early work and cringe a bit. That is a sign of growth.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: How did it pass all the reviewers? it maybe good enough for the conference (unless you are really sure it is not) let it be published and work on an extended version for a journal publication.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/14
| 1,110
| 4,775
|
<issue_start>username_0: A year ago I submitted my CV to an institution of higher learning and they indicated that they would contact me if any openings for instructors became available. At that time all positions in my field were filled.
I just discovered that as of November 1, new positions were posted on their jobs page, including one for which I am qualified. They haven't contacted me. They have posted an applications deadline of the first of next month for the position.
Should I feel that they have essentially rejected me already? Has it been too long since I filed my information with them? Is it likely to have been simply an oversight?
I would appreciate advice, especially from those who may have been in a similar situation before. What should I do at this point?
CLARIFICATION: The "year ago" was a round figure; it was more than ten months, and so far as I am aware, no position in my field had been available during those months, making this the first opening since my CV submission. From comments received so far, this may not matter, as the CV could have conceivably been forgotten almost as soon as it had been received.<issue_comment>username_1: You are assuming a degree of organization that most institutions just do not have. You lose nothing by formally applying to the new position.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: **Apply!**
“We will save your CV in case of new openings” is mostly meaningless HR phraseology meant to reduce the sting of rejection, not only at universities but across industries. In general, employers don’t assume that a job seeker who applied a year ago is still interested, since much more often than not they will have accepted a different job by now.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **Long answer:** I'm not as familiar with the hiring process within academia, but in industry at least most organizations use an Applicant Tracking System. If you never actually filled out an online application at any point, you are most likely not in the system.
Also, in many Applicant Tracking Systems, a system which would allow them to contact candidates that they want to "save for future consideration" requires a separate subscription and configuration, so there's no guarantee that there's an easy way for them to identify and reach out to previous candidates.
**Short answer:** apply.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: No, they haven't rejected you.
They probably receive dozens of applications every day, and it's likely they haven't even seen yours. It's nothing personal. I know a manager who had to literally choose a random double-fistful of applications out of an entire 2-foot stack, and the rest got shredded. he says he knows that the shredder ate the applications of some great candidates, but he literally did not have time to even glance at the vast majority. Not fair, ideal, moral, efficient, or maybe even legal, but that's what happens.
Apply through the usual channels, and make no mention of the previous unsolicited application.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Apply.
I think after few years of intensive cynicism course for others known as life you will build your own HRspeak-english dictionary.
* We will contact you when new position opens = We will forget about you as soon as "reject" button is pressed in our hiring system.
* We will inform you about the hiring process... = We will ask you for more details only if you are among the hot candidates, or the one we want to hire. Otherwise you will get, at best, the auto-formatted rejection e-mail.
These are just two that came in my mind roght now...
Really, one year is really long even for extraordinarily helpful recruiter. The "we will keep your records" stack decays much faster. Within days it is very limitted, within a month it is extict already.
On the other way, the only thing you lose by applying again is the time for writing the application. Nothing more.
It is worth the opportunity.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Recruiter here :)
Re-apply! As it was mentioned before, organizations don't have the muscle to properly build talent pools of candidates that could potentially be interested in the future. It's sad but it's true...
Do you still have the contact (email, phone number, etc.) of the person you spoke with a year ago? I would advise going directly to them instead of following the standard application.
In case that person is no longer part of the organization, reach out to a member of the recruitment/ leadership team mentioning that you were already in process a year ago for a role that was no longer available. You can also elaborate on how the experience you gained in the past year, would bring more value to the role.
Go for it!! :) Best of luck!
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/14
| 663
| 2,852
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got really bad problem. First of all, I am studying for exams, and we have syllabus for exams. And 80% of questions in this exam are repeated from the past year question papers of last 10 years. I have this weird fantasy that whenever I understand a subject well, I want to dive even deeper to the point I am doing worthless and useless stuffs that won't be asked in exams and wasting my time on them. How do I prevent this idiotic behaviour. It is really not good for getting good grades in exam. Also it makes me feel less confident as I encounter stuffs that I can't learn that easily.<issue_comment>username_1: For the short-term goal of passing exams (and earning credits), you are right to focus somewhat and not become lost diving down too many interesting rabbit holes. However, wanting to learn more is a sign of an eager and curious mind, a thirst for knowledge and a desire to go beyond what may be merely a superficial understanding. That is admirable and entirely healthy if kept in balance. Deeper knowledge can stand you in good stead in your future studies/career and is certainly not worthless! You are already aware of the dangers of getting the balance wrong. Set yourself a time limit - no more than a certain number of hours a day (or week) going beyond the exam material. As for confidence, accept that there is much out there on the frontiers that very few understand well. It is good to get used to that feeling, as you will encounter it again, especially if you become a researcher.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Firstly: please do not be so hard on yourself. What you call "idiotic behaviour" is behavior that most teachers want their students to engage in.
I don't think you should stop wanting to learn more about topics that may have no relevance for the exam. Instead, I think you should first learn the core material that **will** be on the exam, and then focus on the more interesting material later. This will require good time management skills, but if you can do this, you will satisfy your need to delve deeper into a subject area and get good grades. Of course, you need to have a familiarity with the core material that will be tested in the exam, but please do not think of your interest in "worthless" topics as meaningless. It can be very beneficial, as it could allow you to have more of an understanding about a subject than your classmates who will only study what is required.
In my experience, it is often the case that in exams, the content on the exam will always be a bit more challenging than the content you will study in class. By taking an interest in the subject and finding out more about it than you need to, you may be at an advantage when it comes to answering some of the more difficult questions in the exam.
Please do not stop being curious.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/15
| 881
| 3,421
|
<issue_start>username_0: I published a journal paper about one year ago. I used content from other people's work with correct citation, but I described it with the wrong organization name. For example:
***Sam, from NYU, reported good performance of this prediction method in 20XX. (Sam, 20XX)***.
Although the citation in the parentheses is correct, Sam is actually from another school.
The journal says I can submit a corrigendum if the mistake is serious, but can this one be considered as "serious"?
Any comments would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, a decision on whether a corrigendum is issued is up to the publisher, who usually acts according to the recommendations of the journal editor.
Consider [Elsevier's "Policy and Best Practices: errata and corrigendum"](https://www.elsevier.com/editors/perk/policy-and-best-practice-errata-And-corrigenda) (emphasis is mine):
>
> A corrigendum refers to a change to their article that the author wishes to publish at any time after acceptance. **Authors should contact the editor** of the journal, **who will determine the impact of the change and decide on the appropriate course of action**. Elsevier will only instigate a corrigendum to a published article after receiving approval and instructions from the editor.
>
>
>
A more detailed process is described for [JMIR publications](https://support.jmir.org/hc/en-us/articles/115001301507-We-published-a-paper-in-JMIR-and-have-a-correction-What-is-the-process-of-publishing-a-corrigendum-), where they describe potential outcomes:
>
> ...
>
>
> Requests like "I forgot to acknowledge somebody" or "there is an error in one of the authors' names" are what we call a "Discretionary Correction", as it is an oversight that is the authors' responsibility but not severe enough to affect the validity of the paper. We can correct it, but reserve the right to charge a fee of $190 for publishing the corrigendum, correcting the original article and linking it to the corrigendum, and resubmitting the article to various databases and/or making changes to the PubMed record.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> We do not think the error you have mentioned is a problem and requires any action/correction.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> The error is a minor layout change and can be made without publishing a corrigendum.
>
>
>
So, for JMIR, the type of error can lead to different results: publication of corrigendum (with fees paid by the publisher or by paper authors), rejection of the corrigendum inquiry, or in-place edit of the publication without formally publishing a corrigendum.
Therefore, the process is definitely field-, journal- and, probably, even editor-dependent.
In your case, **the error in the in-text citation is very unlikely to be considered severe**, especially, since the citation in parenthesis is correct.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If the person is easy to find, say with an uncommon name, then it probably isn't serious. But you can submit the correction and the editor will decide what to do with it.
The purpose of the citation, other than plagiarism, is to let readers see the context of your work more completely. The name of the institution is probably less important than the rest of it.
An exception might be if the actual institution is a world-wide center for research in your topic. Then it would, perhaps be an important part of the context.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/15
| 532
| 2,002
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to describe my used machine learning methods in the methodology of my thesis and my source is **Hands-On Machine Learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras & TensorFlow** from O´Reilly. I anticipate that there is no general answer and it depends on the University, however, if I would like to publish it as a scientific paper, are there any obstacles with these sources?
Many thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you should cite it as you would any source. There are two reasons. If you don't cite it you may give the impression that you developed the techniques yourself, which is plagiarism. Also, a reader needs full context of your work and some of that appears in the book.
Unless something is *common knowledge* it needs to be cited. Things in undergraduate textbooks are usually common knowledge, and this may be in a grey area, but it is better to cite for the context reason if nothing else.
And an unneeded citation is almost never harmful, while a missing one, if needed, always is.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you take a look at Google Scholar, you can see that there are, at the time of writing, [3420 citations](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8615696746315241538&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en) to the book you are referring to. So yes, since you used that book as a source for your methods, do add the citation. There is nothing inherently wrong with O'Reilly books, when you use them for your research, you cite them.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think you should cite this book, and also find the original academic publications about the methods, and read and cite them.
Or maybe not the original academic publications, but some major academic publication such as an academic book that describes them, for example: Hastie, Tibshirani, Friedman (2009), The Elements of Statistical Learning. [https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/ElemStatLearn/](https://web.stanford.edu/%7Ehastie/ElemStatLearn/)
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/15
| 559
| 2,059
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is one section inside a chapter of my thesis that ended up written by my advisor.
As it stands right now, I think it should have quotation marks, and then to add the reference from where it's from. But it's from my advisor, not a paper, book, etc. How can I cite my advisor properly?
Could be something like: advisor's name, university, department, year? or how?
Or to add a footnote, explaining that?
Thanks in advance for your help.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you should cite it as you would any source. There are two reasons. If you don't cite it you may give the impression that you developed the techniques yourself, which is plagiarism. Also, a reader needs full context of your work and some of that appears in the book.
Unless something is *common knowledge* it needs to be cited. Things in undergraduate textbooks are usually common knowledge, and this may be in a grey area, but it is better to cite for the context reason if nothing else.
And an unneeded citation is almost never harmful, while a missing one, if needed, always is.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you take a look at Google Scholar, you can see that there are, at the time of writing, [3420 citations](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=8615696746315241538&as_sdt=2005&sciodt=0,5&hl=en) to the book you are referring to. So yes, since you used that book as a source for your methods, do add the citation. There is nothing inherently wrong with O'Reilly books, when you use them for your research, you cite them.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think you should cite this book, and also find the original academic publications about the methods, and read and cite them.
Or maybe not the original academic publications, but some major academic publication such as an academic book that describes them, for example: <NAME>, Friedman (2009), The Elements of Statistical Learning. [https://web.stanford.edu/~hastie/ElemStatLearn/](https://web.stanford.edu/%7Ehastie/ElemStatLearn/)
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/15
| 579
| 2,424
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student writing a thesis. I am stuck in a cycle of revisions and would like to be able to complete my thesis and move on to other things.
I have both an advisor and co-advisor. They have different ideas about the structure and content of the thesis, and my advisor will ask that I re-revise after getting comments from the co-advisor, even if this goes against their initial instructions. I don't communicate directly with the co-advisor (we communicate through my advisor) due to previous disagreements.
How can I let my advisor know that needing to make multiple conflicting changes is frustrating me, and that I need to finish this thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: The best word for this situation is "sufficient." I would write and say the following:
* You appreciate all the help thus far
* You are concerned about other projects coming up
* You (and, if they agree) and your advisor feel that they current paper is sufficient. Do you agree that it is sufficient?
something like the following - edit to make more or less forceful/deferential, as needed
"Dear Co-Advisor,
Thank you for your recent comments on this chapter and for all of your help thus far. At this point, Advisor and I feel that the chapter is sufficient, and I would like to make time for other projects/additional chapters. Do you agree that the chapter is sufficient in its current state? If not, please highlight the one or two issues I could address, at which point I will need to start focusing on other projects; given time constraints, I won't be able to do another round of review on this chapter.
All the best,
Hmm Idk"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: "The main problem that I find here, is that, it's seems that there's not a defined end." - this is the case with research overall. Fortunately, a thesis (especially undergrad one) is more of a technical kind of work. Unfortunately, it seems your advisor is not a very experienced one.
So, start with the thesis structure. Start fleshing it out, maybe put some lorem ipsum in parts you haven't done yet: it is important to get a vision of the "final product" for people who never know where to draw the line.
Focusing on the research itself is good for ideas but can be terrible for planning and interpersonal communication (in the sense you do need to agree on some set of mutual obligations without goal posting).
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/16
| 681
| 2,903
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted an article to a prestigious journal JCR Q1 about 20 months ago. It took more than 6 months for them to send the article for review. But it was worth it. The reviewers did a good job and decided "major revisions". The EiC was very kind to me and made suggestions for improvement.
However, it has now been 11 months since I submitted the revisions, and I still have not received a decision (the status remains at "with editor"). I have contacted the EiC twice and asked for an update. The first time (6 months after resubmission) she told me that Covid had delayed the process. The second time (10 months after resubmission) she told me that she was still reviewing the revisions and was happy with everything at the moment, that she thought the article was good, but required a few more weeks. She told me he didn't think any further rounds of revisions were needed. But I still haven't heard back.
I also have 2 submitted articles in that same journal that have not been sent for peer review yet (8 months since submission).
I do not come from a field where such delays are common, although the turnaround time for this journal is particularly high (the other published articles had an average turnaround time of a year before covid).
Considering that (1) this is one of the few journals specific to my (sub, sub)field, and (2) the editor seems favorably disposed toward the revised article, is it worth waiting, or should I withdraw my article(s)?
Update (15th, December 2021)
----------------------------
The Editor in Chief, although later than she predicted, finally informed me of her decision: The article submitted some time ago has been accepted and the other two most recent articles have been sent for peer rreview. It was worthy to wait.
---
---<issue_comment>username_1: It is hard to say. My wife had an article in review for 2 years (top journal in our field) and did get published.
Do not withdraw an article with major revisions but rather the other two.
I recommend you talk with your mentor / advisor - they can hopefully give you the best advice for your career / next steps and what is best.
My wife has had manuscripts rejected only to be accepted by other journals. You need to talk to someone in your field and that knows your situation to provide the best advice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Implicit in your question is the assumption "if I withdraw my paper I will be able to get it published elsewhere faster".
Are you sure that will happen though? It's entirely possible you withdraw it, send it to another journal, they take six months to review and suggest revisions, and then take another six months to review the revision.
Ultimately it's up to you, but the fact that the editor-in-chief of this journal is responsive is, I think, a good sign that you will get a decision eventually.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/16
| 986
| 4,004
|
<issue_start>username_0: Any guidelines as to what's a sufficient level of "being succinct" research papers?
This confuses me, because it seems to me like "being succinct" is sold as an *ideal* ("a very desirable thing to have"). But when trying to figure out "well how to produce succinct text", then I find as if there are no general guidelines for it and that it could well be "very subjective" thing.
Based on subjective experience on reading "experienced papers" I would also argue that "being succinct" may come at the cost of not having said information that would have been necessary. I.e. leaving out important information at the cost of appearing "nicer in text".<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a guideline: Follow the six rules near the end of this essay by George Orwell
<https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/politics-and-the-english-language/>
especially
* Never use a long word where a short one will do.
* If it is possible to cut a word [or phrase] out, always cut it out.
In your question, you could cut the start of the 2nd paragraph up to "like" and the last sentence of the 3rd paragraph. I know it is not supposed to be academic writing, but it is just an example of how to be succinct.
But you are right that it is subjective. It depends on the field as well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Being succint is not subjective. Being succint is actually the most objective way to write something because you need to focus on what your audience **knows** and **doesn't know**.
A short example: if you are demonstrating a theorem and you perform an addition, you need to specify that the operation is commutative to K12 students, probably not to graduate in mathemathics.
That's why there are great papers, interesting papers, boring papers: some papers flow with you and your knowledge, some rely on your knowledge to miss the gaps, some get you annoyed spending long time in *obvious* things.
Given the variety of the background and of the knowledge of the readership, professionals in a given field will not unanimously agree on which one is a great paper, but it is quite likely that if 50%-60% of the specialists think a paper is a great paper, then the paper is deemed to be a great paper, even if 20% of the readers maybe think "there are too many missing information in this paper".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: While it is notoriously hard to figure out what to cover and what to omit, there is a handful of purely linguistic tricks. username_1 provided a good example of those, and there are plenty more to be found (another set of key words you might find useful: informative writing).
I will focus on something else instead. The mindset.
The mind in turmoil struggles to communicate thoughts clearly. I find confidence and clarity absolutely essential for writing. There is no need to omit the thought process entirely while sticking to the subject matter like you suggest in the comments.
Text becomes hard to read because of not-so-necessary fluff: overuse of passive voice, waltzing around conclusions with "probably" and "might indicate", dealing almost exclusively in hypotheticals. These are also the hallmarks of a large part of academic writing: dropping careful formulations is also no good, after all. So how to find that balance, then?
By grouping all the "maybe, maybe not" and "this is not conclusive" bits together. Do not let your - and your reader's - mind wander around too much during a single explanation. You might stop at some key concepts and briefly address possible concerns if it doesn't require going too much in-depth. If it does, find a simpler explanation.
Finally, it is impossible to cover everything required to understand the subject in a single body of text. Spend a lot of time considering the scope: who is your audience? What do and don't they know?
This is a lot of work, and the answers can't be given in general. Some examples of questions can.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/16
| 934
| 3,858
|
<issue_start>username_0: A potential supervisor asked to speak with me over Zoom, and sent me a Zoom link. However, the day came and went, but they didn’t show up, and haven't replied to my emails (for about 5 days now, as of November 16).
What should the next step be?
---
Previously, they had asked for a meeting, but after I agreed to the specific day they suggested, they completely disappeared for a month. They then emailed me to apologize, saying they broke their arm and were unable to answer messages. So now I’m just guessing that they probably have an issue with their arm again and can’t reply.<issue_comment>username_1: Anything is possible. They may have been hit by a bus. At this point, you have no way of knowing and I would avoid jumping to conclusions, especially if this is a job you think you might want. If this Zoom meeting was arranged in the usual fashion after some initial email discussion with a recruiter, someone in HR (human resources), or perhaps a department admin, I would reach out to them and report that the meeting was missed, your email has gone unanswered, and you're concerned that something has happened.
If you later learn the supervisor is just being very rude, I would take that as good to know and look for a job elsewhere. Good luck.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I live in a region where uncertainties are common and would consider some possibilities that others might not be quick to recognize. I would suggest that you tick these off the list before jumping to conclusions as to your potential supervisor.
*Possible Reasons for Lack of Communication*
* Their internet, computer, or power has failed. Even in Portland, Oregon, USA, thousands of people had a weeks'-long power outage this year due to an unusual ice storm and its aftereffects.
* Your potential supervisor experienced an unexpected medical emergency. For example, I had a sudden case of severe keratitis this year which prevented me from doing much of anything with my computer for a couple weeks (everything was too blurry to read).
As it seems highly unlikely that, in ordinary circumstances, someone would go to the effort of making a zoom appointment, communicating the time of the meeting, and sending you a link for it and then just not show up, it is prudent not to simply assume the worst. Try to learn the facts of the situation before making judgment calls relative to someone's character or motives.
You do not know what happened. You have no reasonable way to know why it happened. Until you have more knowledge about both of these, avoid making unwarranted conclusions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You asked "What is my next step?"
I would suggest contacting other people at the same place.
If there is an office, contact them. Otherwise look for somebody with a title like "secretary" or similar. As a last resort, contact another academic.
First try an email. **KEEP THAT EMAIL SHORT.** They don't want or need your life history. I suggest:
>
> Hi!
>
>
> I had a zoom meeting with prof X at DATE.
> They didn't show and I have been unable to contact them later.
> Are they all right?
>
>
> Your name here.
>
>
>
I am not sure about how fast you should expect an answer or what your next step should be.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Get in contact with that research group / department's secretariat, or other members of the academic staff as physically close to that potential advisor. Ask them if there's anything wrong with Prof. Whats-their-name. Either they say yes and you have your explanation, or they say no, and you tell them you were supposed to have a Zoom conversation but you haven't been able to get in touch with him. Don't sound accusative - use a more confused/worried tone, so that it won't appear as though you're going around complaining about them.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/16
| 687
| 2,920
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of applying for a Ph.D. and the application process requires several reference letters. Since I only have done significant work with only one supervisor so far in my Master's, I would need to ask from previous professors during my Bachelor's.
Fortunately, the previous professors have already written me reference letters, and therefore the effort would be minimal. What would need to be done is just translate and then maybe change a few words to match the description of the ad.
Nevertheless, I cannot help but feel bad about reconnecting with previous professors with more than two years of no communication, only to ask for a reference letter and to get their permission to list them as referees in my CV.
What is your take on this? How should I approach this without being seen in a bad way?<issue_comment>username_1: Students do sometimes ask me for references several years after I have worked with them. I have no problem with that request, even if I have heard nothing in the interim. It's particularly easy to grant if I have written for them before.
That said, I do tell them that letters about current work are more useful than letters from the past.
You might include in your request that you know current references are better but that you have too few of those for your purpose.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, you lose nothing by trying. We have a saying in Spain: "El no ya lo tienes" (you already have the "no", you just have to win the "yes").
I'm applying for postdocs and last week I contacted a professor I've barely worked with. She is a great reference in the field. To my surprise, she accepted very quickly and very kindly.
Just explain the situation, make the request and take the opportunity to greet the professor and get to know their current situation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You are not “reconnecting”. You are emailing someone to ask for a letter of reference. This is normal and expected. It’s not guaranteed that they’ll say yes, but no one will think any less of you for sending such an email. The people you’re emailing have themselves likely sent a number of such emails to people they don’t know very well over the years. So they will have no issues at all with such a request.
By contrast, what would be a genuine thing to feel bad about, and likely unwelcome, is if you email a professor expressing an inauthentic-sounding desire to “reconnect”, asking some inauthentic-sounding questions about how they are doing, and then emailing them again a few days later to say “Oh, I forgot to mention I’m applying for grad programs, will you write me a letter?” Such a strategy is transparently dishonest and likely to upset people, so don’t do that.
The main thing is to be straight about your intentions. Then you will be fine, and should have no reason to feel bad.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/16
| 1,004
| 4,468
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for a tenure-track position in a university located in California. While sending the auto-request emails to my recommenders, I just noted that the following information is automatically attached to each request email:
>
> Please read the University of California's confidentiality policy
> regarding external letters of reference.
>
>
> Although a candidate may request to see the contents of letters of
> evaluation in accordance with California law and University policy,
> your identity will be held in confidence. The material made available
> will exclude the letterhead, the signature block, and material below
> the signature block. Therefore, material that would identify you,
> particularly information about your relationship to the candidate,
> should be placed below the signature block. In any legal proceeding or
> other situation in which the source of confidential information is
> sought, the University does its utmost to protect the identity of such
> sources.
>
>
>
In this regard:
1- If I request to see the contents of the letters, will my recommenders be informed by the university regarding my request?
2- When may I raise such a request (for example, any time after the submission, or after the delivery of letters, or ...)?<issue_comment>username_1: IANAL but I assume that the text is in accordance with a FOIA style law. If so, then anyone can FOIA the external letters of reference in support of your application. The university has identified the parts of the letter which it will provide and which it will not provide in response to FOIA queries.
FOIA requests are themselves government records and can be FOIAed. If your referees want to know if you requested their reference letters then they can FOIA that. This would require them to continually poll the University with FOIA requests because if your FOIA request was received after their request then your request would not be included in the response to their request.
If the University has a policy of notifying referees about such requests (relieving them of the need to poll) then it is almost certainly written down somewhere and you can FOIA that. However, policy can change at any time. So maybe you would need to similarly poll the university.
If you do FOIA their notification policy and determine they do not notify references and then FOIA their references you can never be certain that (1) your referees will not FOIA your requests (but you could FOIA their requests about your requests); or (2) the university will not change its policy - and they could even change it retroactively.
It is fun to think of some of the absolute absurdities involved (e.g., you could FOIA for FOIA requests about your reference to determine if your referee has learned that you have learned what they wrote about you) but I recommend that instead
1. Use referees that you are positive will provide a glowing reference.
2. If you want to read the reference, discuss this with your referee ahead of time.
There is no right or wrong answer to the question of whether references should be confidential, but there is a right and wrong answer to the question of should you solicit a reference from someone which you have a combative relationship with.
TLDR
1. They might be informed. The university has not promised you confidentiality.
2. You can request at any time. However, I would put off that request until such that as your tenure application has been denied. Just as the university has not promised you confidentiality it has not promised to consider the request negatively against you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I’m a current faculty member and former department chair at a UC campus, and somewhat familiar with these policies. Here’s my “insider’s” take: it is not in the University of California’s interest, nor in the interest of other job candidates, nor even in your own interest (although you might disagree about that), for the answer to your questions to be publicly known and easily accessible online.
It’s not really a great mystery however. If you email a representative of the campus you’re applying to, I’m reasonably confident they will give you a straightforward answer.
Also, please don’t rely on speculation from people who do not have specific, accurate information related to what you’re asking about. The information posted so far on this page is largely inaccurate.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/17
| 437
| 1,816
|
<issue_start>username_0: My paper was accepted by a conference. The paper is limited to 11 pages at the time of submission. But now when I add author information, the paper becomes 12 pages. But I did not see the page requirement of Camera-Ready version. Is the page limit of Camera-Ready the same as when it was submitted?
The website of the conference is: <https://hpca-conf.org/2022/camera-ready-instructions/>
**The reason I asked this question is because I found that a paper last year was 12 pages.** <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/9065598>
And I just heard someone say that the Camera-Ready version is often one page longer than when it was submitted. I'm very sorry.
I sent an email to the conference party in the morning, but there is no accurate reply yet.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Nobody can know more than what the website says. You'll have to make a professional decision what you think is the right number and how much you want to argue with them if you submit 12 pages when they were expecting 11.
That's part of being a professional: Sometime you have to make decisions with not very much guidance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As a general rule, the page limit for camera-ready papers is the same as that for the initial submission. It's quite typical that one has to add things to a paper in response to reviewer feedback -- not only the author header --, so one often has to compress parts of the paper anyways.
However, one can always ask the program chairs if an additional page would be OK. In several situations, I have received a positive response to such a request. It's advisable to ask such a question as early as possible, since the program chairs might need some time to make the decision (including communication with the publishers).
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/17
| 1,008
| 4,250
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently pursuing my bachelor's in Mechanical engineering and I am facing this issue since a long time. I study a subject completely and then forget it overtime as I continue to study new subjects. I thought repetition could probably serve me well. But if I start revisiting a subject all over again, it takes a lot of time, and then I'm in the dilemma of choosing to revise a previously done subject or study a new subject.
How can I overcome forgetting without wasting much of my time?<issue_comment>username_1: First, and most important, there is more to learning than "remembering". Your goal in learning something like engineering (or math or science or ...) is competence in the field. That is, applying what you learn. If you can do that, then remembering specific facts (if that is what you mean) is less important and they are likely to rise to the top when doing applications.
Another major goal of an education is to gain *insight* into the workings of the field. How do the ideas *fit together* to form a unified whole. That can be just as difficult to achieve as competence, though they are related. And again, the facts will be implied by the insights, making them easier to recall, but also easier to look up in reference material as needed.
But, learning requires two things (as I've written here pretty often): reinforcement and feedback. Reinforcement comes through practice and it changes the brain. Feedback is to assure that you don't reinforce things that are incorrect. Most coursework is designed to provide these two aspects along with the presentation of material in a coherent way. For the "change the brain" idea see *The Art of Changing the Brain* by <NAME>.
But there is a way to enhance learning and enable retention that go hand in hand. [Here is a description](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/a/1168/1293) of something called the *Hipster PDA*, which is nothing more than a deck of index cards. The value in learning is that the creation of the cards and the revision of notes is in reinforcement. If you write things out by hand you get strong reinforcement.
But the added value for retention is that you can carry around with you at all times a few of the cards (10 - 20, say) and review them when you have a few moments; waiting in Starbucks, perhaps. If you write important ideas on the fronts of the cards, leaving the backs blank, you have a way to make notes when you think of things or see some relationships to other ideas. If you use different colored cards you can keep different *kinds* of ideas easily classified.
And, you don't waste any time at all. We all wind up waiting impatiently for things. Even carrying a notebook at all times is a big help. Bound notebooks (Moleskine) are very good for this. Date every page. Leave room for updates.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: **Tips for Remembering What You've Learned**
1. It's scientifically established that students will learn better when they like the subject of the class.
2. It's also known that students learn better when they like their teacher.
Given these facts, even if right now you do not think you like the class or the instructor, *try to like them anyhow.*
It's a similar concept to getting more nutrition from a food you enjoyed. You will retain more when you actually like, value, and appreciate the subject matter.
Aside from doing your best to enjoy/think positively about the subject, it also helps to *apply* what you've learned in some way. Think about how what you are learning affects your life or that of others, or how it can be applied to solving problems, etc.
**The Best Tip**
But the very best tip of all (I saved the best for last) is this:
*Teach it!*
That's right--when you have begun to grasp the subject matter, find someone to whom you may explain it. When your mind is applied to the task of *explaining* what you have just learned, it is forced to organize your thoughts, which may still be somewhat sketchy, and to make sense of them. One cannot teach what one does not understand. Furthermore, the very fact of teaching it gives opportunity to repeat the knowledge and make a practical application of it to someone else.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/17
| 1,967
| 8,535
|
<issue_start>username_0: Two years ago, I was about three weeks (fortunately I keep notes) into a postdoc research position with a federal government organization, and I was excited to participate in a meeting with a federal researcher who was asking for help with ideas after a paper was rejected by journal reviewers for lacking any kind of validation of the results or approach.
During the meeting, the researcher presented the model, and I pointed out that rather than constructing an empirical distribution for P(y=1|x), the method was estimating P(x|y=1), which none of the internal or journal reviewers had noticed. I suggested two ways out: sort it out with Bayes' theorem or take an entirely different approach by creating a binary dataset with y taking on 0 or 1 instead of just 1, which was possible due to the sampling scheme.
The researcher took my second idea and quickly published a paper using that idea and included a long list of other folks in the author list and acknowledgments, but there is no mention of my contribution or name.
Now I am writing a paper about my own research that implements the same idea, but with substantial enhancements, and as I contemplate the literature review, I am extremely aware that I would be citing my own idea as the foundation for my approach, but with no obvious way to let the world know that it was my idea or that I contributed in any way.
A footnote explaining my role in the cited research seems weak because it would lack corroboration (unless I put the federal researcher's name on the author list [their only role was providing the dataset, which anyone can ask for and receive], a topic that is a whole other can of worms...).
Reading the responses [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/140095/ethics-is-it-ethical-for-a-professor-to-conduct-research-using-a-students-idea) and [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/141358/is-it-unethical-to-use-your-students-research-idea-without-giving-them-coauth) suggests that perhaps this is a more dramatic ethical issue than I expected (e.g., mentions of plagiarism).
I am also hoping to move on from being a postdoc, so I'm trying to accumulate recommendations so I can take the next steps in my career. I am working with the same federal researcher on another project (that they lead) and I get lots of credit for my ideas that have greatly modernized the approach and for teaching the team all about it. I have been expecting to rely on this researcher for glowing and detailed recommendations, which makes this a bit more difficult...
Broadly, this research is in the area of biostatistics and software development.<issue_comment>username_1: It certainly seems like the paper has your "fingerprints" on it and that you made an important intellectual contribution. Yes, I'd call it plagiarism if you weren't at least acknowledged and probably an author.
My field is math/cs, however, where a few minutes of input can have major impacts. I don't know how similar things work in biostatistics, but for theoretical work, I'd think they are similar. Some people think that it is "effort" or "time spent" that makes you an author. But really it is who contributed the ideas. Especially the crux ideas. It feels like you qualify.
I can't, however, suggest a solution. Think long term, however. If this turns out to be a single "glitch" in your career you can probably leave it behind you. But future "collaboration" with such people isn't advised.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Getting input from fellow researchers is a common thing. There is nothing wrong with building on discussed ideas. This is one way how research progresses, as you have just experienced. Acknowledging that in some way is fair, of course.
But sometimes, it happens that you overestimate the input you gave. Authors of papers usually thought a lot about their work, so many ideas and approaches are already in their heads. Additionally, implementing an idea or adapting experiments and data analysis also takes a lot of effort most of the time. From the perspective of your discussion partners, your input then might be very small, too small to result in co-authorship. Butterfly effects like that happen all the time. I advise to exercise this change in perspective to answer your question yourself, as it is hard to tell from the distance.
Usually, when something as I describe above happens to me, I am actually quite happy that I was able to help. Well, occasionally only after an initial phase of disappointment, I admit. It also depends if you have reasons to suspect that your discussion partners have a tendency to treat people in an unfair way. Cooperation should be founded on mutual trust. If you trust these people, then you can assume that they acted with no malicious intent. And you might even be able to ask them about their perspective on your contribution.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: No, I don't think you were unreasonably left out of the author list, assuming I'm reading the situation correctly from your description.
I have several times made comments of this magnitude on other people's papers regarding mistakes in their statistical analyses. Similarly, I have had reviewers of papers I have submitted that made comments of this magnitude and made corresponding adjustments in the manuscript. Other places that you might see this sort of thing happen would be in discussions at poster presentations or during/after a talk at a conference or speaking visit. These formal and informal opportunities to comment on someone else's work are not bids for authorship. None of these circumstances led to changes in authorship in my experience. If they take your feedback and improve their work, then that's just taking ordinary feedback as part of the scientific process.
In some rare cases, contributions like these might lead to authorship, but not from just the simple suggestion alone. Instead, the way it would happen would be for that one comment to lead to further involvement in the project. For example, if I were to suggest a different statistical analysis, and the current authors invited me to run the analysis myself, write the methods and results portions of the paper that involved that analysis, and to further review the remainder of the manuscript, I would certainly expect to be made an author.
Unless I'm missing something, it seems that all you've done is to identify an error. It may be a simple error or one ultimately resulting in a profound reinterpretation of the results, but still, it sounds like something of the magnitude that a peer reviewer *should* have found or that would have come up in one of the other settings I've mentioned.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You could cite the paper you mentioned and add another reference "personal communication" with you as the first author and the federal author as the second one. This links you to idea, it makes clear there is no official record, and it does not claim authorship of the other paper.
Example
```
We test our hypothesis by creating a binary dataset
with y taking on 0 or 1 instead of just 1 as done in [1,2].
References
[1] <NAME>, Federal Agent: *Personal communication, adding this idea to [2]*
[2] Federal Agent et al: *Different topic, using idea with y taking on 0 or 1*
```
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: It would have been prudent of the authors to have mentioned you in Acknowledgements but take this as a learning experience:
1. Always consider inviting colleagues as co-authors, if they show interest and come with valuable inputs.
2. Be aware whenever you are about to hit the "submit" button: Is there anyone I have forgotten to acknowledge?
3. If you ever feel cheated for a co-authorship, let it pass but do blacklist the offenders; the tit-for-tat strategy from game theory works nicely in this domain.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: No. It does not appear to me that you were unreasonably excluded.
In addition to the excellent answers, it is also worth mentioning that different fields have very (very, very) different author inclusion expectations.
For example, in my experience, biologists tend to include several --perhaps too many-- authors. It is simply a matter of culture. Compare that with pure maths, which is the opposite.
Perhaps you were coming from a more biology background/culture? Whereas your collaborators were more statistics/comp sci, and never even thought about including you as a minor contributor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/17
| 2,851
| 12,313
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm must declare at the very beginning that I'm a PhD student that suffers from major impostor syndrome, and very much feel very unconfident about myself or my abilities.
That being said, I recently received a paper to review for a conference, and when I read the paper I felt it wasn't well-motivated, and the introduction was shaped badly. Even though I felt that the rest of the paper was okay, it was generally hard to follow for me. I'm someone with related experience in the field of the paper, I understood much of the paper after a thorough look, and evaluated based on my opinions. After a deep battle with myself, I decided to 'weak reject' the paper and sent in my reasons to do so.
However, the other submitted reviews were quite positive, and now I feel like maybe I didn't do justice to the authors' work by rejecting it. As I looked further into the draft, I saw some basic things that I didn't consider before. So maybe I didn't understand it well enough because I'm just stupid, and not because the work was actually bad. Now I feel extremely guilty and feel like I'm not capable of sending confident reviews anymore.
Perhaps this is a question for my therapist rather than you all, but being experienced in academia, I want to know if these feelings are normal, how to cope with them, and is it okay to reject a paper the way I did?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I decided to 'weak reject' the paper
>
>
>
No you didn't. It is the editor that rejects the paper, or not. You merely provided input based on your technical expertise, which it sounds like you did in good faith and with considerable care.
>
> and sent in my reasons to do so.
>
>
>
This is the key point. Editors do not make decisions simply by tallying the votes; rather, they will consider the technical points you raised, and those of the other reviewers.
>
> I want to know if these feelings are normal, how to cope with them, and is it okay to reject a paper the way I did?
>
>
>
As you move up in your career, you will find yourself doing this more and more. Eventually, you will be regularly giving students bad grades, rejecting candidates for jobs, and reporting students for misconduct (or making similarly difficult decisions outside of the university). The feeling of second-guessing your decisions never really goes away, but at some point, you get used to it.
I find it helpful to trust that it's pretty rare to be the single point of failure in someone's life. For example, even if you were the sole decider for this paper, the authors would just submit somewhere else; it's not like you torpedoed the paper forever. Similarly, if you fire someone, there is normally a long series of events (validated by other decision makers) before it reaches the point where you have to make the final decision. And it's also helpful once you have more experience on the other side of bad decision making -- for example, if you accept a bad paper and it ends up being publicly criticized or retracted, then you'll feel less bad the next time you recommend rejection.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First and foremost, **you don't make the final determination,** and thus have a somewhat limited responsibility. For a conference, some section chair or committee makes the final determination. It is their job to read all the reviews, and make a determination as to suitability for a conference. They had other reviews, and could certainly have looked at them and accepted the work.
In my field, my experience is that conference standards are lower than those of a good journal by design -- the research is a bit more cutting edge and raw. Referees may or may not know the standards, and again, it is the responsibility of the section chair to make the determination. The best you can do is be specific about the problems you see, so the responsible party has the tools they need to make the right determination.
Whether you're too tough or not, that's a different story. We all get our experience some way, and reviews for conferences are a great place to start.
My personal policy for reviews of anything short of a grant is that I have no reason to write down anything that I would hesitate saying to the author's face (whether the review is blind, double blind, or signed). Whether this is the right policy for you, that's a personal choice. It's different for reviewing grants, where a single review can have a profound effect on a career.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It is true that the editor makes the final decision, but this decision is highly based/relied on the reviewer's comments. I know a Ph.D. student who couldn't sleep well for a few days because the paper that took months of research got rejected. In a case like this, you can always adjust your decision when you think it is the right thing to do.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: As a counterpoint to the world-view expressed in other answers: I've never understood claims that grad students or recent PhDs could be good referees for serious papers. The lack of experience, if nothing else, diminishes perspective...
In particular, if/when a novice doesn't understand something in a paper, especially larger issues, it's not surprising. Yes, we might imagine a standard for writing which makes things intelligible to people not-quite expert... but that is (in math) not the standard for writing. Intelligibility to experts (plus meeting certain implicit stylistic expectations) is the goal.
In mathematics, anyway, it is not so easy for even very talented beginners to be able to appreciate/appraise serious papers. Despite some mythologies, getting a PhD doesn't really make anyone an expert in anything. It's a beginning. People equally capable and with decades' head start on a beginner operate in a much different context. No moral virtue there, but definitely scientific/intellectual virtue.
But, in your particular case, you did the best you could. Good to learn something about your own limitations, such as they may be. Don't worry, except to try to be a better scholar for future episodes.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: If this worries you, there's a fortunately easy solution: never recommend rejection at the first review; always recommend revision. The line between revision and rejection is a fuzzy one, and no one will blame you if you recommend revision for a paper which you have serious doubts about. If, when you get the paper back after revision, you think the authors have not made a real effort to address your remarks, then you can still recommend rejection.
Based on your description I would also guess that the paper was sent for revisions and you're now looking at the revision. You can still recommend acceptance. It's not common for a reviewer to flip from recommending "reject" to recommending "accept", but it's not rare either. Of course, only do so if you think all concerns have been addressed.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: Don't feel bad and don't assume you are less qualified than other, more senior reviewers. Often, reviewers at the beginning of their "reviewer careers" are much more thorough in their work.
My first review was what I percieved to be a very bad paper with many errors and shortcomings. It was within my specific area of expertise, though, and I was very much able to judge the correctness of what they were writing. I wrote a very detailed review and voted to "decline". A few months later, I got the paper to review for a second time (the editor had decided for "major revision"), along with the comments of my fellow reviewers: most of the points that I raised had not been mentioned or noticed by the other reviewers.
Because of my comments, the authors revised several sections of the paper, redid some experiments and corrected wrong references. Whithout me bringing up all these points and my harsh judgement, the paper might have sailed through with only minor revisions and a bad paper would have been published. Because I was harsh, a better paper was published.
I also initially felt bad after I handed in my first review, and even wrote a private letter to the editor, explaining that I am not 100% sure about my judgement because this was my first ever review. But afterwards, it felt right and I have learned to trust my judgement.
Being able to honestly judge the work of other people (including saying it is bad when it really is bad) is an important skill in academia, but it takes time to acquire. Keep up the good work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: As others have said, you did your best as a reviewer, given your level of expertise and perspective on the field.
Other responses also point out that graduate students may not be the best to review research papers due to lack of experience. But, I don't fully agree.
Due to this impostor syndrome, I've declined to review many papers, though I am sure I would have done better, as a student, than 30% of the reviewers that reviewed my papers.
In your case, I would suggest to keep reviewing papers and getting better, even if it is at the expense of a few authors who see delays in their paper publication dates due to you.
There are plenty benefits to it. First, you learn to read papers better, frame them better in the big picture of the field. Second, you learn to write your own papers better. Third, if you are a consistently honest reviewer, you will start adding much more value to the field than you subtracted when you were just learning to review papers. Fourth, and most important, it helps you become a better scientist, by teaching you what is important and what is less important in your field and who the strong players are. All these will help you in your future career, even on the short term. For example, it's one thing to give an interview talk stating what you did and how, and one other thing to be able to tell exactly how your work is advancing the science and what it is built upon and what can be built upon it.
Related to the impostor syndrome, I don't think it's a psychological problem that should require years of therapy. When you do serious research, you are constantly humbled by your apparent powerlessness in the face of the infinite unknown. Whatever knowledge you may have, there is always need for more, and whatever skills you may have, they are rarely sharp enough. Faced with this constant humiliation, you are bound to experience the delusion that you're not worthy of being called a scientist.
But, so are the others that do science, regardless of their status in the scientific community. So, the only way to cure this ailment is to look at what your peers are doing. You'll probably notice that you are not worse than most, even at reviewing papers. There are outliers, some people that are exceedingly good, and, at the same time come from very strong places, but, even those people suffer or suffered from this disease.
In short, stop worrying and keep doing your best, and improve your work with every iteration.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Something you should learn during your doctoral studies is to have confidence in your own judgement. This comes with time, but you can speed up the process by remembering that it is YOUR opinion and nobody else's. As long as you can justify it with facts, quotes etcetera, it is not a personal attack on the author[s] of the manuscript that you are reviewing.
Practise being more confident !
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: At least, in my field, when an editor gives a paper to a Ph.D. student for review, they have probably already decided that they are going to reject it. Your job is to find reasons to reject it, and to give the authors helpful feedback. As a Ph.D. student, you should probably only recommend publication of papers that are unexpectedly good. You should feel uncomfortable letting it through, not rejecting it.
Give the authors useful feedback, positive and negative, and then feel very comfortable rejecting it as that was probably what the editor wants/expects you to do. You are just doing your job.
Talk with someone senior in your field or maybe at the journal to make sure as some practices do vary by discipline. I think you will find that this is the case.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/18
| 258
| 1,234
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've noticed some potential professors explicitly write to contact them prior to applying if interested in working with them. Why is that?<issue_comment>username_1: Probably to save you and them time, because in the past they have received many applications that were not suitable, or they are only interested in students with certain very specific skills.
You can write them a short and concise message summarizing your experience, skills, and why you are thinking of applying - maybe 4 bullet points - and asking whether you should make a formal application or whether you could talk to them to discuss.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: They may also not have funding this year, or are not looking to hire anyone, so better you find out now instead of in a few months after the application process that they cant hire you (depending whether you apply to the professor or to the school).
Maybe they are looking for a very particular candidate/skillset so they can advise whether you would even be worth considering.
Or they just want to see who can actually follow instructions. They can simplify their search by only considering those that showed some initiative and reached out to them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/18
| 1,019
| 4,413
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate masters student in the Computer Science Field in the final year of my masters program. Recently, in a particular elective course in which I had been doing quite well, I had a major falling out with the professor due to which 70% of internal marks got cancelled. The professor advised me to withdraw from the course, but in the middle of semester it's no longer possible. Since I have 70% of internal marks cancelled (Meanwhile the fault is all mine as I didn't properly cited some work while summarization of class notes resulting in plag situation) , the best I could have done was to try for a D grade; but this would have drastically reduced my GPA which I really wanted to avoid. So I instead requested an F grade so that I can take another elective next year (in replacement) by taking an extra load. This also means that the F grade won't be counted towards my GPA.
But this has resulted in me asking the question: "Did I permanently nuke my chances of getting a PhD admission now?" How will it affect my chances of graduate admission in US/UK considering the subject in question is an elective course and not a core program course?<issue_comment>username_1: If there is no trace in the transcript of that F grade or in the GPA, it will not hinder your application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Answering for the US, [graduate admissions are highly individualized](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/176909/63475) - there's no formula, and decisions are being made by human beings tasked with evaluating a stack of applications that cannot be judged objectively.
All it takes to be admitted to grad school is for at least one admissions committee at a school you apply to to decide you would make a good graduate candidate. All it takes to not be admitted is for all of the admissions committees to feel they have better alternative candidates. How exactly that shakes out depends on some mix of the content of your application, the criteria each committee member considers, and the content of every other application they review.
If a program you apply to conducts interviews, you can expect to get questions about an outlier grade like this one. If you get to that stage, whether or not you are ultimately accepted may hinge on how exactly you answer that question. Some people have good excuses for specific poor grades, such as medical or other life events, in which case honestly explaining the situation is straightforward though balancing personal privacy is another important factor.
Your reason is that you got caught cheating. You may be tempted lie or deflect about it, by not mentioning it or using wording like you originally did with this question: saying you had a falling out with a professor, or that you electively took a failing grade in order to take a different course. I think you can expect admissions committee members to see through this sort of thing, and even if they don't it doesn't exactly paint you in the best light.
Being more straightforward about what happened may be a better route, but it's important that you're sincerely contrite. Students caught cheating (or really anyone "caught" for anything) have a tendency to deflect and minimize. In your own question, you write both "I didn't properly cite some work" and "the fault is all mine" - this does not resonate as honesty with me. While you write words accepting blame, "not citing properly" is not typically the level of plagiarism that nukes your grade. "Not citing properly" sounds more like citing the wrong source, or when you break up statements during editing such that a citation for multiple items A,B,C seems like it only applies to C, or disagreements over the lines between common knowledge and what must be cited. If it's really that sort of issue, you should be contesting this at your current institution, as these are all reasons to lose marks on an assignment but not reasons to be failed in a course. On the other hand, if you have "not cited properly" by presenting work that is not your own (or partially not your own) as if it is your own, you've simply plagiarized which is cheating.
It's also possible there won't be too much attention on this one course and you will be accepted without it coming up because an admissions committee will see it as an unimportant outlier in an otherwise strong application.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/18
| 492
| 2,205
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on composite material modification with the combinations X + A + P and X + A + Q (where, X, A, P, Q are different materials). For both works, I used the same testing methodologies (experimental program). Now, I have enough data for two separate research articles on each of the combinations X + A + P and X + A + Q. Is it acceptable if I submit two papers that use the same experimental methodology but different material combinations? Note that providing all of the results for the two combinations in one paper would make it overly long.<issue_comment>username_1: It is possible to write two publications in such a case, no problem. This is a common strategy. Make sure to cite the other work where appropriate.
However, in a paper you have to address a specific research question. It could well be the case that especially the second paper is only an incremental step forward because it does not include too many fundamentally new results. So while I see no ethical issue here, you still could ask yourself if you might be able to write one very strong paper with your data. If that is true, of course, depends very much on your actual results.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Is it interesting to compare the two compositions? If so, combining the results in a single paper may make for a better, stronger article, as username_1 suggested. If not, separate papers that dive into the specifics of the materials may be preferable.
You say that "providing all of the results for the two combinations in one paper would make it overly long". That's probably true, but invites the question: do you really need to provide all the results? Information dumps of the "here's everything we did" variety rarely make for the best papers. In contrast, if you have a clear story and select results and design figures accordingly, it can make for a more interesting and insightful article. Often less is more. Other results can maybe be included in supplemental material, or left out entirely. Note: I'm not saying this is a route you need to take (you know your results, we don't), just noting that "providing all of the results" shouldn't be the main goal.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/18
| 950
| 3,849
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was offered a UKRI funded position. It was advertised as two positions. I negotiated my salary given my experience and the PI refused. Since I am International, I was waiting for my visa so I attended some meetings with the team. During these meetings, I realised that my level is much higher than other postdoc who clearly did not know a lot of stuff.
Unfortunately, no one instructed me on negotiation process, I thought it is all about salary. I did not even know about relocation negotiation. I am not comfortable and I honestly want to reject this offer.
It is my first opportunity to work. I need it but I feel I deserved more.
Can I negotiate my relocation expenses to be covered?
How to negotiate relocation expenses? What if it failed?
Should I reject the offer or accept it just because I do not have any other opportunity? I am not comfortable doing a job and I know I should have more.<issue_comment>username_1: After the update to the question I will turn my comment into an answer.
In general there is very limited scope for negotiating academic salaries in the UK, especially at the post-doc level. There is a [national pay scale](https://www.ucu.org.uk/he_singlepayspine) which constrains the salaries possible for a particular job category ('band' or 'grades') fairly tightly. You can often find these pay ranges by searching 'University Name Pay Scale'. See example [here](https://www.exeter.ac.uk/media/universityofexeter/humanresources/documents/payroll/Pay_Scales.pdf) (not my institution). The Band/Grade will often (but not always) be mentioned in the job advertisement. It would be exceptionally difficult (impossible) to negotiate a salary outside the pay band of the job in question. In most cases you would get a salary at the lower end of the pay band since you increase by one 'point' per year and would then get stuck at the top of the band unless you got promoted to the next 'band'/'grade' (unlikely for a short-term post-doc since this would mean promotion to a permanent faculty position).
Relocation is often an administrative policy depending on the position & length of contract. So there is probably limited scope to negotiate this. But you could (should) ask about it if you need it. At my institution you would need at least a 1 year contract to qualify for relocation (among other requirements). This is managed by our HR department.
Note that UKRI funds are quite restricted in what they can be used for, so it usually isn't possible to pay more salary or relocation from research funds.
We can't say if you should accept the job or not. But make sure your expectations are realistic based on how academic pay/benefits work in the UK.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41443/username_1)'s answer that there is usually a very limited opportunity to negotiate postdoc salary in the UK (see also [my other answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/166590/i-couldnt-negotiate-my-postdoc-salary-during-hr-meeting-should-i-try-days-late/166593#166593)).
Regarding the relocation expenses, your University should have a policy on that. Sometimes relocation is covered for all new staff, sometimes only for permanent, sometimes only for lecturers and above, sometimes only for international, sometimes only for local. This is not in your offer, because it is in the "collective agreement" which is an internal document negotiated by University senior management, staff unions and sometimes academic Senate. HR will know the rules and will tell you whether they can reimburse your relocation from the Uni's budget. Importantly, this is not the UKRI budget, which your PI is responsible for. This is why you should ask HR, not PI, about it (but you can cc your PI in the email of course).
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/18
| 846
| 3,822
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in physics at a US institution. I've worked with a very good and supportive professor last summer in some area of research. The goal was to try a particular research group and see if it is a good fit. I was not committed to that group. The research work in that group is very much focussed on a particular method of computer simulations.
Now, I discovered that I am extremely interested in a different field of physics, which is much more theoretically oriented. I find that I am naturally much more capable of doing pure theory work in that other field of physics. I have to decide on which field I should be doing research on next spring. I found that all professors working on the field I am very interested in are not available next spring. At least one of them will take students next September though, but he still has to decide on which student he would take.
I am still very interested in one of the research questions that I started to think about last summer with the original group. The PI said he is available next spring.
My question: Would it be ethical to continue working with that group even though I know there's a possibility that I will switch fields next Fall? If I join, I intend to work as hard as I can on the project given to me, but I feel much more interested in (and capable in) the other field of research.
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: The only ethical issue I see is if you were to abandon work that others depend on, leaving it unfinished. That might be a minor or a major issue, depending on circumstances.
But, it seems to me that you are leaving a sure thing for a possibility that might not work out. Perhaps you need a discussion with your supervisor about your direction. They might be amenable to a more theoretical turn (or not).
Your doctoral work doesn't set your career direction for life. It has an effect on what is open in your first positions afterwards, but you can always switch directions at some future point, especially if you attain tenure in academia.
So, I encourage you to look at all options and think long term.
There is a saying "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence." Perhaps it is that, and notice that the saying may still be true if you cross the fence.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Mostly, it is. However, like the previous answer suggested, there is no problem in leaving a group for another if the particular subject that you're not working on is interesting enough. But it is important to be upfront about it with your supervisor, especially since you say that they are very supportive.
I had a friend who did this- he got an opportunity in another (better) institute, but as he was looking for this opportunity, he had told his supervisor that he may not stay in the group for long, because the topics didn't interest him. They had a good relationship, and the supervisor was supportive of this decision. Moreover, during this period, he completed all his pending work and published two or so papers with the supervisor. Now he is in another group, and they still occasionally collaborate together.
At the end of the day, you do not want to spoil your relationship with your current supervisor, since they can always be helpful in providing recommendations in the future. Be honest with them and tell that even though you love working with them, you feel you'd be better suited in another field of work, and that you want to start trying to look for other opportunities. Ask if you could stay longer to finish all the pending works, and if they agree, you can continue until you find yourself a new position. And when you apply for the new position, you again want to be upfront about already having a position, and the reasons for you to leave that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/18
| 1,110
| 4,678
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had to choose my dissertation topic, but due to some technical problems the wrong choice was selected. I wanted to know how much will it affect when I'm looking for a job. My major is accounting and finance and the topic that was chosen is much more theoretical i.e corporate social responsibility. What should be done?<issue_comment>username_1: There are too many variables to give a definite response. It could matter. It might not matter at all. I think that in most fields, at least, it is still rare for undergraduates to write a thesis. If that is so in your field, then anything you write is probably a plus.
It also depends on the type of job you want, as well as your future aspirations, e.g. graduate study.
But employers can be picky. If you write things that are seen as controversial, it could hurt. But, in general, thinking and writing are valued by many, if not most, employers. I doubt that too many employers will look at more than the title and the grade, though.
And, you also likely have an advisor who can give you advice on this.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: *[This answer is from a North American perspective; it may apply less elsewhere. And it speaks in generalities.]*
When industry is hiring at the **Bachelor's level**, they are generally looking for general academic success, an overall knowledge of a broad area (the "major"), and some evidence of ability for independent work (evidenced, for instance, by a major senior paper, project, or thesis.) They are fairly **rarely looking for specialized knowledge** in a small area that would have been developed specifically within the context of such a project or thesis. This is unlike at the Masters' and Ph.D. levels, after which specific expertise developed during one's thesis/dissertation work is much more likely to be directly relevant for the job one gets hired into.
With that in mind, if your major is in field A, **you should not be penalized for having done a major project in subfield X while seeking a job in subfield Y.**
That being said, as a former academic as well as someone who hired undergrads into industry, those hiring often look for consistent good academic performance as well as a sense of purpose, and a narrative to match.
So if I'm hiring you for Y, your thesis/project in X **may be a missed opportunity** to demonstrate interest and knowledge in Y. If you can demonstrate that elsewhere in your CV/application/interview, and if you have any sort of **narrative why** a project in X was interesting for you, I'll be unworried. If you fit the pattern of someone flighty who is interested in something different every week, and has no pattern of engagement with Y anywhere, then I will be worried.
In this instance, it seems X=CSR, and I'm not sure what subarea of accounting and finance Y is. I also find the wording "due to technical problems the wrong choice was selected" a bit unusual, so I hope you have a reason coming from your personal interest why you're writing on CSR, not just checking the wrong box somewhere!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: #### Short answer: no, not really
Although it sometimes happens, it is quite rare for the topic of a dissertation to align with later professional work --- *a fortiori* when it is only a bachelor dissertation. Most of the time the bachelor degree functions as a means of giving broad tertiary instruction in a field and then signalling baseline competence in that field. Even for people who go on to do PhDs, it is common that their disseration topic will diverge from their later professional work.
There is perhaps a (very) slight advantage if you end up practicing in a field where your bachelor dissertation directly relates to your professional work. It gives you a very minor headstart, but it is only minor, since you will get better and better at your job, and your musings as an undergraduate will later seem like they are not of high quality. For a bachelor dissertation the usual expectation is that you are learning a topic area and able to say something sensible about it, but you are not usually expected to contribute publishable research.
As to what should be done in your particular case, you haven't set out your available options, but in any case, I really don't think it's a big deal that you are doing a topic outside your major. It is an opportunity to learn about a topic that is not the focus of your major, which will give you a more-rounded education in the field. So long as you have no strong aversion to the topic (e.g., extreme boredom of it) then I would suggest you accept this topic and get stuck in.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/19
| 1,436
| 6,001
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will start working as a postdoc at a university in the UK. I want to apply for a grant as PI and I am afraid to discuss this with my supervisor. Can I apply without telling him? The grant application goes through a university committee. So he will know anyway, but there is a high chance he wants to be PI on this grant and as it is my idea, I want to be the PI. I did not start working yet, so I don't know how this usually works in UK universities.
What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: You are a postdoc. You have to be independent. In your next Zoom call, or per email, simply state to your professor that you are writing a proposal as a PI for that grant. If you want to have a softer tone, state that you are *interested in* writing a proposal for that grant, and see how it goes.
Your professor may be in competition with you for that grant, but so he is with other hundreds of persons in the whole country, you have to have no guilty feelings.
The only possible negative point is that if your intention is to bring the money from that grant to a different department.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There are certain types of grants, usually with "fellowship" somewhere in the name (e.g. the Royal Society University Research Fellowship or the various Research Councils' Postdoctoral Fellowships), which are specifically designed for a postdoc to be the PI. So the straight answer to the question in the title can only be "yes".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is possible to apply for/win grants as a Post-Doc in the UK, but it's rare. There are various independent fellowships which are intended for post-doc level applicants which are the more typical route to independence.
If you want to apply for this grant. First Make sure to evaluate if you even meet the criteria to apply as a PI. For example most [EPSRC grants this requires](https://www.ukri.org/councils/epsrc/guidance-for-applicants/check-if-you-are-eligible-for-funding/):
>
> Principal investigators should normally hold a permanent post but fixed-term employees may be eligible provided that the EPSRC can be satisfied that the host research organisation is prepared to give the individual all the support normal for a permanent employee and that there is no conflict of interest between the investigator’s obligations to the EPSRC and to any other organisation or employer.
>
>
>
(in practice this usually means at least holding an independent research fellowship - not being employed on someone else's grant).
Additionally, consider how realistic your chances of success are. Major grants are extremely competitive and have a very low success rate. One of the criteria for evaluating an application ([again from the EPSRC](https://epsrc.ukri.org/funding/assessmentprocess/review/formsandguidancenotes/standardcalls/)) is:
>
> a) Appropriateness of the track record of the applicant(s);
>
>
> * Whether the proposal demonstrates that the applicants have the
> expertise and capabilities to deliver the project.
> * The applicant and wider team’s ability to deliver the project through
> to the creation of impact.
>
>
>
(for example, experience successfully managing other grants).
Also do you have access to the necessary lab/software/resources to complete the project without the support of your PI?
I don't know your specific situation/qualifications, but in most cases you would have more success working with your PI to develop a grant application as a Co-PI. You can then learn from/take advantage of their experience/track record to increase the chances of success.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Its unlikely, but not impossible you will be able to apply for a grant as PI without the support of your institution, and they are unlikely to provide that without the support of the PI.
Most standard-type grants in the UK require you to have a permanent position at the host institution. Even in cases where this you argue an exception to this (see @username_3's answer), you will need the university to guarantee your employment for the period of the grant. Importantly, in the UK there is a cap on how much of a PI's salary a grant will pay. I can't remember off the top of my head, but i think it might be 40%. But its unusual for a grant to provide my than 20%. Someone has to agree to pay the rest.
Now, there is an alternative system to this: personal fellowships. Where as with a standard grant, thee grant is awarded to the university, with a fellowship its awarded to the individual. At least in my field there are two types of fellowship: postdoc level fellowships (such as the Henry Wellcome fellowship) and independent fellowships (e.g. the Wellcome Career Development fellowship, known until recently as the Sir Henry Dale fellowship).
With a postdoc fellowship, the grant is awarded to you, but to work under the close mentorship of someone else (i.e. your supervisor), so any application would need a letter of support from the proposed supervisor.
For an independent fellowship, you work independently (ie not with a supervisor). However, you still require support from the proposed host department. You will need not just permission from the head of department, but also the promise of real, concrete support both for the project itself, and your ongoing career development afterwards. My university promises a permanent faculty appointment to anyone completing an independent fellowship. Because of this the department has to make a business case to the university before supporting such an application. Its inconceivable all this could happen without your supervisor being aware.
Independent fellowships are highly prestigious, are generally longer than a standard grant (normally 5 years rather than 3) and come with about twice the level of funding support (around £1m-£2m). I don't know where you are in your career, but they are aimed at people with one or two postdoc positions already under their belt.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/19
| 2,893
| 12,754
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a statistics lecturer at a university. For midterms and short exams, I have students use software such as StatCrunch or Excel for computational questions, but not theoretical questions.
The head of department, from a physics background, said to me that using such software to answer computational questions is just a type of cheating to get marks. She said any statistics exams must be conducted in the traditional way. Is what she said correct?
NB: I am the instructor and required my students to use software as we are in 2021 and no one needs to compute it manually as they are finance and economics students.
Clarifications:
* The chair's concern seems to be that if students are allowed to use software, the course is too easy and the grades will be too high. This is obviously false, since there is much more to the course than just computing numbers (students have to understand the theory).
* The chair does have a history of being very controlling and abusing or firing instructors who don't submit.
* Traditionally, instructors in this course have mentioned that statistical software exists, but have not necessarily required that students use the software extensively.
* I do not believe it is just a miscommunication; she clearly said that "students using software is an attempt to cheat and get better marks" (even if I allow them to use software)<issue_comment>username_1: University policies need to be followed and, in most cases, specific instructions from the head need to be given serious consideration. If you are tenured faculty then it might be reasonable to oppose the head on something like classroom/exam management, but for low level faculty it might not be wise - or even possible.
But that leaves the philosophical question and for that there can be a difference of opinion. My own would be that in the earliest courses, when data sets are mostly small and students are learning principles, manual calculations are probably valuable. Later, when doing serious things with serious data, tools might reasonably be employed. After all, those tools weren't developed for the simplest of cases.
So, doing manual calculations at the start might help the student gain insight, whereas a tool might just be a magic box. Students not only need to be able to get answers, they need to be able to make quick judgements as to the likely validity of the answers so that tools aren't misused accidentally or by design.
Of course, your opinion might be different, but you need to be able to make some reasonable argument (to the head) to justify it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Cheating is behavior that violates the rules on what is acceptable to use during the exam. If you didn’t make a rule that using software is forbidden, students who use such software cannot be considered to be cheating.
It sounds like your department head and you have a disagreement on whether there *should* be such a rule, that’s related to a conceptual disagreement over what skills students should be tested on. Whether she can dictate to you whether you should have such a rule depends on the policies of your institution. In my institution and all others I’m familiar with in western countries, the decision on what aids students are allowed to use during an exam lies with the instructor as part of the instructor’s academic freedom. A department could make recommendations to instructors about what sorts of policies are a good idea to implement, but individual instructors could decide to do things differently if they thought that was pesagogically appropriate.
Finally, even if your department head doesn’t have the official power to force your hand on this issue, there are situations in which it might be a good idea to do what she suggests anyway.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it is high time to sit down and discuss the intentions and options.
What the head sees is a test, like any other before and later, and students are allowed to use somewhat blackboxed tool that reduce efforrt needed significantly.
What you see is a new technology that allows all to focus on the core problem and leave the number crunching for a machine.
It is very same as times where forst calculators became available...
If you left the tests and evaluations same as without the aid, the head is right; the resulting marks will be increased without increased level of student performance.
On the other hand, if your tests and marks are adjusted to this aid, then you are "right" and should be able to convince the head that there is no tech-created bias.
I can remember one of my toughest exams. We were allowed to use any aid we could bring in the room, except for laptops and phones. Quite rich help, aint'it? The questions were formulated the way nobody without knowledge would be able to find the answers in the papers.
And my most favourite teacher announced that any student can go and use Wolfram Alpha for their calculus exam, and distant students were allowed to use any help. It was a trap; without the knowledge, Wolfram's answers were useless and "smart cheaters" all left soon after because the knowledge they didn't learn led them to fail in all other subjects...
Back to your problem. Try to convince her the number crunching is not the critical skill for the course and that the bigger picture is. Meaning, as the students have tools for simplify their work you have made it harder elsewhere.
But, by the way, sometimes the old number crunching is a good exercise and forces people to go down and look "under the hood".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There are two issues here: the pragmatic and the pedagogical. On the pedagogical front I think your head of department is just wrong. Being able to do the arithmetical computations in statistics is useful only to the very limited extent that it helps with intuition. The American Statistical Association [agrees](https://www.amstat.org/asa/education/Guidelines-for-Assessment-and-Instruction-in-Statistics-Education-Reports.aspx)
>
> Modern data analysis involves the use of statistical software to store
> and analyze (potentially large) datasets. While there may be value to
> performing some calculations by hand, it is unrealistic to analyze
> data without the aid of software for all but the smallest datasets.
> At a minimum, students should interpret output from software.
> Ideally, students should be given numerous opportunities to analyze
> data with the best available technology (preferably, statistical
> software).
>
>
>
From a pragmatic point of view, then, what can you do? Nothing, probably, for a course in progress. In the longer term, you might try to get a department colloquium talk from a statistics education researcher -- easier now that remote talks are standard -- to get some discussion. The American Stats Association documents might help to provide some external authority, and I think the Royal Statistical Society may have something similar
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: It sounds to me like the comments from the head of your department were made in some sort of informal chat.
The question of allowing use of computational aides beyond a pocket calculator is an **significant pedagogical decision**. It is therefore important that:
1. This matter be discussed seriously at least at the departmental level, if not the university level, rather than decided semi-off-hand by each instructor of each course. (And that's true even if the instructors have the autonomy to make their own decision.)
2. A clear policy be set, at whatever level the decision is taken, on this matter: What instructors will use when teaching; what students will be encouraged to use in class, in homework and in exams; and what students will be allowed to use in class, homework and exams.
3. The matter be reflected to students *consistently*, at the very least throughout a semesterial course.
I therefore suggest that you:
1. Check whether discussions have been held on this question (and locate the minutes/summary/recommendations).
2. Check whether official policy has been set on this matter (and whether it's binding).
3. Consult instructors of statistics in your department in previous semesters, and other departments currently, about the practice in their courses (not necessarily to copy it).
4. Assuming this matter has not been given thorough enough treatment in the past - schedule a meeting with relevant members of faculty and the head of the department, or bring it up in a department council session or another appropriate forum, to start such process.
While you're doing this, I also suggest that you get back to the head of the department, explain that you believe that this issue merits more thorough treatment - flattering them for bringing up this point, so that the main impression is not that you're brushing them off, but rather that you've taken their words to heart. Emphasize the need for a consistent policy vis-a-vis the students. Assuming the department head agrees with your general outlook, that will set the background well for you to argue that it would be inappropriate vis-a-vis the students to change course policy mid-course, and that based on the more thorough treatment of the matter, you will reconsider the policy before next semester.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: If in the end you need to go with a non-computer-based exam, here's a handful of suggestions which hopefully get at the same pedagogical points:
1. Set up multiple choice questions where the students have to determine *which* distribution or function is most appropriate.
2. Make hypothetical spreadsheet data with an error to find and correct. For example, one column labeled as (x-mu), the next labeled as (x-mu)^2, but with some cells clearly not squared. Or a sum that doesn't contain all of the terms (see e.g. Reinhart-Rogoff).
3. More theoretically, write subtly incorrect formulas and have them correct the errors. For example, neglecting a square root.
4. Looking at a data set and estimating the standard deviation/variance or mean or linear coefficient.
5. Solve the results yourself (using computer software), and have students *interpret* that data.
All of these are meant to highlight points that a finance/economics student would come across in their own **use** of statistics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm old enough to remember taking many quantitative exams where only pencils carried in were permitted and sometimes a slide rule. Typically, grading made allowances for these limitations (e.g., lower precision required) and were usually thoughtfully (fiendishly it often felt) designed to probe conceptual understanding. Being a little dyslexic, I often foundered on "dumb math errors." Many extra point problems of that era could probably be solved with a few keystrokes on a cheap present-day calculator or a smart watch. So, if that's one's frame of reference, using such a device would have been ipso facto cheating.
I'd guess the "cheating" part of the dictum is at least partly motivated by a desire to avoid evaluating superficial skills in the use of portable computing devices and surreptitious cribbing via the internet, and instead evaluate conceptual fluency in essential subject matter. As @username_6 notes, questions can be formulated that are independent of aids, which could support exams given mit or mit out.
As others have noted, ex post facto changes to rules (by any party) are certainly questionable.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: You could just disallow software, but take off no points for computational errors.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: I have upvoted the most popular answers as they cover all the ground very well. As a human being who spent decades as a leader in academia, I can read between the lines. This chair is not up to the job and therefore being overly controlling, unreasonable, and outright horrible at times. You *must* keep your nose down until this person is no longer chair. If that is more than you can bear for the years to come, look for a transfer or a position elsewhere.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Here are my two cents on avoiding the problem rather than trying to actually address it, which could make matters worst - as others have noted above.
Perhaps one way to work under these guidelines is short answer questions on using the software and testing whether the task is possible or not, without (excel) add-ons. Worst case there is the option of pseudocode on paper.
For example, asking whether linear regression is possible in R, and what should be the input and output be, in terms of the dimensions and data structure.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/19
| 2,911
| 12,847
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to graduate (doctoral) programs for this fall with the first deadlines for application materials being December 1st (as of writing this post it is November 19th).
I asked a professor, who I felt would be my strongest recommender for a letter of recommendation some months ago. The professor agreed. Overall I believed we had a good relationship throughout the time I was a student - we did many independent studies together, and had enjoyable conversations both about the subject matter we were studying, as well as unrelated chit-chat and discussions about life.
However, as deadlines approach, I sent said professor (alongside other professors I am asking for recommendations) a number of follow up emails (spaced about one week apart). I heard back from other professors, but not him. When I did not hear back, I called his office and left a message. However, I still have not heard back as to whether he was still willing to write the letter. Perhaps even more "damning", a student I am friends with emailed him about some administrative matters, and received a response within hours.
Is it time to give up and find a new recommender? I have an email prepared to send another individual, but of course I would prefer a recommendation from the original professor. Is this professor implicitly telling me he is no longer willing to write me a letter of recommendation? Is there any reason why he would not tell me outright if that is the case?<issue_comment>username_1: University policies need to be followed and, in most cases, specific instructions from the head need to be given serious consideration. If you are tenured faculty then it might be reasonable to oppose the head on something like classroom/exam management, but for low level faculty it might not be wise - or even possible.
But that leaves the philosophical question and for that there can be a difference of opinion. My own would be that in the earliest courses, when data sets are mostly small and students are learning principles, manual calculations are probably valuable. Later, when doing serious things with serious data, tools might reasonably be employed. After all, those tools weren't developed for the simplest of cases.
So, doing manual calculations at the start might help the student gain insight, whereas a tool might just be a magic box. Students not only need to be able to get answers, they need to be able to make quick judgements as to the likely validity of the answers so that tools aren't misused accidentally or by design.
Of course, your opinion might be different, but you need to be able to make some reasonable argument (to the head) to justify it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Cheating is behavior that violates the rules on what is acceptable to use during the exam. If you didn’t make a rule that using software is forbidden, students who use such software cannot be considered to be cheating.
It sounds like your department head and you have a disagreement on whether there *should* be such a rule, that’s related to a conceptual disagreement over what skills students should be tested on. Whether she can dictate to you whether you should have such a rule depends on the policies of your institution. In my institution and all others I’m familiar with in western countries, the decision on what aids students are allowed to use during an exam lies with the instructor as part of the instructor’s academic freedom. A department could make recommendations to instructors about what sorts of policies are a good idea to implement, but individual instructors could decide to do things differently if they thought that was pesagogically appropriate.
Finally, even if your department head doesn’t have the official power to force your hand on this issue, there are situations in which it might be a good idea to do what she suggests anyway.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it is high time to sit down and discuss the intentions and options.
What the head sees is a test, like any other before and later, and students are allowed to use somewhat blackboxed tool that reduce efforrt needed significantly.
What you see is a new technology that allows all to focus on the core problem and leave the number crunching for a machine.
It is very same as times where forst calculators became available...
If you left the tests and evaluations same as without the aid, the head is right; the resulting marks will be increased without increased level of student performance.
On the other hand, if your tests and marks are adjusted to this aid, then you are "right" and should be able to convince the head that there is no tech-created bias.
I can remember one of my toughest exams. We were allowed to use any aid we could bring in the room, except for laptops and phones. Quite rich help, aint'it? The questions were formulated the way nobody without knowledge would be able to find the answers in the papers.
And my most favourite teacher announced that any student can go and use Wolfram Alpha for their calculus exam, and distant students were allowed to use any help. It was a trap; without the knowledge, Wolfram's answers were useless and "smart cheaters" all left soon after because the knowledge they didn't learn led them to fail in all other subjects...
Back to your problem. Try to convince her the number crunching is not the critical skill for the course and that the bigger picture is. Meaning, as the students have tools for simplify their work you have made it harder elsewhere.
But, by the way, sometimes the old number crunching is a good exercise and forces people to go down and look "under the hood".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There are two issues here: the pragmatic and the pedagogical. On the pedagogical front I think your head of department is just wrong. Being able to do the arithmetical computations in statistics is useful only to the very limited extent that it helps with intuition. The American Statistical Association [agrees](https://www.amstat.org/asa/education/Guidelines-for-Assessment-and-Instruction-in-Statistics-Education-Reports.aspx)
>
> Modern data analysis involves the use of statistical software to store
> and analyze (potentially large) datasets. While there may be value to
> performing some calculations by hand, it is unrealistic to analyze
> data without the aid of software for all but the smallest datasets.
> At a minimum, students should interpret output from software.
> Ideally, students should be given numerous opportunities to analyze
> data with the best available technology (preferably, statistical
> software).
>
>
>
From a pragmatic point of view, then, what can you do? Nothing, probably, for a course in progress. In the longer term, you might try to get a department colloquium talk from a statistics education researcher -- easier now that remote talks are standard -- to get some discussion. The American Stats Association documents might help to provide some external authority, and I think the Royal Statistical Society may have something similar
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: It sounds to me like the comments from the head of your department were made in some sort of informal chat.
The question of allowing use of computational aides beyond a pocket calculator is an **significant pedagogical decision**. It is therefore important that:
1. This matter be discussed seriously at least at the departmental level, if not the university level, rather than decided semi-off-hand by each instructor of each course. (And that's true even if the instructors have the autonomy to make their own decision.)
2. A clear policy be set, at whatever level the decision is taken, on this matter: What instructors will use when teaching; what students will be encouraged to use in class, in homework and in exams; and what students will be allowed to use in class, homework and exams.
3. The matter be reflected to students *consistently*, at the very least throughout a semesterial course.
I therefore suggest that you:
1. Check whether discussions have been held on this question (and locate the minutes/summary/recommendations).
2. Check whether official policy has been set on this matter (and whether it's binding).
3. Consult instructors of statistics in your department in previous semesters, and other departments currently, about the practice in their courses (not necessarily to copy it).
4. Assuming this matter has not been given thorough enough treatment in the past - schedule a meeting with relevant members of faculty and the head of the department, or bring it up in a department council session or another appropriate forum, to start such process.
While you're doing this, I also suggest that you get back to the head of the department, explain that you believe that this issue merits more thorough treatment - flattering them for bringing up this point, so that the main impression is not that you're brushing them off, but rather that you've taken their words to heart. Emphasize the need for a consistent policy vis-a-vis the students. Assuming the department head agrees with your general outlook, that will set the background well for you to argue that it would be inappropriate vis-a-vis the students to change course policy mid-course, and that based on the more thorough treatment of the matter, you will reconsider the policy before next semester.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: If in the end you need to go with a non-computer-based exam, here's a handful of suggestions which hopefully get at the same pedagogical points:
1. Set up multiple choice questions where the students have to determine *which* distribution or function is most appropriate.
2. Make hypothetical spreadsheet data with an error to find and correct. For example, one column labeled as (x-mu), the next labeled as (x-mu)^2, but with some cells clearly not squared. Or a sum that doesn't contain all of the terms (see e.g. Reinhart-Rogoff).
3. More theoretically, write subtly incorrect formulas and have them correct the errors. For example, neglecting a square root.
4. Looking at a data set and estimating the standard deviation/variance or mean or linear coefficient.
5. Solve the results yourself (using computer software), and have students *interpret* that data.
All of these are meant to highlight points that a finance/economics student would come across in their own **use** of statistics.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I'm old enough to remember taking many quantitative exams where only pencils carried in were permitted and sometimes a slide rule. Typically, grading made allowances for these limitations (e.g., lower precision required) and were usually thoughtfully (fiendishly it often felt) designed to probe conceptual understanding. Being a little dyslexic, I often foundered on "dumb math errors." Many extra point problems of that era could probably be solved with a few keystrokes on a cheap present-day calculator or a smart watch. So, if that's one's frame of reference, using such a device would have been ipso facto cheating.
I'd guess the "cheating" part of the dictum is at least partly motivated by a desire to avoid evaluating superficial skills in the use of portable computing devices and surreptitious cribbing via the internet, and instead evaluate conceptual fluency in essential subject matter. As @username_6 notes, questions can be formulated that are independent of aids, which could support exams given mit or mit out.
As others have noted, ex post facto changes to rules (by any party) are certainly questionable.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: You could just disallow software, but take off no points for computational errors.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: I have upvoted the most popular answers as they cover all the ground very well. As a human being who spent decades as a leader in academia, I can read between the lines. This chair is not up to the job and therefore being overly controlling, unreasonable, and outright horrible at times. You *must* keep your nose down until this person is no longer chair. If that is more than you can bear for the years to come, look for a transfer or a position elsewhere.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Here are my two cents on avoiding the problem rather than trying to actually address it, which could make matters worst - as others have noted above.
Perhaps one way to work under these guidelines is short answer questions on using the software and testing whether the task is possible or not, without (excel) add-ons. Worst case there is the option of pseudocode on paper.
For example, asking whether linear regression is possible in R, and what should be the input and output be, in terms of the dimensions and data structure.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/19
| 1,317
| 5,509
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my PhD one month ago. I applied to post-docs and I received three firm offers. Those offers are interesting but are (i) not in the field I would ideally like working on, (ii) are not the most strategic choice for my academic career.
What I would be more interested in, and what would be better for my career, is in another domain where the offers are harder to find (but not impossible, I already applied to two of them and I am awaiting their response).
**How long can I be unemployed before it looks bad on my academic curriculum?** What if, in the worst case, I am without job for one year? Important info: in the meantime I would continue working (I have to finish publishing 3 papers from my PhD). Also, money is not a real problem (the state is giving me money while I find a new job).<issue_comment>username_1: There is no max, really, but the longer you stay out, the harder it gets to get back in. If you skills get cold/old, if you lose contact with recommenders, if the market changes, then all is uncertain.
You seem to be letting the perfect be the enemy of the good here. Another thing is that you have three "birds" in the hand, but wanting the one in the bush. The old saying works the other way round.
There is nothing that prevents you from changing areas after you have a secure position. But hoping for the perfect outcome in this employment market seems a bit optimistic.
But it is your assessment of risk that matters here.
---
Edited to add a couple of points.
In the current market, upset due to COVID, and other constraints, I think people would be more willing than in normal times to accept a longer gap. But everyone reading an application makes their own decision. If you aren't doing anything during the gap to increase you skills it will harm you.
Also note that most academic jobs are on an academic year schedule, so a one month gap could actually end up being a year, or half a year anyway.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know your field, but at least in my area (chemistry):
1. Postdocs almost exclusively last two years or less. Some are for as little as 6 months. Even the two year postdocs are often phrased as "one year, with the option for two if mutually agreed upon".
2. On the academic track, it is expected to do multiple postdocs before trying to get, say, a tenure track position.
With these in mind, my response would be "why not do both?". Take one of these less related post-docs if it is a short enough stint and continue applying for more relevant post-docs.
It depends how certain you are that you can secure an offer in a short amount of time. If you think it will take 1-2 extra months to get this more relevant post-doc, its probably better to wait. If takes 6 or more extra months, you probably would have been better off taking the less relevant post-doc during that stretch.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: An additional point to consider: for an academic career, the publication output after the PhD is crucial. One of the typical measures of success a hiring committee will look at is how many publications there are in the years after the PhD (besides obviously the quality of the publications and if the candidate had a leading role, etc.) So if it's more than a few months break (say a year), it can already give a disadvantage in the competitive academic job market. The OP mentions three publications to be finalized from the PhD; that is good, but what really matters is the research output one is able to produce independently from the PhD advisors. That being said, "follow-up" postdocs to bridge time of up to a year at the PhD institution aren't uncommon (although not a good way to establish and demonstrate independence).
For job applications in general, anything more than a few months of gap in a CV typically would require some form of explanation. If there are many applicants for a competitive position, the hiring committee members can make their busy lives easier by sorting out CVs where something 'seems slightly off'.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A three month gap between completing your PhD and your first postdoc does not look bad, especially because of the pandemic. Since there is no guarantee you will get an offer in January, I think it is a mistake to not accept one of your three current offers. A one year gap is certainly far worse than one year spent in a sub-optimal postdoc. You should expect your career and other areas of your life to have zigs and zags. It is never a straight line to your planned destination.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: After finishing my PhD i had a six month contact with the lab next door to my PhD lab. I was unemployed for a year after finishing that, very much like you i published two papers (and a textbook chapter) during that time. I kept up with the field, keeping in contact with the lab i had a six month position with.
Nobody has ever questioned that one year gap in my CV. Perhaps it weighed against me in hiring decisions, who knows? But i always found a job when i needed one after that, so it can't have weighed too negatively.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> How long can I be unemployed before it looks bad on my academic curriculum?
>
>
>
Two months will not look bad. More than six months is likely to look bad, assuming there is not a reason for unemployment which is beyond your control. In between two and six months is a matter of personal opinion.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/20
| 477
| 2,176
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently a researcher shared on Twitter
>
> I've reached that stage as a supervisor where the students have the idea, do the math, write the code, run experiments, draft the paper and I contribute by fixing the formatting errors in their bibliography files.
>
>
>
If this is the case, should the supervisor be on the author list? Or, on the acknowledgments?
If the supervisor contribution is just small suggestion to the redaction of the paper and that she/he gained the grant paying the student, is this enough to become an author?<issue_comment>username_1: If the "small suggestion o the redaction" did not include substantive ideas, your case might serve as an example of unethical behavior. Unfortunately, it happens in academia.
"Acknowledgements" are meant to mention funding and such kind of "redaction" support. In my opinion, the supervisor's name should be in the acknowledgments if he or she made no intellectual contribution to the work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that there's some ambiguity about "providing funding": quite often the funding is the result of the supervisor applying for some grant by submitting a plan for some particular research direction. The fact that the grant was approved is supposed to show that the submitted plan is considered solid. This would mean that the supervisor has at least put some decent work into the initial stage of the project, maybe they had the idea to study the broad question on which the student focuses and they established the motivations.
In this scenario I think that the supervisor has some reasonable claim at co-authorship: their contribution is at a more abstract level but it is substantial nonetheless.
But in general it's certainly a grey area, there's no simple way to determine in which cases a contribution is significant enough for co-authorship.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would respond to the twitter post suggesting that in these circumstances an acknowledgment would be appropriate and quite sufficient.
Coauthorship seems like cv padding. Better to take credit for being a good supervisor in the next grant proposal.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/20
| 2,357
| 9,598
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am the smartest (or nerdiest) person in my class and my classmates who I have spent a lot of my time helping during the school year, whether with homework or explaining parts they didn't understand keep asking me to let them cheat from my paper.
I want to tell my teacher to change my seat so that they can no longer cheat from me but I don't know if I should do it.
Please note that I am a really shy timid person so I can't easily stand up to people, and I have a feeling that my classmates know that well.
They keep on asking me for favors and help, and each time I do whatever they ask.
Please also note that I can't simply say no to them because I have 2 more years to spend with the same class and I don't want to be hated.<issue_comment>username_1: This seems like a question from a very young person. I'm going to assume that, though it makes this question off topic here. I hope my exception won't be objected to by other users.
Yes, you can talk about this with your teacher and between you a solution might be found, though an obvious move might make your friends also distrust you. I'd suggest not naming people.
But the bigger issue is your shyness. The fact that you are willing to help people is a really good thing. I hope you aren't being coerced into its, though.
The reason I'm giving an answer is to suggest that it is time for you to learn how to overcome your shyness so that you can take a more active role in lots of situations, not only this one.
I, too, was too (far too) shy growing up. It seemed impossible for me to speak up for myself when it was necessary. It was only a lot later that I learned that being shy (introverted) doesn't limit what you can do if you learn to do it. It takes practice, however and maybe a few sessions with a counsellor who can give you tips.
I was once so shy that I couldn't look into people's eyes, though that isn't frowned on in my culture as it is in some. It seemed to me like people could see my soul if I looked directly at them. A counsellor suggested otherwise and I practiced doing what others do naturally and finally overcame it. But, not speaking up in a particular case once caused me a very large setback in my education and career.
I once asked a friend I'd known for a long time if it seemed to him like I'd changed my personality over the years, going from introvert, hiding in the background, to extrovert, putting my ideas out into the general mix. He thought for a moment and decided that yes, so it seemed. I was still the same person *inside* but seemed to be different *outside*. An act of a sort, but it becomes easy once you practice it enough.
I have another friend who is very important (famous) in our field (CS) and he is well sought after as a public speaker. But he is actually a bit autistic, which is beyond introverted (not the same, really, but it has similar tendencies for some). He taught himself to act in public by joining an acting group so that he could play roles that hid his personality but let him *seem* to be as extroverted as necessary in any given situation. He is still quiet, but speaks with authority.
So, it isn't that you *can't* do certain things. It is that they are uncomfortable for you and you don't, yet, have enough practice in doing so. It can be learned through practice, just like learning math can be.
If you can learn to do such things at an early age and combine it with a willingness to help people learn, you'd probably make an excellent professor someday. It was something I needed to do along my own path, which is what leads me to write this.
It won't surprise me if many users here have something similar in their backgrounds.
---
Note that the "setback" to my education and career that I describe here happened in grad school, so the need to overcome shyness can hit at any age. Maybe this isn't quite so off topic after all.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If you can, try telling your friends that you want to continue to help them understand the material, but that it makes you very uncomfortable when they ask you for help during a test.
You might want to do this one at a time, not in a group. Since seats seem to be assigned, you have to deal only with the one or two close to you.
You need not say it's wrong (even if you think so) or blame it on them (even if you do). You need not say why it makes you uncomfortable. In fact, giving no reason makes it harder for them to argue with you - they can't really tell you not to feel as you do.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I originally want to write a comment but I don’t have enough reputation for that. To add on username_1’s excellent answer and respond to your last paragraph, I think it is good to help your friends, but you have to be judicious. I understand that some shy people have the fear that if they don’t agree to other people’s request, then they may be disliked. But (supported by my personal experience) it is simply not true, sometimes quite the opposite. If you help people based on that fear and can’t “say no”, large chance is that they will exploit you, and they will give no respect, which does not help the relationship. By saying no in appropriate situation, you develop personal power and (albeit slowly) earn the respect of the others. It is probable that some (toxic) people will turn against you for that, but overall decent people will stay and you will be free of the mental burden you experience. I was like you before, but I realized that even sometimes I said no to people (maybe I don’t have enough of time, or energy), they still like me as a good friend. Of course I like to help people, but now I put myself on emphasis and live more happily on this matter. For practicality, I suggest finding some reasonable excuses to refuse when you don’t think it is comfortable to help (this does not attack the current matter, but I am suggesting for future needs). The important point is that, you are the most important person in your world. If you don’t think so, then people will not value you either. Sorry for my English, I am not native speaker.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, you can ask your teacher and if they are nice they will reseat you (I would and I was a teacher for a long time). However, the teacher might not resist the temptation to make some sort of joke alluding to your isolated seating later on.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Not a solution to the long term problem perhaps, but if you don't want to make a confrontation about it quite yet, you could try disappearing for a time before the test and turn up at the very last minute, so as to need to take the last seat available.
Not 100% reliable of course, your 'friends' might save a seat for you, but a thought.
If you were going to talk to your teacher about it, then yes, I'd keep any names of others out of it (the teacher will know who you mean anyway), and perhaps you could arrange with the teacher to make sure the last seat available was not where the others are, perhaps by the teacher telling the others who arrive before time to 'shuffle up to the front', depends how cunning and co-operative the teacher is. Not ideal though.
Alternatively, you could ask the teacher to decide that the pupils must sit in alphabetic order, I don't know how innocuous or otherwise that might be, school is a long while back for me but we were often told to arrange ourselves in alpha order of surname and first names to make checking our attendance on an list easier. That might make it seem less contrived then the teacher simply moving selected people apart.
It may well be the case that the teacher has noticed this going on, you may only be confirming what they already suspect, and will no doubt be happy to oblige with some reasonable way to separate you.
As a semi-confrontational measure, if you got in first and chose a seat right at the front, nearest the teacher or in a front corner. It would be hard for anybody to consult with your turned back, and very easy to detect from where the teacher mostly lurks during the test. Your 'friends' would no doubt take it up with you afterwards if they now expect your co-operation.
In the end if would be good for you as a young person to stand up to the others and calmly decline to co-operate, but others have written extensively on that, so I won't, apart from relating something vaguely similar in my school days.
When I was about 15 or 16, roughly 1981, I was in a small class for one subject, scripture as it goes, only about 9 of us taken from various classes. One boy was fascinated with the new digital watch my mother had given me and asked to have a look at it, I took it off to proudly show him my prize (nobody else had such a gleaming artefact at the time !) and he decided to borrow it to wear and play with for the whole lesson. The next scripture class he asked... demanded with menaces if he could borrow it again, so I let him. The third time I took it off beforehand and when he asked again told him it was at home but he looked at my wrist, saw the chain link impression on my skin and worked out my ruse, and spent the lesson with my watch again. The fourth time I wore it and said no, and he asked again more forthrightly, I somehow held my ground and he backed off. It was quite a moment for me, I had stood up to Andy A., one of the toughest guys in our year, well, maybe top 10% on that scale anyway (with me being firmly bottom 10% material), I didn't get pounded to a bloody pulp at the next play time, and I felt proud of myself.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/21
| 2,521
| 10,680
|
<issue_start>username_0: In 2018, I shared an idea with an assistant professor from another university. I shared this because this is an idea many people are working on and are developing approaches to solve it.
My PhD advisor himself is not the one from this problem area, so I had little help from him. This is a project I prepared and developed, as other sections of my PhD were getting done. The other section of my PhD use the solution developed by this project. I thought this solution could be a separate chapter and a good paper itself.
Being from biology/genetics background I am very familiar with the problem and solution I came up with. I had to learn python programming on my own to write solution to the problem. In the beginning I had difficulty putting maths together and writing it into a programming language (python). Nevertheless, I achieved more than I had expected by learning myself and by getting a lots of help on stack overflow.
I thought that sharing this with the one working on a similar avenue might give me some insights and corrections if there is any. The professor (from another university) received the email and said it was “interesting” and was looking forward to reading the paper, in just 2 lines. I received no further communication in following months and I felt that he/she did not had a time to look into it.
This is the idea I have been trying to develop in my PhD since 2016 and I had something prepared by early 2018. I shared this idea around the mid of 2018. Around the end of 2018 I had some health issues which was going on for about more than a year. The health issue had become chronic and I had to take a break for little more than 2 years. And I just recently (2021) started on the process the last couple of months.
I recently realized that the professor had taken my idea, twisted it a little bit, gave it a new name, and published an article (a single-author paper) in 2019. When I came across the paper, I was really shocked because the idea was so similar to the approach I had developed. He included some sophistication because he is mature than me in terms of academic training. This incident has frustrated and angered me over his non-professionalism. If only he/she had just mentioned me on the paper (saying that there was an unpublished work on progress) or consulted me on it I would have been fine, but he/she just took the idea and changed a little bit to make it look his/her.
The work I had shared with him/her is on Github as public repository. The reason I put it in public mode is because I was less worried about it being stolen. I find people in academia to be honest, and I also wanted other people (especially biologists) to use it and help develop it by receiving feedback, and questions. I did receive interests from other academicians.
These are the links to work I had put on github and question I had asked about it several times on stack:
* <https://github.com/everestial/phase-Extender>
* <https://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/186396/solve-the-phase-state-between-two-haplotype-blocks-using-markov-transition-proba>
* <https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2716192/how-to-convert-a-detailed-mathematical-statistical-compuational-process-into-ma>
I have prepared an email response about this violation (a draft) to that professor (who I had shared my idea with), and had almost sent it. But, I am currently gathering myself to prepare for how to respond to this. I have also cc’d the head of the department and dean of the arts and sciences of that university. However, I expect he/she will be defensive about it and even possibly be worried and angry. So, I want to think with a cool head and develop a more professional approach to handling this problem.
How do I take this forward? Please help.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> This incident has frustrated and angered me over his non-professionalism
>
>
>
Don't. Being prepared for the open conflict is not the same as having pent up frustrations, and building yourself up for a big dramatic entrance involving their higher-ups is most definitely not a great idea at all. Speaking of which...
CC'ing their dean is a fairly bad idea as well. The university wants nothing to do with that and will, in general, protect their own staff in cases of lab rivalry (which is the territory you're stepping into). If needed, the correct escalation of this conflict would be to the journal editorial board: they're the ones responsible for the integrity of published articles. A retraction based on plagiarism would hurt that professor's reputation/standing within the university way more than you would achieve making noise next to their dean's ear.
Most importantly: **get an impartial evaluation** of whether this scooping was so heavily reliant on your idea. At very least, try to get your lab head's advice on this: even if that's not their subject area, you must be able to articulate how your idea was unique and how that perceived offender has reused it, and their extensive experience with research in general might be enough to evaluate your claims.
Finally, if you establish that the offense, indeed, took place - email that person directly first. State that you felt unfairly left out, be direct but not aggressive. Maybe it was something as innocuous as they forgetting the origins of the idea (provided they have not used the code in your github repo) and publishing an erratum to that article giving you proper attribution is possible. If they prove uncooperative at that stage, raise the matter with the journal editorial board, as stated above. The best way to protect your rights is by taking one step at a time - if you go all out from the very start, it may very well fizzle quickly if the other side simply states "oh sorry my bad what could we do to rectify this?". If this happens, it is *you* who would be perceived as making lot more noise than needed, potentially putting *you* into the category of people one would rather not work with nor would recommend anyone doing so.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: #### You catch more flies with honey...
>
> I have prepared an email response about this violation (a draft) to that professor (who I had shared my idea with), and had almost sent it. But, I am currently gathering myself to prepare for how to respond to this.
>
>
>
If you would like to write to this professor about the incident, I recommend you avoid referring to this as a "violation" (or using other accusatory language) in the first instance. A reasonable opening email on the subject would simply let this professor know that you are upset that you weren't acknowledged in his paper (or even invited to work with him on it), and you feel that you should have been. It is reasonable to share your feelings on the matter, but you should come at the situation with an open mind and give this professor a chance to explain his own thinking on the matter. In particular, you could reasonably solicit his opinion on what reliance he had on your work and why he chose not to acknowledge your initial idea in his paper (or offer to work with you on the topic). If you can write your email in a way that lets him know how you're presently feeling, but acknowledges that he may have a different perspective to you (which you are open to hearing), you might get a sympathetic response.
It is unclear from your description whether there has been an actual academic integrity violation, but it seems doubtful to me based on your description. While it can be a bit nasty in some cases, working on a general research idea you heard from another person does not necessarily require citation, co-authorship or acknowledgement. Nevertheless, it would be reasonable for you to communicate to this professor the fact that it is difficult for a PhD student to come up with publishable research ideas and progress those ideas into papers. Consequently, it sets you back when more experienced researchers take your research ideas and progress and publish them ahead of you. (And contrarily, if this professor had offered to work with you on the paper instead, it would have been very helpful to your learning and your candidature.) That is something that I think most professors will be sympathetic to, and it might be a useful learning experience for an assistant professor to improve his dealings with PhD students --- it might also be something that a junior professor isn't already cognisant of.
Of course, if you have reason to believe that this was an actual academic integrity violation then you can certainly escalate things after your initial contact. That is an option available to you if you feel you have an actionable case. I recommend starting off with an email that is polite in tone and seeks concilation rather than initial conflict. You might find that it is a learning experience for a junior professor, and if you frame things in conciliatory terms you might receive some sympathy for your position (and maybe even an offer of collaboration in the future).
Finally, one last thing to note here is that this incident can be a learning experience for you in regard to the ability of experienced researchers to progress your research ideas ahead of you. While you ought not close yourself off to the research world, you are now aware of the possible adverse consequences that can accrue when you share your ideas too broadly and too early. As you progress your research career you will get better at judging when you have a sufficient research head-start to safely share your ideas without being "scooped" as a result.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I will briefly play kind of devil's advocate here.
First: was it your only idea? it is a pity, but now you know you can do good things.
Second: if you cannot swim against the flow, go with the flow. Write that professor, and discuss the possibility of extending that publication in a more consolidated work. You know, this way you put your foot on the topic, and you will still work on your "starting idea".
Third: it can really be that you sparked the light in that person's brain ... and then he forgot completely if he heard about the new idea in a conference, in a workshop, in a coffee chat. Yes, you know you triggered his thinking ... but are you sure he still remember you and your email?
Fourth: you can easily ignore the paper from that professor, work on your idea and send it to peer review. Or complete your thesis, whatever applies. Then after you completed your task, you can get in touch with that professor. Not to confront him/her, but to find a productive way out of this situation for you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/21
| 464
| 1,540
|
<issue_start>username_0: My Supervisor has pointed out that Harvard requires different in-text citation styles based on whether it is in Narrative style or Parenthetical.
>
> e.g.
>
>
> It has been emphasised that good referencing is an important academic skill (Harris, 2015).
>
>
> OR
>
>
> Harris (2015) emphasised that good referencing is an important academic skill.
>
>
>
Is there any way to edit the citation style to reflect this? I've been playing around with the CSL editor with no success. I'm using Mendeley Cite-O-Matic in Word.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't have a good answer for Word but in case you would consider using LaTeX, it's pretty easy to do:
```
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite}
\usepackage{parskip}
\begin{document}
It has been emphasised that good referencing is an important academic skill \citep{doody}.\\
\citet{doody} emphasized that good referencing is an important academic skill.
\bibliographystyle{apacite}
\bibliography{biblatex-examples}
\end{document}
```
Output:
See [this thread](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/616883/how-to-cite-inline-in-the-form-name-year) for more information.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think Mendeley allows different styles like this. You just have to manually edit it in the text. Mendeley allows you to do this freely, unlike some others. For example, to make your second example, move the opening bracket and delete the comma.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/21
| 2,399
| 10,029
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing my PhD since 2019 in the subject of molecular biology.
I am at the end stage of my PhD.
Despite the harsh beginning, I put really a lot of effort to become very good in laboratory work and I started spending a lot of time within the lab working at the bench within the 1st year of my PhD until now.
My supervisor was saying from the beginning that he wants us to release between 2-3 research articles + 1 review. And that he will help us with that.
Throughout my PhD, I was involved in 3-4 different projects.
Although, it was hard, I was really engaged in all of them because I remembered his words about the publications.
In addition to this, because we had no post-docs, I was responsible for the preparation of buffers and reagents, as well as the management of the stock in my lab.
Throughout my PhD there were another 3 students who were very negligible about the "condition" of our lab, thus whenever something was finished, they weren't bothered and I had to take care of that. In addition to this, many of them come very spontaneously to the lab, and sometimes they can come to the lab only 2-3 times throughout the whole week
Now, roughly 6 months before the finish of my stipend, during the lab meeting, he pointed out that the "lab members" have to start attending the lab regularly. His statement was a bit more elaborate, however, it made me feel like I am the one being targeted. In addition to this, I was then asked to come to the lab on some specific day to take care of the master's student and do the experiment. I said that "I cannot, because I want to focus on writing my thesis this week". He was all surprised and repeated to me I need to come to the lab.
I explained to him again that "at the beginning of the PhD I was told that there is a benchwork period and writing period, and now I want to focus on writing because I am lagging behind with that" (especially compared to the PhD students who haven't been coming to the lab that often).
Also meantime I was preparing some review articles. I sent it to him for some feedback, however, feedback wasn't very helpful, and usually was saying to add something more. Now I ended up with a big chunk of text, that I do not really know how to handle. I believe I need more help with that, but it is not coming.
I talked with him again recently, and I said that I am happy to still sacrifice some time for my "main" lab project because I hope to have it published. The supervisor said that the process is not that simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publish it.
I am not familiar with publication process or how to assemble a good "paper", because it is my first time doing it. And since I am a **PhD student**, I require some help with that.
On the end it seems like I spent 3 years, gathering data for my boss for different projects, while, he did not help me to publish anything not even a review paper which would make me more employable.
I will add that my supervisor had some conflicts with his employees which made them quit.
What should I do about this, should I forward an official complaint on him to the University. Or maybe I just complain too much?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm worried that stress has you overreacting. Note that fighting with your supervisor is usually counterproductive.
If you have been faithful about the lab then I'd guess that the criticism is directed at the others - or just general. He may feel that you have "taken charge" of the lab and so the words were directed at you. It would be fair if you were formally the lab manager, of course, but an overreaction otherwise.
But the big issue is your graduation. He says you have 3-6 months of work to go and you have 6 months of funding. So, it seems to fit.
Rather than make a complaint, I'd rather suggest that you seek his assurance that you will finish in a timely manner or have funding extended. If I read it more or less correctly then he is depending on you and that gives you the opportunity to get good recommendations if you don't poison the atmosphere.
But the bigger issue may well be stress. You've been at it hard for quite a while. If you can find a way to reduce that it might be made more comfortable, even though it remains hard.
Another big issue is the feedback on your writing and publications. You may need to meet with him more often with questions to make that go more smoothly. Just waiting for feedback (from a busy person) isn't going to improve it. One question you could ask, given that you aren't getting a lot of feedback, is whether he feels that feedback isn't really necessary and you are doing fine.
But, explore these things before you consider any formal complaints. That is likely to turn out badly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I want to focus on the parts where you mention (fruitlessly) seeking advice.
First off, how independent PhD students are supposed to be is heavily country-dependent. In places where MSc is a requirement for PhD, the students are commonly assumed to have developed some writing skills already.
Most of the PhD students seem to get stuck at more or less the same things, which *usually* gets resolved by reviewing the work as if it's already being presented to the thesis committee or a harsh reviewer. Overall, be more proactive and specific when making arrangements and setting deadlines. "I ended up with a big chunk of text, that I do not really know how to handle" is not very helpful for them to diagnose possible issues. It is like
- Dear prof., I didn't understand, could you explain it a bit more, please?
- Sure, which part did you not understand?
- Could you, um, explain the entire thing?
It might be still on them to sort it out but you might be making it *very* complicated for them. Again, be specific: instead of "I don't know what to do with this" go for "I want to publish this, what are the obstacles preventing me from doing so?". With your supervisor put to the "reviewer" mode you might find their comments a lot more helpful (e.g. "The introductory section is absurdly short, a whole body of relevant work exists but only 5 articles are considered" instead of "please add more articles to the review part").
Unfortunately, no matter how hard you work it would not get you closer to even a single publication on its own. You must set it as a goal and work towards it.
>
> The supervisor said that the process is not that simple and it might take another 3-6 months before we manage to publicate it.
>
>
>
Depending on the exact meaning of this, it's either very quick or very slow: if you're only to submit it in half an year, that is slow, but you then need to work out what's lacking if you want it included in your thesis. You don't sound very involved with this project at the level above that of a lab technician at the moment - otherwise you would know the project scope and be able to reason about its current status: "we wanted to test X, we did, we have derived some conclusions from the data, I have prepared plots for publication and did the writing etc".
PhD supervisors LOVE to repeatedly tell students to not take their time with publishing because it takes a good while for the article to appear in print. What is barely covered, however, is how long does it take to prepare the article for submission - many researchers would do it under a week or even under a day. Supervisors absolutely don't get how clueless their students are about what makes it publishable in the first place. To that end...
>
> at the beginning of the PhD I was told that there is a benchwork period and writing period
>
>
>
This is not entirely a big fat lie, but something you almost surely misinterpreted. Yes, you will need some time *at the end* to assemble things together, tidy it up and do a bunch of writing. Given you're in a field with lots of lab work, setting aside 60% of the time to writing now is almost surely wasting most of that time. You would be much better off writing in short bursts, stumbling upon issues which would take you back to the lab anyway. Some people do need more time for writing, it's true, but you are presently doing this for the same reason you feel clueless about your review texts. This reason is that your writing is not really aligned with your goals, and probably a bit misaligned with the goals of your research for a good measure.
One more thing you might find helpful: every bit of your PhD is an answer to some question. Formulate these questions, they will help you structure your writing. Most general of them are:
* What problem are you trying to solve and why? (Thesis introduction, possible review article). Example: people love their grass green, but it is bleak.
* What has been done to solve this problem before? (Another part of introduction, review article). Example: Smith et al. tried to paint it, <NAME> used another cultivar of grass...
* What is your idea/approach? (First part of the main body of the thesis). Example: We've used autonomous hydroponic farming to control irrigation and nutrients supply.
* How did it turn out? What were the problems with this approach? (Results, Discussion, combined with the previous bit - an article or a few)
* How could your results be used/improved upon? (Conclusion)
This is still not specific at all. Suppose you've been working on molecular markers X for diagnosing Y. Why is diagnosing Y important? Currently, a completely different method Z is used to diagnose that, how does yours compare to it? How do you prove that? Why are your statistical tests valid? Are there other complications from using/creating X?
Go over existing articles in your field and mark every single paragraph with some question it attempts to answer. Do the same with your own writing. Devise more questions which need to be answered but are not.
Not knowing what to write or why, I would spend unlimited time with next to zero productivity. Don't get trapped in that, and good luck!
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/22
| 1,472
| 6,346
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the future, I'm thinking about applying for tenure-track positions in Computer Science at teaching/undergraduate focused institutions. The kinds of places that usually have 3-3 teaching loads and smaller class sizes.
How much grading of student work do faculty in these kinds of departments have to do? Are they able to hire upper-level undergraduates to do much of their grading for them, the same way that faculty at research universities are able to pass most of their grading on to graduate students?<issue_comment>username_1: I taught at such places, though for some of them the load was higher. I once (over 30 years) had help when an intense course was oversubscribed (40 students instead of 30 or so). I've also done courses with 40 or more students, but with a lower class load, but no assistance.
But grading was never a burden, even in project courses with frequent deliverables. You just need a system for managing it and getting it done quickly while still giving feedback to the students.
Note that research universities often have very large classes, but also a very large TA staff to manage things. So, a given TA might be responsible for 30 students even if the course has 300 students. And the professor of record needs to spend some time managing those TAs, making sure that everyone marks in an approximately similar way and handling special issues and questions that arise.
I've always considered using undergraduates to grade other undergraduates to be problematic. It requires a lot of oversight and if class loads and class sizes are reasonable then you might just as well grade them yourself than manage the issues that might arise. Grading multiple choice questions is easy, though they are IMO the worst sort of exam or practice questions.
But for projects that need to be updated (biweekly, say) and quickly returned there are easy ways to manage it. First is to use small group projects rather than individual, reducing the number of papers. Next is to have students highlight changes from previous versions and also submit the old versions with the new.
With a system like the above, I was even able to permit students to resubmit "one pass" work for regrading if they could make improvements. A few hours a week was all that was required.
But, don't try to make it so efficient that you skimp on the feedback. Sometimes it is enough to show students where they went wrong, but other times you need to say why.
And, with smaller class sizes at such institutions, office visits are pretty frequent, making deeper feedback more possible, especially if they bring you work that has been highlighted with changes and/or issues.
And that contact and individual feedback is one of the key benefits to students attending such institution.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I’d like to offer a different perspective from username_1’s answer, although I’m in no position to make a judgment as to which is better.
My undergraduate institution was one such teaching college. But due to the growing size of the computer science major, the required courses often had hundreds of students enrolled across multiple sections. I’ll start by answering your second question first: at my college, professors in computer science absolutely hired undergraduate students to do grading for them.
There was a strong culture for students to both grade and tutor classes they had taken before, known colloquially as “grutoring”. Students who grutored reinforced their own learning, gained experience with teaching, and got paid to boot. Pretty much all of my friends in computer science grutored at least one class each semester after their first.
This includes upper-div classes: I graded fizz buzz level programs in our intro course to proofs in our algorithms course.
Professors often would employ another aid to reduce grading time: an online grader. This was usually done in addition to having grutors. We used Gradescope. Gradescope would automate the program checking by running it against test cases. The job of the grutor would then be to award points for style and flag any invalid submissions (usually students would be offered a chance to explain/resubmit).
It’s much harder for me to answer your question regarding how much work faculty did, as I was not a faculty member. There are three primary things I can imagine a professor has to do, assuming they have grutors.
The first is to design the grading rubric and any infrastructure for autograders such as Gradescope. The former can be done while writing up the homeworks, so I can’t imagine it is too much work, especially since questions will often fall into one of a few archetypes which you can have rubrics predefined for. The latter, while a lot of work, can be student-aided. I know at least one class where a student worked (over the summer I think?) to set up the autograder.
The second is to hold grading sessions, although this is often optional for upper-div courses. The required courses at my college have grading down to a science, having been refined over decades. This is useful, since they often have hundreds of assignments to grade each week. Pretty much all of them will have a “grutor party” one day of the week for about 1 to 2 hours, wherein each grutor grades their assignments and the professor is available to answer grutor questions. For the upper-divs which don’t do this, they’ll usually at least have a weekly meeting for thirty minutes to talk about any issues that came up.
The third (like username_1 mentioned) is to hold office hours. Grutors will also have grutoring hours, but if I recall correctly, they’re only obligated to help with the homework. You’ll nevertheless want to give students a chance to talk with you directly if you’re at a teaching college.
In sum, I think that “a few hours a week,” like username_1 said, is optimistically all that was required of my professors.
I’m happy to clarify any of these points if you have questions, but please keep in mind that my perspective comes from a student grader’s view at one college. Also, I think username_1’s (and perhaps your) class sizes are much smaller than some of the ones I grutored.
Finally, this perspective is for homeworks only. In pretty much all the courses, professors graded all exams.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/22
| 1,414
| 6,079
|
<issue_start>username_0: What if you opt for the 12-month pay but quit your position before the end of an academic year? (For example, give 30-days notice in December). Do you forfeit your 3 months of distributed pay that would have been paid over the summer months?<issue_comment>username_1: I taught at such places, though for some of them the load was higher. I once (over 30 years) had help when an intense course was oversubscribed (40 students instead of 30 or so). I've also done courses with 40 or more students, but with a lower class load, but no assistance.
But grading was never a burden, even in project courses with frequent deliverables. You just need a system for managing it and getting it done quickly while still giving feedback to the students.
Note that research universities often have very large classes, but also a very large TA staff to manage things. So, a given TA might be responsible for 30 students even if the course has 300 students. And the professor of record needs to spend some time managing those TAs, making sure that everyone marks in an approximately similar way and handling special issues and questions that arise.
I've always considered using undergraduates to grade other undergraduates to be problematic. It requires a lot of oversight and if class loads and class sizes are reasonable then you might just as well grade them yourself than manage the issues that might arise. Grading multiple choice questions is easy, though they are IMO the worst sort of exam or practice questions.
But for projects that need to be updated (biweekly, say) and quickly returned there are easy ways to manage it. First is to use small group projects rather than individual, reducing the number of papers. Next is to have students highlight changes from previous versions and also submit the old versions with the new.
With a system like the above, I was even able to permit students to resubmit "one pass" work for regrading if they could make improvements. A few hours a week was all that was required.
But, don't try to make it so efficient that you skimp on the feedback. Sometimes it is enough to show students where they went wrong, but other times you need to say why.
And, with smaller class sizes at such institutions, office visits are pretty frequent, making deeper feedback more possible, especially if they bring you work that has been highlighted with changes and/or issues.
And that contact and individual feedback is one of the key benefits to students attending such institution.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I’d like to offer a different perspective from username_1’s answer, although I’m in no position to make a judgment as to which is better.
My undergraduate institution was one such teaching college. But due to the growing size of the computer science major, the required courses often had hundreds of students enrolled across multiple sections. I’ll start by answering your second question first: at my college, professors in computer science absolutely hired undergraduate students to do grading for them.
There was a strong culture for students to both grade and tutor classes they had taken before, known colloquially as “grutoring”. Students who grutored reinforced their own learning, gained experience with teaching, and got paid to boot. Pretty much all of my friends in computer science grutored at least one class each semester after their first.
This includes upper-div classes: I graded fizz buzz level programs in our intro course to proofs in our algorithms course.
Professors often would employ another aid to reduce grading time: an online grader. This was usually done in addition to having grutors. We used Gradescope. Gradescope would automate the program checking by running it against test cases. The job of the grutor would then be to award points for style and flag any invalid submissions (usually students would be offered a chance to explain/resubmit).
It’s much harder for me to answer your question regarding how much work faculty did, as I was not a faculty member. There are three primary things I can imagine a professor has to do, assuming they have grutors.
The first is to design the grading rubric and any infrastructure for autograders such as Gradescope. The former can be done while writing up the homeworks, so I can’t imagine it is too much work, especially since questions will often fall into one of a few archetypes which you can have rubrics predefined for. The latter, while a lot of work, can be student-aided. I know at least one class where a student worked (over the summer I think?) to set up the autograder.
The second is to hold grading sessions, although this is often optional for upper-div courses. The required courses at my college have grading down to a science, having been refined over decades. This is useful, since they often have hundreds of assignments to grade each week. Pretty much all of them will have a “grutor party” one day of the week for about 1 to 2 hours, wherein each grutor grades their assignments and the professor is available to answer grutor questions. For the upper-divs which don’t do this, they’ll usually at least have a weekly meeting for thirty minutes to talk about any issues that came up.
The third (like username_1 mentioned) is to hold office hours. Grutors will also have grutoring hours, but if I recall correctly, they’re only obligated to help with the homework. You’ll nevertheless want to give students a chance to talk with you directly if you’re at a teaching college.
In sum, I think that “a few hours a week,” like username_1 said, is optimistically all that was required of my professors.
I’m happy to clarify any of these points if you have questions, but please keep in mind that my perspective comes from a student grader’s view at one college. Also, I think username_1’s (and perhaps your) class sizes are much smaller than some of the ones I grutored.
Finally, this perspective is for homeworks only. In pretty much all the courses, professors graded all exams.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/22
| 1,345
| 5,404
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working on my PhD for fourteen months now. I had a break only for four days before my PhD. I was busy with my master's thesis before that. During the PhD, I have had breaks for 3 weeks scattered during the last fourteen months. I didn't have a break in the summer, because I was worried about my research proposal and one-year review.
Although the research is not very mature yet in terms of solution strategies, I found good scientific questions. I passed the one-year review.
People asked me to take a break and relax before going further. I can't go back home or to a different destination because I am worried about COVID for multiple reasons and I don't want to risk it even though I am vaccinated.
I am on a break now for a week and this is my second week of break. I like the stress-free period now. However, I wanted some advice if this is an ideal break because I see people do a lot of activities during their break to recharge themselves and I am here just relaxing.
My usual activities during this break.
1. Watching movies - 60%
2. Visiting museums - 10%
3. Trying to cook a lot of food because I like cooking - 20%
4. Social media - 5%
5. As drawing with charcoal was my hobby in 2017/2018, I am thinking about buying essentials for painting to learn how to use colours. - 5 %
Like point number 5, I have ideas to do something else, but I feel lazy all of a sudden and I just do things from point 1 to 4. Is this healthy? I feel like my brain needed some serious rest after working for a year continuously (I took weekends off of course). I may even plan one more week of a break after the two weeks break I have planned.
What are your opinions? I know this is not exactly an academic question, but this is essential for my research in the long term.<issue_comment>username_1: I see two things that seem to be missing.
The first is personal contact with people and having meaningful, even if not "life-changing" discussions, both personal and broadly professional. Social media could imply that or not, but for many people it doesn't. The other things seem too isolating to be good for mental health. You can do this even in COVID times if you do it with care. It doesn't always need to be face to face and can be done in safe environments, such as outdoors.
The second item is a lack of physical activities, especially aerobics of some sort - even if mild. Biking is better than walking, but walking may be enough. You want to get your heart beating a bit (or a lot) faster as it supplies blood to the brain, which actually enhances your professional work. Biking in a group can also be a bit social. Swimming may be safe or not. Running almost certainly is. You don't need to spend a lot of time with it, but an hour's break for a 20 mile ride (pretty fast, actually) can rejuvenate you.
You might be able to organize some activities among your peer students (and some faculty) for short, periodic breaks. Saturday softball, say. Both active and social.
Generally, not just when taking formal breaks, get enough sleep.
Note that your brain doesn't shut down during such activities, even sleeping. Sometimes you find the crux of a vexing problem immediately upon finishing some activity, even on waking up. The mind is a wonderful thing, but it needs rest and some variety.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I see nothing that is missing.
If I read you well, it is your fourth week of vacation after more than a year. By what should be healthy standards, this isn't much and you seem tired.
And when you're tired it is normal to rest ; spending one week home if that is what you feel like doing is in no way unhealthy. If your everyday life has the required equilibriums but this week you don't feel the need to go hiking, biking or meeting people, then you should listen to yourself.
While those activities are healthy and generally improve your mood, they can be draining as well. It is perfectly normal to watch a movie over going on a hike and, I insist on this point, not something that you should label as lazyness but rather as a personal choice -- or even a need as you observe yourself.
You should try to view or practice those activities with as much distance as possible with the peer pressure that comes with it. Some people may see some activities that you may do in your break as more worthwhile than other, but in the end you are the one doing those activities and enjoying them or not.
From there it is clear that an "ideal break" is really time and person-dependent and that while asking for suggestions is a good idea, you should really allow yourself to do exactly what you want to do in your vacations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: So when I did my PhD way back in '93 to '95 I took up triathlon. I was reasonably fit at the time. Riding to my campus every day spurred me on to start swimming and running. By second year I was training twice a day, once at lunchtime and then in the evening. I was lucky that I could do all of this and still carry out my research and everything else. By doing this on a continual basis I felt much fresher mentally. There is a life outside of your work. Find something you enjoy and set time aside on a regular basis to do it. If I'm honest, sport is the best as it gets you out with no distractions and away from where you study and work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/22
| 1,715
| 7,011
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a postdoc based in Europe working in a theoretical/computational field with a background in physics and am considering leaving academia. There are various reasons for this, but most importantly I have not made as much progress as I had hoped and am pessimistic about my long-term chances of getting a tenured job.
Now I am close to 2 years into my postdoc, and my contract runs for another full year. I have an individual fellowship that has allowed me to work flexibly and start various collaborations, but due to a few setbacks none of these projects has been published yet.
My plan would be to work in industry, perhaps as a data scientist or to work on AI/machine learning. I already have some skills that would be directly relevant for such a career (Python, R, machine learning knowledge), and have some experience applying these to data in my research. But I have no experience outside academia at all and don't have a clear idea of what working in industry is like.
Unlike for PhD, there's no clear endpoint for a postdoc. So I am considering what the best **exit strategy** would be.
1. **Should I stay longer (perhaps until the end of my contract) and try to finish my projects and write up the results?**
2. **Or should I try to leave as soon as possible?**
Arguments in favour of (1) are:
* It would be more responsible and less problematic for my supervisor and collaborators.
* I would have a sense of accomplishment if I manage to get a few
papers out before I leave.
* I could use the spare time to acquire more skills relevant to e.g.
data science without pressure of immediately delivering anything.
Arguments in favour of (2) are:
* Another year in academia would potentially make me less attractive to industry.
* I am afraid that my supervisor might lose interest in mentoring me if I tell that I will leave academia.
* Better compensation in industry (though I am satisfied with my current postdoc salary).
As for my personal situation, I'm in my late 20s and am unmarried and without children, so from this perspective everything should be relatively uncomplicated.
Do you think these are fair and valid arguments, and what would you do if you were in my situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Find out more about jobs in industry. It will be very helpful to have some idea what it is like when you apply for jobs.
Could you get an internship in industry for a few months? If not, there are probably many other ways to find out about these jobs.
I don't understand the point about your supervisor losing interest in you. I don't think you need to tell your supervisor that you are leaving academia until you get a job.
If I was you I would start applying for jobs now. If you get interviews, you will find out about the culture and get more idea what industry is like. If you don't get interviews, you will know you need to improve your applications in some way, and you will be glad that you started applying soon.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While it's plain sad to say things like that... Leave asap.
Time is precious. Every day you spend on something you think is a dead end is a day not spent on something better.
Sit down with yourself, think long and hard about what you actually want out of your life, then go after it. No job title is ever a goal in itself, it's just a shorthand for some other things you value. Think about things that excite you in this moment. Think about things that are likely to bring you joy and comfort as you'll be looking back at those years. Weigh your options, be also wary of the midlife crisis possibly looming over you.
These decisions are probably the hardest in life. But if you have firmly decided to quit, just quit.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: You present two option:
>
> 1. Should I stay longer (perhaps until the end of my contract) and try to finish my projects and write up the results?
> 2. Or should I try to leave as soon as possible?
>
>
>
I would take a third approach based upon the answer by [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178304/33210). I would **figure out what type of industry job you want and what skills are need for that industry job and then work as hard as possible to develop them while still working as a post doc.**
The best time to apply for a job is when you already have one! I would even consider starting to apply now and keep on applying as you build your skills. You will keep on building your marketability.
Ideally, you could *double dip* and learn the skills during your post doc. For example, maybe you see that the industry jobs you want you to use machine learning with R. Figure out how to do a project that helps your postdoc mentor while learning those skills. Also, some industry jobs such as research positions, favor publications, but many if not most do not. There are other posts on that topic on this site (e.g., <https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=industry+publishing>).
Also, checkout posts on imposter syndrome (such as [How to effectively deal with Imposter Syndrome and feelings of inadequacy: "I've somehow convinced everyone that I'm actually good at this"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11765/how-to-effectively-deal-with-imposter-syndrome-and-feelings-of-inadequacy-ive)), you probably know more than you think.
Lastly, check out resources like [Build a Career in Data Science](https://www.manning.com/books/build-a-career-in-data-science).
I suspect this book has resources that will help you on your journey.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There is a clear endpoint for a postdoc - the end of your contract.
You can search for a job and set the start date to the end of your postdoc contract. Six months before the end of that contract is a nice time to start: it takes time to conduct a job search, then to schedule interviews, technical tests, and whatnot. Then when you are asked when you can start, quote the end of your postdoc contract.
Should you leave *right now*? That's up to you. There shouldn't be anything special about leaving now that can't be foreseen: you tell your supervisor (how they react you will know better than most people), you trigger the exit clause on your contract, and you search for a job. Ideally you leave your postdoc only when you have a job lined up, because job searches can take a while. But you can also leave without having a job lined up - you just become unemployed for some time. The major difference would be that you start doing something different sooner rather than later, and how valuable that is to you only you can know.
One suggestion: job searches can be scary if you've never done them before, so talk to people you know who have. Your peers who did undergraduate studies with you and are now in the industry are a good candidate, as are your parents, family friends, etc. You should also make use of is your university's career center, if there is one - they can offer a lot of practical help.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/22
| 1,318
| 5,472
|
<issue_start>username_0: I noticed that a recent teaching faculty candidate's LORs from an institution outside the US all had not-so-short and shamelessly hagiographic "short bios" appended onto the end. One went on for a whole page, making me wonder who they were recommending, the candidate or themselves.
I've always taken the attitude when I've written an LOR that the reader doesn't know or care who I am, they care about the candidate, my relationship to the candidate, and the up-close observations and evidence I'm able to offer in support of my recommendation, so they can judge for themselves whether this is really a top candidate. (In the unlikely event they do want to know about me, I give them a link to my faculty page.)
So, this was the first time I've seen a short bio at the end of an LOR. Is this the new thing or something that's been going on forever that I've just never noticed?<issue_comment>username_1: (I'm in the U.S., in math.) I wouldn't claim that "it's a thing" in math in the U.S., but I *have* been asked occasionally to provide a brief auto-bio when writing letters in support of fellowships and other things. Not, to my recollection, for graduate admission (in math, in the U.S.).
But/and when I'm on our grad admissions committee, it *does* matter a bit to me what the context of a letter-writer is. Not so much about their childhood, etc., :) but certainly about their own experience with grad education in math in the U.S. Many people I am vaguely acquainted with, so have an idea of their context, but more-and-more younger faculty I do *not* know, etc. And, in particular, being faculty at a small liberal arts college, or a branch campus, certainly no longer gives any indication of one's grad school experience! So some explicit remarks (often volunteered in any case within a letter of recommendation) are helpful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: When writing letters of recommendation, especially for graduate students, I start my letters with a short bio. I do this because I am not a faculty member, but instead work at a government research lab. This helps with context for the letter. I have noticed that some applications ask for me to rank students compared to other students I interact with. However, I only have limited interactions with students. But, the students I work with are almost all high quality. Also, this helps the letter reader see why I think the students will thrive in graduate school (i.e., that both the students and I are doing serious research even if I am not a professor).
Furthermore, I do this as an opportunity to link in the prospective student's research in with my research. And, ideally, their target program by describing collaborations with faculty there or alumni from their program. Here's a paragraph from generic template:
>
> I am pleased to recommended *XX XX* for admission into *YYYY*. I had the privilege to <*mentor/supervise/etc.*> *XX (usually first name only)* as a <*ZZZ then describe situation*>. I am *my job title* at *my org*. Through this position I mentor undergraduate students and serve on graduate committees <\_link to ZZZ>. My primary research focuses on <*CCC*> and XX has assisted me with *CCC*.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: In actual practice, who the letter writer is actually matters quite a lot -- maybe not so much when it's a letter for an undergraduate applying to grad school, but certainly when it's for tenure or for promotion to full professor.
Now, we could argue whether that's useful or not, but it is what it is -- though we probably agree that when evaluating someone's qualifications as a researcher it *does* make a difference whether the evaluator is a senior faculty at a research-active university with a good perspective on the research landscape, or a just recently hired assistant professor at a teaching-intensive university. As a consequence, letters often do contain a brief paragraph about the letter writer's qualifications -- in essence, a short bio.
These paragraphs were typically at the very beginning of the letter. In recent years, at least some universities have asked letter writers to state their qualifications/affiliations/prizes/... along with how they know the candidate they are writing for, on a separate page at the end of the letter. That's because universities had to contend with candidates who use open records laws to gain access at the letters, and the letters had to be redacted to remove personal information about the letter writer. This is easiest done if all personal information is on a separate page.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Presumably the short bio is to convince the reader that the LOR was written by "not just anybody" which, presumably again, should correlate with the quality of the assessment in the LOR (spoiler: the rho does not equal 1). And yet we can usually tell from the LOR itself whether or not the referee makes sensible and or useful comments on the candidates; we don't need their bio. It makes some sense in our world in which academia has exploded exponentially and more often then not I am not sure of the quality of the referee (they may hold X rank at institution Y, but even so I am usually not sure about the quality Y is able to attract on average). But I bet all these bios are telling you that ref is world-class, world-leading, excellent etc.! It is part of a much wider trend of padding and puffing-up, I'm afraid.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/23
| 830
| 3,394
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to US universities for Ph.D. so I wrote to some professors from X university. Actually, I wrote them at the beginning of this year but I was late for admission so I did not get any positive reply. But wrote them again last month and one of them replied asking if I have time (that week) to discuss my further goals with her. I replied saying I got time. After that, she did not reply. So after 3 weeks, I sent her a reminder email. She did not reply.
At the beginning of this month, she again replied and asked if I have time for an interview. Again I said yes and we fixed a time. On that day, she wrote me she got some work to be done and again if I have time in the later week. I said yes.
Again she didn't reply back.
What should I do now?
If I can manage a PI before I apply to this university, I will have a good chance of admission and they will waive my application fee.<issue_comment>username_1: They might have been busy. These days more than research they are busy with administrative works — which are unavailable. So ideally you could follow up after two or three weeks from first email.
With my experience I would suggest contact them as you contact other professionals and follow up to have an update. You have to wait until they reply. Meantime if you have friends or any known administrative at their office— you may follow up if professor is occupied.
However don’t put all the eggs in one basket. Meantime apply for all the potential opportunities.
Good luck with your application.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you need to know and they have a phone number, I recommend calling people. Email overwhelms most professors inboxes, but these days many people never think to give someone a call. I have had much better luck with getting what I need sorted out on the phone.
Skype or google phone credit is a cheap enough way to manage this internationally.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Perhaps this isn't the best PI for you as they are likely very busy - perhaps too busy. But, in most fields in the US it isn't necessary to contact a professor before you apply for admission. And in most fields the professor you contact is not going to be able to have any influence over your admission as it is handled by a committee. There are a few exceptions. But perhaps the reason that they don't reply is that they don't have any say in admissions, not being on such a committee.
But most students arrive in a doctoral program without any PI in mind and have a chance, while taking advanced coursework to get a better sense of who would be best to work with. It also permits a more personal level of contact.
Likewise, in most fields, the first task of a new doctoral student is to prepare for comprehensive exams. Again, there are a few exceptions, but that is the reason for the advanced coursework when it is required.
It can be a bit different, and possibly compressed, for those with a masters. And it can be a bit different if a PI is required for (grant) funding.
And, while it may be frustrating, if deadlines aren't rapidly approaching, the person will likely be prioritizing other things. So, you may just need to keep trying.
---
And see the [answer for the US to this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/176908/75368) about how graduate admissions in the US works
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/24
| 1,621
| 6,832
|
<issue_start>username_0: When writing a book about a subject, if all your text is in your own words, and, contains only commonly known, fundamental, well established knowledge about the subject, which can all be seen in tons of resources, do you need to show any references or bibliography at all - even if you looked at other places while gathering that information, but took only the commonly established knowledge?
If you do not list any sources, can someone come to you and say "OK, you didn’t copy anything from me, but what if you looked at my book (which also has that common knowledge), since you do not list any sources"?
I am asking in terms of avoiding a legal issue. Not in terms of "citing is better for your text to be more reliable" in an academic field, etc.... This is an introductory to intermediate level book I am talking about. It is not something that claims to be at an academic level.<issue_comment>username_1: See related question [Is there such a thing in the academic world as "common knowledge"?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/144271/is-there-such-a-thing-in-the-academic-world-as-common-knowledge)
If the knowledge you're looking of really is common knowledge (the example in the linked question is "the sky is blue"), then it's arguable that you don't have to cite it. But it's still only arguable - reasonable people can press the opposite argument that you still should cite that the sky is blue.
Ultimately, when in doubt, cite it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Some statements that are "commonly known, fundamental," and "well-established" now were not so in the past. For example, the statement "tobacco smoking causes lung cancer" should have a reference (say, [this](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3749017/)), in my opinion. If I were to make the statement "one is not a prime number," then I would cite, say, [this](https://cs.uwaterloo.ca/journals/JIS/VOL15/Caldwell2/cald6.html).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Edit: I am asking in terms of avoiding legal issue.
>
>
>
Legally, you just have to not commit copyright infringement, which should be easy by writing in your own words.
But there are still good reasons to include citations. One is to give a pointer for further reading on the topic for readers who are interested.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Literally, no. Common Knowledge is held in the commons. Generally speaking if you find it in an encyclopedia or in an undergraduate textbook it is likely to be common knowledge, though the specific expression can be covered by copyright.
But there is another reason for citing some things in textbooks. The reader/student may want to know more and go deeper into the things you write.
One alternative is the fairly typical "Further Reading" section at the ends of chapters. Some of these are more than just a bibliography, with a sentence about what the reader might find there to enhance their learning.
You need to avoid plagiarism also, so don't write in a way that the reader might assume that you originated the ideas. Sometimes you want to name some names of the originators of certain ideas. You might also want to give dates of discovery if not complete citations. "<NAME>, in 1899, ...".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: ### Your book should be held to the same standard as a Stack Exchange answer in a similar field
I think that the level to which we hold Stack Exchange answers accountable for sourcing facts should be at least the minimum to which we would hold more traditional books. After all, the body of answers for a given site is often seen as encyclopedic in nature and utility for future readers1 and that's roughly what a book is.
Why do we encourage sourcing of fact assertions? For reasons cited in other answers here
* it helps to build overall credibility of the post
* it provides interested readers with resources to read further
* it helps us spot answers that are just making stuff up by their failure to source
I think the first two can also apply to your book.
The book may be likely to be reviewed and recommended (or not) for use in libraries or in teaching, so if it's well-sourced this *might* contribute to a better review, which may mean more money in your pocket, wider readership and a better result for your publisher, which may contribute to future "book deals".
### This is Academia SE and so view-based answers don't always cite sources
I've ironically fabricated one out of thin air below, but for your "introductory to intermediate level book" I recommend you find the SE site that best matches your topic and review the best received-answers and see how they support their assertions of "common knowledge" with sources, and consider this as your floor, your minimum.
---
1While SE answers collectively are encyclopedic in nature and utility, individually they also should answer the OP's specific question or attempt to "solve their problem". This is universally known as the "SE is both a floor wax and a desert topping" doctrine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I think you should consider not just whether you **need** to cite sources, but also whether you **should**.
There are multiple purposes to cite sources. One is to properly credit ideas, to avoid appearing to take improper credit for those ideas (plagiarize). This is probably the purpose most associated with "need".
Another is to support your own arguments and statements, by either directing your readers to see the grounding of those statements in other places (which can't be recapitulated every time they were mentioned, otherwise every published item would be longer than the one before it and soon would be completely impossible to digest) or at least presenting the appearance that your ideas have other support[[1]](https://xkcd.com/978/).
Yet another is to connect your readers to additional reading according to their own interests. It may be common knowledge in a given field, but if a reader wants to know more, where should they go next? What if they want to understand *why* something is true, rather than merely that it is true? What if they want to understand how that piece of knowledge came about?
I think it may be difficult and overly pedantic to include these sorts of citations to every element of very base knowledge in an academic paper, but if your purpose is to introduce a field to your readers it may be worth giving them branches to more reading rather than just setting them out on their own with little more than Google to help. I would not recommend using the absolute bare minimum of citations according to "need", but rather balancing the level of citation with the level of content you present. **Keep your audience in mind** when writing, no matter what level you write for.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/24
| 1,505
| 6,087
|
<issue_start>username_0: Several astronomers are building up the grass-roots / volunteer organisation [Astronomers for Planet Earth](https://astronomersforplanet.earth) (raising awareness for the climate crisis from an astronomical perspective).
Most, but not all of us have institutional affiliations with various universities, but we would like to (also) use our grass-roots organisation as affiliation in our publications -- and we are wondering if we may do so. Googling and searching on this site did not lead to an answer.
Does anyone know what the requirements are on an organisation to be listed as academic affiliation?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd say, go for it. The worst that can happen is that you are asked to remove it.
>
> Does anyone know what the requirements are on an organisation to be listed as academic affiliation?
>
>
>
If there are requirements for affiliations, they are set by the individual publisher. I'm pretty sure there is no universal requirement, especially if you act in good faith. The affiliation is basically just an additional identifier for you.
However, there is a requirement to disclose any potential conflicts of interest and that includes being open about affiliations impacting that. Since your grass-roots organization has a non-scientific and even somewhat political mission, I'd argue that you should disclose it if your study is related to that mission, even if only marginally.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The requirements are up to the publishers. But I don't think you should do it. How would you feel if people started listing social movements or political groups as affiliations?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: While there do not seem to be strict formal requirements for what can be put as an academic affiliation on a paper, there is a general understanding that the institution given as an affiliation somehow "hosted" the research that is described in the publication. Examples from publishers are (highlighting mine):
* <NAME>: "Your affiliation in the manuscript should be the institution **where you conducted the research**. You should also include details of any funding received from that institution." (<https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/editorial-policies/defining-authorship-research-paper/>)
* Elsevier: "Present the authors' affiliation addresses (**where the actual work was done**) below the names." (<https://www.elsevier.com/journals/information-and-organization/1471-7727/guide-for-authors>)
That means if your membership in the grass-roots organization **was not substantial to the research** being done, you **should not list them** as an affiliation. If you do, I think it may be taken similarly as someone listing a political party they are member of, or maybe the gym down the street where they have a membership card.
You should also realize that while the affiliations that are listed may seem not so relevant from the view of the author, they are relevant to the institutions, as this information may be aggregated in various institutional evaluations (see e.g. <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/117431/3890>, [KAU is accused of hiring well-known professors to boost university rankings by adding affiliation. Is it ethical to accept this kind of offer?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41684/kau-is-accused-of-hiring-well-known-professors-to-boost-university-rankings-by-a?noredirect=1&lq=1)).
If the organization can not be listed as affiliation, you could still check whether they can be mentioned in the acknowledgments. This would be justified if for example the interactions with other researchers, through that organization, were somehow helpful to conducting the research or just making the publication.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: <NAME> listed a pub as his affiliation:
============================================
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6Tvcu.png)
([doi: 10.1088/0022-3700/13/23/008](https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3700/13/23/008))
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JVhYg.png)
It is up to the journal, and most if not all journals will allow you to list "Astronomers for Planet Earth" as your affiliation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
People who are telling you outright not to do it, probably missed this part of your question:
>
> "Most, but not all of us have institutional affiliations with various universities, but we would like to (also) use our grass-roots organisation as affiliation in our publications -- and we are wondering if we may do so."
>
>
>
For those without any other affiliation, the journal would probably ask more questions about their lack of affiliation than about the fact that the affiliation is "Astronomers for Planet Earth". Then if the people with no other affiliation are using "Astronomers for Planet Earth" as their affiliation and you are not, that would not seem right, so you should feel free to do it if you want to and the journal allows it (most likely, if you submit the paper with this affiliation, they will not even mention it in the slightest way, so you're probably worrying about nothing, but it's good that you're playing it safe and asking the community here).
Generally, institutions can get angry at you for putting their name on your paper if you weren't actually working there, but in the case where "Astronomers for Planet Earth" is someone's only affiliation and the organization wants you to list their name in the paper, your only obstacle would be whether or not the journal allows it and most likely they will. Some academics might not take you seriously if they haven't heard of your affiliation, and ***whether or not it's a good idea to do this*** will depend on many other factors, but whether or not you ***can do it*** is up to the journal and the answer is almost certainly a "yes".
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/11/24
| 439
| 1,898
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am looking for postdocs, and I have different postdoc offers.
I am really hesitating between different possibilities.
Some of those offers are interesting, in a dynamic group and they are in eastern Europe countries.
I was wondering if compared to a post-doc in a country such as the U.S for instance it can be badly seen on a curriculum (for an academic carreer).
I plan to do a career in Western Europe (ideally in France). Also, some answer suggested to do a postdoc in the same place where you want to find a position. Actually I did my PhD in France and for this reason I have to go outside of the country for networking purpose.<issue_comment>username_1: There are some truly fine universities in Eastern Europe. There might be some advantage, however, in doing the post doc in the same place that you want to build a career since it is easier for others to make judgments.
The exception would be for a really interesting opportunity that isn't likely to have a counterpart elsewhere. And one that won't raise questions about relevance for your career.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: What matters is more what you do, less where you do it. Of course ideally it’s best to do great work in a group with high visibility, but the visibility of the group is often country-independent. In addition, it’s likely that, if you want to remain in the same field, these high-visibility groups will be well known to prospective employers.
The tricky part is to assess if your work will get proper recognition, and this implies - in addition to the core value fo the work - opportunities to promote your work through conferences or workshops, the abiiity to interact with others through a vigorous visitor program, and such things that basically boil down to $$.
Certainly in physics there are extremely good and well recognized groups in Eastern Europe.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/25
| 884
| 3,588
|
<issue_start>username_0: Consider the [following bolded recommendation](https://ewh.ieee.org/reg/ccece15/files/ccece-word-sample.pdf#page=4) for arranging graphs and tables for an IEEE submission
>
> Because IEEE will do the final formatting of your paper,
> **you do not need to position figures and tables at the top and bottom of each column. In fact, all figures, figure captions, and tables can
> be at the end of the paper**. Large figures and tables may span both
> columns. Place figure captions below the figures; place table titles
> above the tables. If your figure has two parts, include the labels
> “(a)” and “(b)” as part of the artwork. Please verify that the figures
> and tables you mention in the text actually exist. Please do not
> include captions as part of the figures. Do not put captions in “text
> boxes” linked to the figures. Do not put borders around the outside of
> your figures. Use the abbreviation “Fig.” even at the beginning of a
> sentence. Do not abbreviate “Table.” Tables are numbered with Roman
> numerals.
>
>
>
Till now, I use to think that it is the burden of the author to properly align figures and tables. Although the IEEE guidelines are not instructing to not take the burden, they are recommending the author to leave the burden.
With this context, I want to know the practice of taking or leaving the burden by the majority of authors. Do authors generally leave the burden to IEEE or arrange all of them by themselves?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience with different publishers (not only IEEE), the tables and figures are often rearranged, repositioned or even reformatted after submission to fit in with the specific journals' style. This is done by the journal editors because, well, they know what an article at their journal should look like much better than you, the author. If all figures and tables are properly referenced in the text, placing them at convenient points in your article is not a big issue for the editors.
So I would not call placing tables and figures a "burden", rather part of the normal job of an editor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Authors can arrange the tables and images, but they don't have to, because whatever they do will not help the typesetters and in fact the typesetters will largely ignore them anyway. It's like wondering if you should write in blue ink or black ink when the document is going to be scanned using a black & white scanner. If you really want to use blue ink, then by all means, but it doesn't really change anything for the scanner.
If you really want to arrange the tables and images yourself, then sure, but you would not be "taking the burden" - the amount of work they have to do remains the same.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As [username_2](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178397/20058) and [username_1's](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178395/20058) answers explain, the typesetters will take care anyway of floats' placement.
However, I usually try to have anyway a decent placement of figures and tables before submitting to facilitate the work of the reviewers: in my experience, given the same scientific content, a well-presented paper has more chances of being accepted. Moreover, I had sometimes received remarks where a reviewer asked to move a figure. I usually reply that typesetters will take care of figure placement, but with a minimum of work I try to have my figures and tables well-placed: after all, in the economy of a paper, 10 min spent in adjusting floats' placement is virtually nothing.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/25
| 468
| 2,122
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is a paper that has used **entropy feature** in the **beta band** for subject classification and obtained a specific **accuracy value**. I am aware that there is no context here, but I put these minimal information just to explain my problem. Now I have two subsections under the "Literature Review" chapter in my thesis. In the first subsection, I am exploring **frequency bands**' effect on the **accuracy** and I reviewed the mentioned paper's results. In another subsection, I am dealing with the effect of **complexity-based features** on the **accuracy**, so again I need to review that paper again. I can't just split the **feature** and **frequency band** information in two and report them separately under the two sections because it harms the understanding of the review. What can I do here? Repeating the review, although with different emphasis, seems redundant. And cross-referencing inconveniently interrupts the flow of the text for the reader.<issue_comment>username_1: "Repeating the review, although with different emphasis, seems redundant" but it is not, because you are tackling a different aspect and you do not want to cross-reference.
So, either you are redundant (which is **not** always a bad thing) or you are cross-referencing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Repeating yourself for the sake of clarity is not redundancy. Redundancy is repeating yourself needlessly.
The scenario that you have described seems to me to be a very well justified case for reviewing the same paper twice in two different sections. In one section, you should emphasize frequency bands, and in the other section emphasize complexity-based features. And it is quite appropriate to briefly refer back to the paper so that the attentive reviewer knows that you are quite aware that you are referring to the same paper twice, albeit from slightly different angles. So, for example, you could begin the second time with something like, "Authors (20xx), whom we discussed in our section on frequency bands, also analyzed complexity-based features and they found that …".
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/25
| 1,971
| 8,310
|
<issue_start>username_0: Impact factors and citation counts are widely used metrics to judge the reputation of researchers. However, these metrics can be misleading, and in some cases can be manipulated.
Why do universities place so much importance on citation counts and accumulative impact factors?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Because many funding agencies give a lot of weight to citations and impact factor,
2. Because many ranking agencies (of all sorts) will give higher rankings to institutions with research-active and well-funded faculty, as measured by such metrics,
3. Because stating in a recruitment brochure that your faculty publish on average so-many papers a year will make you look better than so-few papers a year.
Yeah it’s all marketing, but in these days where governments are funding a decreasing proportion of the cost of education, where universities compete for students, and where the ratio of administration to faculty keeps increasing, the administration needs new revenues. See [this article in Forbes magazine](https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardvedder/2020/04/13/academic-tenure-rip/?sh=5a06332115cf) for additional context and financial pressures on institutions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Question is impossible to answer since the **premise is false**, or at least has no proof. Specifically,
>
> why majority of universities give too much importance to citation
> count and accumulative impact factor
>
>
>
No university I am aware of cares at all about impact factors, which are in most cases fake (the ones reported by journals).
Citation count is slightly more important, and is used at times as a proxy of "impact" of a scientist, but even this is not universally recognized, and most universities do not explicitly check this measure.
In fact, **promotion and hiring is based more on:**
* reference letters and peer evaluation
* places of publications: prestigious or not.
* acquaintance of existing faculty members with the candidate
* *number* of publications in selective places (not number of citations)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have no idea about "majority" either, but we are occasionally discussing what a "fair metric" would be for counting publications. Everyone agrees that the evaluation of the true scientific merit is impractical (or even impossible) for a variety of reasons from impossibility to carefully read and evaluate all papers in a variety of completely different areas to the mere fact that to estimate a true impact of something, one has to wait for 10+ years at the very least.
Our current system (as far as I remember it) is to have tier 1 and tier 2 journals with 2 points for a publication in a former and 1 in the latter (there are also some fancy rules about sole publications vs. co-authored ones I was too lazy to read properly, so I'd rather skip them here). It is far from ideal and is constantly critiqued from all sides, but it is a not too bad compromise after all. I've heard of much worse arrangements where the formalization was brought to something completely absurd (from my perspective, at least). The tiers are determined by "general agreement" (and there is some fight here) with the impact factor playing some role, but not the decisive one. In general, it is believed that the individual citation metrics (like h-index) reflect the true impact of a researcher much better than the sum of journal impact factors times the number of papers in that journal.
The main reason for the very existence of this point system seems to be that neither we would like to explain to the administration what is worth what on the routine basis, not the administration would like to hear such explanations more often than absolutely necessary, so everything should be reduced to a single number. When really important cases arise (like promotion to tenure, etc.) the number merely needs to be above a certain (fairly low) threshold and the decision is made based mostly on the recommendation letters and such, but for trivial issues like annual merit salary raise that number suffices and everybody can see how the awards are made. Transparency here is at least as important as fairness and since the latter can be hardly achieved even in theory, resorting to the famous KISS principle is a reasonable idea. As long as the point system (whatever it is) doesn't acquire life and power of its own that overrides common sense, it is harmless and even useful.
Of course, the situation varies from place to place, but what should be remembered is that many rules like that are not creations of the universities, but rather of the faculty in the particular departments, and the ugliest monsters are born when people do not want to agree on anything or even to listen to each other. Various "rankings" by independent agencies also play some role, of course, and the citation factors play noticeable role there, sometimes in a rather weird (again, IMHO) way.
As I said, the current system is far from ideal, but if you ever come up with a bright idea of a really good way (fair, transparent, and practical), let me know and I'll be happy to advocate for it locally :-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: **Because it's easy**
Let's say you got 100 researchers to evaluate. How would you go about doing it? You could read their papers in sufficient detail to understand them (would take months or years, especially if they're not in your field). You could rely on peer evaluations and recommendation letters (already done extensively). You could look at prizes and awards won (also already done extensively). Or you could look at citation counts and impact factors. The last is easy to do, and while it's not perfect, it is objective and there is a correlation with research quality ([citation counts is the standard method to measure excellence in bibliometrics](https://academic.oup.com/rev/article-abstract/23/2/166/2889062?redirectedFrom=fulltext)).
Besides, many non-specialists care about citation counts and impact factors, e.g. all the major university rankings use it, and students look at rankings. Doing badly on those rankings can make one less attractive to students, with all its negative consequences.
See also [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90/university-rank-stature-how-much-does-it-affect-ones-career-post-ph-d/154#154):
>
> But. Faculty candidates are necessarily judged by people who are not experts in their field. Without the expertise to judge whether your work is really good, those people must look at secondary data that correlate strongly with successful researchers. One of those secondary characteristics is "pedigree". Did you get your degree at MIT, Berkeley, Stanford, CMU, another top-10 department, or somewhere else? (What's an "Ivy League"?) How good/famous is your advisor? If they're really paying attention: Where did your advisor's other PhD students get jobs, and how well are they doing now?
>
>
> Fortunately, most good departments do make a serious effort to understand the quality and impact of applicants' results, instead of relying only on secondary data. Also, secondary data matters considerably less once you actually have an interview.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: A major issue in my view is the concept of "objectivity" and the issues with it. Objectivity can mean many things, but often it is taken to be the result of a transparent and reproducible measurement procedure, and associated with the removal of the influence of personal interests and opinions.
The essential dilemma with this is that the ability and potential of a researcher and the value of their work are so complex (and surely not one-dimensional, as any ranking needs to be) that chances are that no "objective" measurement procedure can do them justice. In some places there is a tendency to prioritise straight numerical measurements despite being obviously deficient (I'm not necessarily saying the citation counts and impact factors are the best of those). In some other places decisions are made in intransparent manners by commission members, taking into account reference letters and other information from peers. This can work well, but also is connected to favouritism and old networks protecting their field.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/25
| 380
| 1,639
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am adopting the MLA citation style. If a book is written by a principal author with an editor, is it obligatory to add an editor of the book in citation?<issue_comment>username_1: There are a lot of kinds of editors, but it would be very unusual if any of them contributed to the actual intellectual content of a work. In that sense, no, it isn't necessary to cite them so some would put the name of the editor, say in parentheses, with the citation: "...(edited by x.y)".
Some editors handle the publication process, some give advice on writing style, some might even rearrange things, but few would contribute to the actual ideas. There might be rare exceptions.
There is, however, another kind of editor. Some books are little more than a compendium of the work of several authors. In this case and "editor" will have done the creative work, such as it is, of collecting those papers into a single volume. Then, if you need to cite the volume itself, cite the "editor" who created it. But the papers themselves don't need the editor's name attached.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Many books don't have editors (unless they are employees of the publisher). But some do, and it is possible you should add their name to the citation. For example if the book is a collection of papers by [famous author], then the editor is important, since they chose which papers to collect. Similarly the editor of a review volume is also important even if they didn't contribute any articles to the volume.
If the name of the editor appears on the front cover, I would default to 'yes'.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/25
| 566
| 2,476
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is publishing a paper only with theoretical knowledge deemed okay? I was invited by an editor (through a lecture series) to publish a paper in an Urban Planning journal. I wrote two articles and they're published recently. However, I don't feel proud instead I'm self criticising and feeling that my work is not up to the standard ( I mean more research and analysis). A theoretical analysis was done but I'm somehow not convinced that I did a good job. Is this normal? Am I just feeling the imposter syndrome? I'm a Masters Student in the final year and I want to do a PhD and get into academia.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, if the journals that published your work are reputable, then you are definitely "up to the standard". So, yes, it feels like a bit of imposter syndrome. And maybe the shock of early success (which is far preferable to the opposite).
Talk to an advisor about how "theoretical" work is accepted in your field. The journals who welcome it might be different from those with a more practical focus.
If you don't already know about the quality of the journals you've published in then a local professor can give you advice on that as well. But from a distance, all seems good.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From my experience, it is difficult for a master's student to evaluate the quality of academic journals and of the articles published in them (including their own). I echo username_1's recommendation that you should talk to a professor to get their assessment.
However, I would add the strong emphasis that it is usually (though not only) researchers who actively publish themselves who are able to give you a reputable assessment of the quality of the journals in which you have published. So, I would recommend that you search a researcher's research record first on Google Scholar to make sure that they are themselves actively publishing researchers in the field of Urban Planning. When you have verified that this is the case, then you can ask such a researcher their honest assessment of the quality of the journals in which you have published. (And even better, if they have the time to give you, they could even take a look at your articles to assess their specific quality.)
My implication is that if you ask a professor who is an inactive researcher about the journals, they might say that it is great just because they themselves do not actively publish that much.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/26
| 1,151
| 4,758
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently came across a very old article of mine. The article was written at the beginning of my career when we were pressured to publish extensively. There is nothing really wrong with the article, but it is written in poor language (my English was very basic at the time) and it has no special academic value content-wise.
Do you think it is ethical to retract an article just because I don't like it anymore? Or do I have to accept that a badly written article is attached to my name and live with it?<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that it can be done, since a publisher was once happy enough to publish it. And if anyone has depended on this article, no matter how "primitive" you find it now, you would be disrupting the flow of scholarship. Whether that is ethical or not depends on your frame. Who now "owns" the work in a philosophical (not legal) sense.
But, let me change the frame a bit. Your dissatisfaction with your early work is nothing more than a sign of growth. If your best work is in your past then you have stopped moving forward.
I've been told that some poets, occasionally at least, sometimes cringe at their early work. But that is because they have gone beyond it. And that early work likely let to later, better, work. The same is probably true for you.
You did the best you were capable of at the time. You have advanced past that stage. Celebrate it.
---
Note that I've assumed that the paper doesn't contain actual errors or, worse, cause harm. If that were the case then the original author is an excellent person to provide a follow up paper dealing with the issues. That would be superior to a retraction in many ways.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You probably won't be allowed to retract the article, so the ethics of it doesn't arise.
See e.g. [this](https://www.atlantis-press.com/policies/article-retraction-and-withdrawal) policy on when retractions happen:
>
> Journal Editors should consider retracting a publication if:
>
>
> * It contains infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, etc.
> * It contains major errors (e.g. miscalculations or experimental errors) or the main conclusion is no longer valid or seriously undermined as a result of new evidence coming to light of which Authors were not aware at the time of publication.
>
>
>
Since your paper is neither, the editor is not likely to approve a retraction.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As in the other good answers: first, in the U.S. and western Europe, as far as I know, it is not the author's choice whether to "retract" or not, in the traditional peer-reviewed setting. Second, the editors/publishers probably will not want to make a practice of this, for several reasons. Third, doing so can make a mess of bibliographic citations in other papers.
(Indeed, the impermanence of stuff on the internet is one problem with references thereto... but is probably inescapable. Yes, I do correct old on-line documents of my own, so that an old reference can become inaccurate... even while the factual aspects of the document have improved. No easy fix...)
Also, *of\_course* we are all somewhat embarrassed of our earlier work. Nevermind. :)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It’s useful to keep in mind that the term “retraction” in the academic context is really a kind of shorthand for the act of the editorial board of a journal effectively stating that it does not stand behind the content of an article they published anymore. Thus, from that point on the article cannot enjoy the credibility of having been published in that journal. The article itself will still exist, but readers will draw different conclusions on what its existence means and how much its content is to be trusted.
So, as others have said, the decision whether to retract is not up to the author, since this is about a statement made by the journal. But, as an author you are free to issue your own statement on any forum or medium (say Twitter, or your personal home page) explaining how you feel about the work. You can state “I no longer consider this work valid”, or “I no longer consider this work up to my standard for publishable work”, or anything else that accurately conveys how you feel. In that sense, by making the statement you will be “retracting” the article.
Now, the value of taking such a step seems very dubious to me. As with a journal’s retraction, the statement changes nothing about the article existing. But regardless, you are free to make such a statement and I don’t see that doing so has any particular ethical implications, assuming that your statement is a truthful one.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/26
| 1,123
| 4,439
|
<issue_start>username_0: Following this question on SE Academia: [Easy way to see historical trend in keywords in publications?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3439/easy-way-to-see-historical-trend-in-keywords-in-publications), I'm using Google Scholar and the linked script (<https://github.com/Pold87/academic-keyword-occurrence>) to get the number of publications on a certain keyword.
For the record, I was using the tool to get some statistical data for the popularity of the keyword "inter(-)organis(z)ational trust" (multiple spellings) (this should not matter for the the actual question though).
I found that there are very few to no publications at all on this topic between the 1940s and 1985. I'm wondering if this is (was) actually the case OR if this is just because there's no data on Google Scholar that dates back to that era, i.e. there *were indeed* publications on that topic but none of them got into Google Scholar because no-one cares about those publications now.
#### TL;DR
So my question is whether you think the part of publications before 1985 that is not on Google Scholar is really "negligible" and the numbers on Google Scholar *are representative (historically accurate)* for the period of time between 1940 and today.
FYI, I attached a plot of the numbers from GS:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mREM4.png)
EDIT:
If not GS, do you think the data on Constellate (<https://constellate.org>) is attendible (or is there literally any service you know of that fits this purpose)?<issue_comment>username_1: No they are not attendibile at all. Google Scholar focuses on living researchers and on readily accessibile online publications or metadata therein.
Older publications may not exist in digital format, or they may have poor ocr performed (an example is the “t” being recognized as “f” … it was happening in the early 00s and 10s on many publications from the 70s through the 80s).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Google Scholar is essentially a byproduct of Google Search. It picks up everything in the web crawl that *looks* like a scholarly paper, and indexes it. There isn't much manual curation, and unlike most publications databases it doesn't start by working from a list of publications it thinks it should have.
(If you are Scopus, you index the Journal of X by starting at Volume 1 and recording all the papers. If you are Google Scholar, you do it by collating all the papers from X that turned up in the search, relying on them being online to avoid gaps. It does then deduce the existence of other papers it finds in the citations - but only by title/author etc.)
This means that Google Scholar is very good at picking up modern material that is on the web, *wherever* it might be hosted, but very bad at identifying material that is not on the web, or only referred to in a static list somewhere. More and more older material is trickling online, ending up in the big waves of digitisations or on repositories or wherever... but there's still a long way to go. And of course, a lot of the older material is not well-digitised - it may be in flat non-OCRed PDFs, if at all. So it will be invisible to in-text keyword searching, which is what you're wanting to do.
It's striking that your numbers start to rise properly in the mid-1990s. This is the point at which journals started to routinely publish online, and it becomes more likely there would be a full-text readable version for the crawler to pick up. Prior to that, you're maybe going to be trying to match your keywords against just the title, or maybe an abstract at best - so of course you get fewer hits compared to the period when you can match full text.
(It might be worth benchmarking your search against some other terms - run it for "deflation" or "deforestation" or "fishing rights" or whatever. I have a suspicion you'll see a similar sort of curve...)
Lastly, you ask about Constellate. This is derived from the old JSTOR Data for Research service, and is mostly made up from records in [JSTOR and Portico](https://constellate.org/docs/data-sources); this means there will be some very substantial gaps depending on which publishers they have signed up to their service. That is likely to skew the results one way or another, but whether it's going to be an issue for your topic, I don't know.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/26
| 491
| 2,061
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to reference thoughts from [a book](https://faculty.ksu.edu.sa/sites/default/files/Modern_labor_economics__theory_and_public_policy_0.pdf), which would be a legal and normal thing to do, but there is a part on the first page of the book which makes me confused. Maybe the author forbids even to reference the book and I need written permission for that?
This was the legal text:
>
> No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without prior written permission of the publisher. Printed in the United States of America. For information on obtaining permission for use of material in this work, please submit a written request to...
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Actually, that is fairly standard copyright boilerplate. All it really means is that the normal copyright rules and restrictions apply. The same would be true, almost everywhere, even without the notice.
But "fair use" will still apply as usual and you can quote small sections of it with citation just as you would from any other book.
If anything, the notice also says that the author *might* be willing to give you a license for more if given some reason. But you will find nearly the same wording in novels and other books by commercial publishers.
Treat it like any other work.
---
I'm currently reading a mystery novel for relaxation. It has nearly that precise wording on the copyright page.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A shorter answer than username_1's is this:
The text you quote is about *using* parts of the book -- that is, making copies and distributing them to students, or using figures from the book in your own publications. It doesn't say anything about *citing* the book. That is something nobody can prohibit you from doing because you are not infringing on anyone's rights by doing so.
So rest assured that citing the book is both legal and the right thing to do.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/26
| 2,029
| 8,564
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a mathematics student in the US. For a recent exam, I achieved one of the highest scores. The problem is that the final question was intended to be a challenge, rather than one "average" students are expected to solve completely. Most students got only partial credit for their attempt.
I got full marks on this problem not because I solved it during the exam, but because I happened to see both the problem and solution while I was studying. I'm guessing that I would not have been able to solve it on my own had I not seen the solution. Therefore, my performance on this problem was largely a function of my ability to regurgitate the solution I had seen. This problem was worth a significant portion of the exam.
Is this cheating? Should I tell my professor?<issue_comment>username_1: No, if you saw the problem and its solution through random reading (rather than getting an advance copy of the exam, etc., obviously), then you have not only *NOT* cheated, but have in fact been a better-than-average scholar.
I realize that some instructors (and students) have some idea that reading ahead, or consulting other sources, is "against the rules"... (I'm not talking about *during* an exam, but about an approach to studying for a course) ... but this is bad/dumb/anti-intellectual.
So, no, what you did is not "cheating", it is your reward for taking a broader view of the subject, and reading more broadly. Also known as "scholarship/learning" :)
Upvotes: 8 <issue_comment>username_2: No, you have not cheated. When lecturers create an examination they have the option of writing new questions from scratch. If they choose instead to copy questions from another source (e.g., past exam, textbook, etc.) then they are choosing to give a question that a student may have seen before. Some lecturers do this on purpose, since they want to further incentivise the student to practice through a wide array of practice problems.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: NO, you have not cheated. It's good that you put in extra effort to practice some problems/learn few stuffs on your own, rather than just depending on the assignments and lectures. It was your hard work that paid off.
A very similar thing happened with me in the last year of my undergrad. The professor had given an exercise in the class as an homework. The question wasn't too hard, but still it was on the harder side. None of us were able to solve it properly; all of us just had some intuitive idea. After few days everybody just forgot about that problem. But before the final exam, as I was doing my revision, I again decided to give it a try, but, again, no luck.
Few hours before the exam I went to the professor's office to ask him about this problem and he told me the solution. To my surprise, that exact same question appeared as a bonus (or "challenging") question in the exam.
Obviously I was able to solve it and my other classmates couldn't. Then, after the exam, I talked to the professor about this and he said,"well, lucky you".
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: I graded a lot of written math exams, and I can tell you I'd be perfectly fine with students knowing some answers beforehand. In fact, we often had exam tasks copied more ore less 1:1 from homework tasks that the student had beforehand, inlcuding sample solution, and you would be amazed at how bad the students did at some of those. So good work, reap the benefits of studying well and being prepared.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with the other answers that you have not cheated on the exam, or more precisely that you have not violated ethical/academic principles to gain an unfair advantage.
However, depending on the nature of your solution, it is very possible that you should have given some kind of citation or attribution when you reproduced the solution. This applies especially if you saw the solution not in the course text but in some external resource. Even though you did not *cheat* and deserve full marks on the problem, standard academic principles of not passing the work of others off as your own still apply.
Fortunately, this is not a big deal, and if you're so inclined you can send an email to your Professor letting them know what happened, and including the attribution to the source of your answer in that email. If they are reasonable, the most they will do in their response is thank you for your honesty. Sending such an email may also help to relieve some of your anxiety about whether your conduct constituted cheating.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: The fact that you studied and learned to solve a variety of problems is just good scholarship, not cheating.
When I taught, my tests were intended to explore a students knowledge of the material. I would sometimes include material we barely discussed in class to separate the best students from those who were "merely" good. Whether a student had read the solution somewhere, or derived it by themselves, was less important than their knowledge of how to address the problem. If your professor had actually wanted to test your ability to resolve an unknown problem, then he would have invented an original question. However, few questions, or problems, are truly original which is why we study hard to recognize a broad range previously answered questions. Good work, sir!
Oh! Tell your professor if you wish, but he will look at you rather oddly and wonder why you are wasting his time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Not cheating, but you are correct -- there's a possible ethical(?) problem. But not in this case.
If you were given, say, a placement exam and specifically told it's about problems you've never seen, clearly you should speak up about ones you've coincidentally studied. Ethically, you're lying by implicitly presenting it as "here's how I solved a problem which I have never, ever seen before". And of course, it's in your best interest to be placed correctly. One could construct examples where it's less and less important and less and less dishonest. A problem on a school test is somewhere below 0 on that scale.
You're probably getting an A either way, and one test isn't that big a thing, and minor changes in grades don't matter than much anyway, and if you did so well your score will be left out of the curve (if there is one). You were only told about "to see how you handle a problem you've never seen" afterwards, and there's no practical way to fix it (the instructor is not going to find a new problem for you), and it's already understood that tests contain a certain element of luck as far as what-they-studied vs. what's-on-the-test.
I've had students come in and tell me they got 2 extra points on an exam (their final score was 2 points higher than if you added the points they got for each problem). That's fun. I generally dead-pan it, telling them it would be too much trouble to change but I'll try to keep it in mind for final grades. If you wanted to bring this up with the instructor, they'd probably be amused, understand where the impulse came from, and not consider for even a fraction of a second that this was anything they needed to fix.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: No. This is what exams are for.
However, those papers that offer a choice of two or three problems of equal and considerable weight are problematic. It may be that a good student must know at least one of the problems by rote, otherwise it is a lottery.
If on day 1 you are given 20 problems and promised that the final exam will be any two of them, master all twenty. This can happen for any number of disciplines. Study.
Now, if this is not a local examination, and papers are not the same across a federated geography, it may be unfair to others that a past question has been re-used verbatim.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: When I was in graduate school, I realized that the professor of the Real Analysis class was taking homework (and later test) questions from the textbook I had used for Real Analysis as an undergrad. My recollection is that I got a C+ as an undergrad. Might have been a B–. I finished third in a class of over 20 as a first-year grad student. Many of my answers came from my undergrad homework, including the solutions provided by others for the problems I didn't get the first time.
I would add a number of my classmates had used the same text as undergrads and had a similar experience second time around. None of us thought twice about any ethical issue here. Nor should you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/27
| 781
| 2,871
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my PhD in early 2018. I immediately sumbitted an hard copy at the dept. library and a pdf copy on the online database (open-access), a few weeks later as per Univeristy rules.
1. at the time I found some mistakes - probably due to the stress of the moment- (typos/syntax etc.) and some quotations (directI/indirect) either not cited correctly, or not cited, but bewteen quotation marks and so on.
So, being as honest as I could, I prepared an erratum to be added to the harcover and another one to be uploaded with the pdf online.
And I was satisfied and happy.
2)After 4 years I had to read again my old thesis to do some future publication.
And there I found other - well 4 to be exact - words and/or senteces missing quotation or quotation marks without the ref. I guess I was more stressed, exausthed and distracted than I Thought.
I had my manuscript checked on a plagarism scan and the outcome is between 3-4 %, that counts most of the correct citations (i.e. indented paragraphs and/or italic), and some common used wording; so the percetuange it is surely lower.
However, thanks to that tool I found this 4 missing quotations.
These issues are normally right after a directly or indirectly quoted paragraph of author X,Y,Z.
So, after many years I can guess I was rearranging parts and some got lost. I guess we may consider it "plagiarism in good faith"or simply unintentional. I know, it is still palgiarism.
Ah! "the mistakes of youth".
So, I really do not know what I can do now.
Sending another Erratum could be suspiscious or creating Drama in an University I wouldn't go back to not even under torture (ahha!). Right?
Do I have other options?
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.<issue_comment>username_1: I will go against the feel-good answers you will receive.
Burn your diploma and go to your local religious structure and start working there for free, because, you know, people in their life commits mistakes, but saints and the like never ever commits any mistakes, or when they do, they find some perpetual punishment.
Ok, jokes aside, is not the hard learned lesson “I was way more stressed than I thought” enough? You did those mistakes because you were most likely on the edge of burnout, not because you were foolishly tired , and you were ready to cut some (very small) corners to get to your goal.
Think about it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To cite [E. of Arendelle [2013]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elsa_(Frozen)):
>
> Let it go!
>
>
>
This is the best advice you can get. There's not really anything you can or should do. It is a PhD thesis, not a published article. It is not published, except at the university which means that probably nobody looks at it. You've already added some corrections, which is probably more than most would.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/11/27
| 622
| 2,834
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interested in expanding my areas of research to a somewhat unrelated field, where less than half of my current competences would be directly applicable. To start collaborating with other researchers in a field, it is necessary to have some experience, and ideally, to have some papers published in that field.
One suggestion that I got when discussing this question with a colleague was to try replicating existing results from a paper, but with a sufficiently different approach to be able to publish a paper with these replicated results.
However, when I was entering my current fields of research, I was not replicating the results of others; in several cases, my research was really novel despite me being just a beginner at that time. But, I had the advantage of being a PhD student with an advisor; now just getting an advisor in the additional field does not seem to be a practicable option (maybe I'm wrong about that).
So, merely trying to replicate the results of others to establish a track record in an additional field of research seems to be somewhat suboptimal to me. Are there any better approaches that I could consider?
For context, I am currently a senior postdoc and work at the intersection of several STEM fields. My research topics are already quite diverse, but the additional field of research that I am considering would be an outlier in terms of similarity.<issue_comment>username_1: The search for the "most efficient" approach is going to be fruitless. It is seeking the "perfect" when the "good" is enough and will waste less effort. As in many things, the perfect is the enemy of the good.
But you already noticed that you worked better when you had an advisor who you could bump ideas against.
I suggest that you find a way to attach yourself to some working group in the new field of interest. Perhaps you can start one yourself. Perhaps you can find a few people locally or at a conference that draws a lot of researchers. Perhaps your advisor already has a core group that can help you if you can join them in some way. Perhaps a senior faculty member where you are has people in their circle.
Get yourself into a long-term conversation with a group. Bounce ideas off of them. Collaborate on various ideas of theirs or yours. Perhaps you can get a few joint papers. Perhaps you can speak at a conference on the developing ideas. Perhaps you can expand the circle of interest.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As well as the excellent answer by username_1, find a collaborator who is in that field already and has a different set of skills. You say that you do have relevant competencies, so you can probably find someone in the field who is missing some of those (or has a project that needs more time than they have available).
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/27
| 1,116
| 4,740
|
<issue_start>username_0: [How do I improve my ability to learn?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/176879/how-do-i-improve-my-ability-to-learn)
Here is a similar question. I will tell why it doesn't answer my question here.
1. Solving exercises is not my problem. My problem is learning the theoritical subjects where it is dense theory only.
2. I tried teaching to someone else but that still doesn't help me to understand text content. It does help for recall though.
3. I do active learning while reading textbooks. I write a lot of notes. But I simply can't get a conclusion reading books.
4. Practice helps but only if I already understood the concept.
5. I do overlearning. I actually understand everything when I overlearn. i.e first study from videos then from books. But it is not sustainable as I am approaching life after graduation and there are fewer and fewer video content afterwards.
6. I have goals while learning. I learn paragraph by paragraph. It still becomes hard for me to comprehend it. But if I watch a video or some other source that is not text content, I can easily digest it.
7. I do spaced repetition but that doesn't help me with learning new content.
8. Encoding and active recall all come after learning new content.
9. Deliberate practice doesn't help learning NEW Content but it does help strenghtening already learnt concepts.<issue_comment>username_1: Some people learn from reading better than others. I think there is no method that is best for all learners. Some of the points in your question are, indeed, good ways to do it for may readers. Maybe you are one of those who will require a live instructor in order to learn hard material?
Long ago, instructors used (very effective) corporal punishment (such as a ruler to the palm) to help learners; but that is frowned upon nowadays. I heard of a psychologist using such a method on himself... he kept a rubber band around his wrist; whenever he wanted to make himself remember something, he would pull it out and release, hoping the pain would reinforce the memory.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: At some point every scholar faces the fact that they no longer have a guide and that they are mostly on their own for learning new things. I can make a few suggestions.
If you are learning something completely new, expect it to be slow. If it is deep, expect it to be very slow. It took Einstein about ten years to come up with special relativity.
If you are learning something related to what you know already, try to build connections between the two. Try to get insights into the new topic from insights (and the way you obtained them) from the old.
Some of your approaches, such as #6 seem to be both based on memorization, not learning, and a too small, microscopic, view of the subject. You need a broad view and insight and that is unlikely to be found in any small section of a text, certainly not in a paragraph. Ask yourself constantly "How does it fit?".
Don't work alone. Einstein bounced ideas off of others in his circle during those ten years. And he used very old insights from Galileo to form the foundation. Discuss what you are learning with others who also might be interested.
If you absolutely have to work alone, don't work from just one text. Get a different book and compare what is written in the two (or more) texts. Different authors may take slightly different approaches to a topic and you might gather insight from that.
I'll suggest one simple technique that might help or not. It has two parts. First, as you read, take notes. Don't just copy what you read, but try to capture your understanding of them in a single sentence or two (not more). Take the notes on index cards and number them as you go, since you will eventually rearrange them and may want to put them back in order. You can use different colors of cards for different sorts of things also. Keep the backs of the cards empty initially.
The second part of the exercise is to select a few cards, perhaps at random, not always sequential. Look at those cards and think about whether there are interrelationships between what you have written on the cards. The goal is to use different approaches to try to find a big picture - insight. The backs of the cards can be used during review for notations. And you can create new cards as well.
The advantage of index cards over electronic capture is that you can always carry a few cards with you and spend a few minutes here and there reviewing just those cards. Let the mind work. Let it wander. Intense study over many hours can be self defeating, actually. The mind gets stuck. It gets tired. It rebels.
---
There is, of course, no plan that will work for everyone.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/27
| 3,665
| 15,840
|
<issue_start>username_0: For the background: I am a Ph.D. student (UK) in a computational field (my job can be done anywhere in the world where there is an internet connection, no experimental work involved). I started around one year ago, during the covid period.
My supervisor is a senior professor, who graduated from a top university, his whole career is based on his post-doc project. He is really busy and has little to no time to give (I speak with him around 30 min each week.), other problems are:
1. He is asking us to be from 9 AM to 5 PM, Monday to Friday in the office.
2. He doesn't know anything about my topic, and never really gave me good advice, he never for example told me "I found this interesting paper you should have a look at it". I never had an exciting scientific discussion with him.
3. He never listens to you and shows it with disrespectful behavior (Constantly look at his watch among other things of the same sort)
I like what I do so much that I do not think of it as a job, but this 9 AM to 5 PM thing makes it feel like a job. If I wanted to transform my passion into work I would just find a regular job. In my (maybe naive) opinion, academia is hard work and responsibilities, but at least you are supposed to work with more freedom?
I asked if I could leave the office from time to time to work from home or anyplace else (the office is small and crowded, I spend my day in front of three screens, I find it hard to study books here for example). He told me that my request is "unreasonable".
When you are late in the morning he sends you a salty email, etc... He gives more attention to this micromanaging things than our actual projects. It is such a big deal for him that we had to sign a paper saying that we are "essential workers" to come work during the lockdown. When one of us receives a ping that we should self-isolate because we've been close to someone with covid, he is pushing for that person to still come. I don't know why he is acting like this, because nowhere in my contract it is written that I need to do these hours in the office.
So now I am doing like every other student, I ignore him and do what I want. Which of course I feel guilty about... This starts to affect me, I notice that I don't want to work as much as I wanted before (I used to do much more per day during my master for example)
Now the question: Am I the one being unreasonable? I just wonder if I am delusional and not fitted for academia<issue_comment>username_1: >
> *Now the question: Am I the one being unreasonable? I just wonder if I am delusional and not fitted for academia*
>
>
>
Based on your description it is your advisor who is unreasonable. If this was an experimental (e.g. biology, medicine, etc.) lab, there may have been a justification to insist on attendance registration. But seeing it's a mathematical/computational science you do, your advisor's standards are highly non-standard internationally, in my experience.
Since what matters eventually in academia is for most parts your productivity in publishing significant work in selective journals and conferences, I think you are neither delusional nor not suited to academia. It's your advisor who is not suited, it seems.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Supervisors come in all shapes and sizes. I'd say that around 50% of supervisors i know require attendance 9-5. This is true of purely computational labs just as much as experimental ones, although it is a field with a high proponderence of experimental labs, so its possible the culture of experimental labs rubs off on the computational ones. My attitude is that I expect group members work 8 hours a day and to usually be available 10:30-4 (but available can mean on slack/email/zoom, especially since the pandemic). I do think that things work better with people present in person because it allows casual interaction between people, and senior members of the group to provide unscheduled help to junior members. But i don't enforce this. And i would certainly never have recommended people use the essential worker loop hole (unless they were doing COVID research, which one member of my group did)
Most supervisors, even the ones that don't require 9-5 attendance do have an attitude that a PhD shares a lot in common with being employed, and that things work better if both student and supervisor work on this assumption.
As for the rest, just sounds like you are being poorly supervised. 30 minutes a week is more than many people get, but i would expect the to at least concentrate and act interested during this time. All professors are busy right now, and apparently more than 50% of academics are currently showing signs of burn out, but it sounds like from the rest if your group members that this isn't a new state.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I run things on the basis of core hours, usually between 10am and 4pm. I make it clear to students that this is when I will normally be available, and when I expect others to be normally available.
I find it is useful to have core hours with everyone present so that some amount of “peer troubleshooting” can be done between members of the group. In addition, there is something positive about showing up for work regularly. If the atmosphere in the group is good, attendance is rarely an issue.
On the other hand, I also make it clear to the students that I am very flexible with exceptions, and that I am “result-driven”. There are days where people will be absent, and I’m fine with this provided they give a heads-up to everyone *in the group* (no side deals with me personally). Someone may work late because things are going really well and it’s not reasonable to show up early the following morning. Someone may have a dentist appointment etc.
I am fine with people occasionally working from a coffee shop but less so working from home. At least for me, I need to transition from “leisure time” to “work time” and this is best done by changing environment (of course, not always possible with the pandemic). Everyone realizes that common sense should prevail, and I’ve rarely had to enforce strict core hours with one or another student.
So while I don’t think it’s completely reasonable to be so strict as in the situation your describe, I see your situation as an extreme case of a generally reasonable system. In my experience,the converse extreme situation where nobody shows up leads to fragmentation and loss of productivity. It seems the major issue in your case is that the supervisor does not provide a constructive environment that would stimulate the students on a regular basis.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Some PIs run their lab in one way, other PIs run it differently. Choosing a lab which does not fit your wishes is a poor choice. Yes, you are unreasonable to expect the lab to change for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: A PhD is a delicate balance between a job and an education. On the one hand, you're getting a degree and are expected to learn something. On the other hand, you're also getting paid to be there. So, while I understand your frustration, I don't think it's completely unreasonable that your supervisor is treating you like an employee; he is, after all, paying your salary (assuming you're not on an independent fellowship).
The fact you're also getting paid to be there also means you don't have complete (or even much) control over the direction of your project. Most likely, your PhD is part of a larger, externally-financed project with very clear deliverables that need to be reported back to the grant agency.
As a student, the realisation that a PhD often has less freedom than an MSc is pretty tough, but unfortunately this is the way the system works these days. My advice is that if you want real academic freedom, you need to "buy" it via your own external financing. The good news is that there's plenty of opportunities for such early-career financing for e.g. travels abroad, postdoc fellowships, etc.
As someone who now finds themselves running a large(ish) group, I have to say I'm also a little sympathetic to your supervisor. I'm sure that nothing would give him more pleasure than to spend the days discussing the technicalities of your project. However, the system described above likely means that most of his time is spent managing these large large projects (including reporting and other admin tasks) and figuring out how to keep the ball rolling via the next round of grant funding. Just like going from an MSc to PhD, the postodc to professor jump is also something of a bait-and-switch...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I believe there are two main issues:
1. Your workstyle is different from what your supervisor wants:
This is a question that you sould have discussed during interviews (e.g. is mobile office possible, can I work frquently from home etc.) Of course this is harder during the pandemic to see how this plays out but especially then it is important to also check what happens after Corona, during lockdown and in phases without lockdowns. It is of course NEVER acceptable if your boss forces you to sign an essential worker document if you are not exactly this. This could be taken up to HR or the responsibles from University, but with the probable outcome your boss will be very annoyed.
Micromanagement is also something which is hard to realize during interviews. If you are not the only one in the group who is unhappy about this maybe create a need in the group to allow home office e.g. for 4 days a month. Start with a small number and show your boss that homeoffice is not holiday but working time and you are productive. In general I recommend everyone for PhD interviews to spend time (lunch, virtual coffee) with the working group ALONE to get more details for the ways a group works as you are not alone with having a hard to deal with your supervisor.
2. You are not happy with supervision:
This is essentially a different topic. While as a Master student you can expect a grade of supervision during PhD this is not the case anymore. Often supervisors do not really understand the topic of the PhD students so usually post-docs are more helpful for technical things, supervisors more for the general direction. See if you have people with similar problems in your lab. I was in the same situation, the sole one working on a topic and a supervisor I saw maybe once a month for like 30minutes. It taught me a lot (like seeing possible research directions, carrying a project on my own) but it is much harder than having a supervisor which knows the topic and guides you. Therefore, this highly depends on the group and supervisor and you need to decide which style you prefer and what you would like for your PhD but just know this type of supervision is not completely unusual.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Food for thought: Professors operate on grant funding. Bidding to a grant requires a basis-of-estimate for the cost (hours and currency) to do the research. Establishing core hour expectations allows them to obtain an estimate of how many student-hours a project with a given scope. Of course, student-hours are different than person-hours in a real world setting, but it's a start.
The expectation that you be physically present suggests that your prof wants to do "management by walking around" but your description doesn't seem to fit that pattern.
The issue raised on your advisor's attitude is separate from the core hour and physical presence expectation. Sounds toxic. If you're making progress, keep moving forward. If you're flailing, I suggest seeking a different advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: If your supervisor is paying you (with a stipend or tuition remission), then you have an obligation to make a minimum amount of progress on your project. If you are being paid through a grant, your supervisor is expected to make progress on the project described in the grant application. Therefore, the supervisor must see to it that you make progress on the project. In this case, the supervisor–student relationship is much like manager–employee relationship. The supervisor has obligations that must be met and you have been hired to meet those obligations. The supervisor should have explained the obligations of your position when you were hired (or joined the group). If you are not making sufficient progress on your project, your supervisor is well in their rights to demand that you put in more regular hours or find a new job.
If you are not being paid and are supported by an external scholarship or from your own funds, you should move to a new group because it sounds like your current supervisor is offering you nothing. If you have your own project and are sufficiently self-motivated, you may be able to find a supervisor who is much more hands-off.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: As other answers pointed out, you are very reasonable and this is not usual. But...
**What can you do?**
*If he acts as a company manager, treat him like one.*
Compile a detailed, clear, professional email describing how his current management affects your productivity negatively, with examples given where possible.
* Describe in a few words how you usually spend the 9am-5pm hours at the office, whether there are times when you cannot do anything, and how would you spend these times on work more effectively out of office. Give examples where a flexible working hour style would have worked better.
* Describe the negative impact of being in the office on your ability to research. Tell him how you would be more productive out of office (going to the library, being more focused in a calm and isolated environment). Offer openness to test the productivity increase.
* Highlight your need for professional help regarding your research. Do not question his expertise in your topic (even if you see signs), but describe how a bit more input from his side would be very helpful. Ask him that if he lacks time to participate more, suggest professors in the department with whom you could conduct scientific discussions.
* Propose a solution to the above issues that potentially could satisfy both of your and his expectations. Ask for a 1v1 meeting to discuss it in person. Be ready to compromise on many points.
Be very clear on your issues and with the goal of the email. Focus on your productivity and professional relationship: what affects your performance negatively, and how could it be solved to increase your productivity. Avoid private issues, as they can easily derail the whole point and give a hook to refuse your suggestions. (For example, *"I could spend more time with my SO"* is not a reason and should not be included, as it is unrelated to your productivity, at least not directly.)
Keep the email short and concise to the maximum extent, describe each point in no more than 2-4 sentences. Busy people (or those who want to see themselves as one) will not read lengthy letters in detail, and some of your crucial points will be overseen.
Of course, it's possible that you cannot arrive at a situation that satisfies you. In this case, there's no way to resolve the issue, so you must consider whether you can accept the situation as is, or find a new supervisor who would be a better fit.
---
Regarding the lack of professional discussion: you can attempt to improve this by email communication. Before each meeting, write him a brief email (5-10 sentences) with a list of the points you want to discuss. This gives him a chance to prepare beforehand in mind and give more thoughts on the topic. Supervisors are working on multiple projects, and it can be hard to "jump back" into a specific one you didn't pay any thought for for days, maybe weeks.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/27
| 2,602
| 11,104
|
<issue_start>username_0: A [recent](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/178407/58912) question mentioned the importance of citation counts and impact factor in evaluations of faculty candidates. There are some good answers explaining why this is the dominant model today.
I'm curious if any other models have achieved a reasonable amount of use today, even if they are not remotely the most common ones. That is, are there models that either do not take into account citation count and impact factor, or where they are relatively minor factors? For example, something like this could match:
>
> Welcome to the Slightly Northwestern South-By-Southwest University of Central Eastern Ruritania. As you wrap up your PhD, note that if you want to continue on as faculty here, your citation count and impact factor are less than 5% of the evaluation. Nobody here worries about them. If you want to get an appointment, you need to spend at least 75% of your time studying for the New Faculty Literacy Exam rather than doing research not strictly required for your degree! Write one trash paper for a third-rate journal if you must, and then start studying! The exam is really tough! Here's an exam syllabus to get started.
>
>
>
To be clear, I'm not asking about alternative pathways to *degrees* (e.g. degree by exam, degree by prior publication, etc.), and I'm not asking for a *list* of universities that disregard citation count, etc. in favor of other factors. I'm simply asking if this is actually a *thing* in 21st century academia.<issue_comment>username_1: Here's what my department will do before offering you a tenure-track or tenured position: Our personnel committee will get informal opinions about you from colleagues in or near your area. You will be invited to give a colloquium talk and possibly also a more specialized talk, and to meet with faculty members here (usually including the chair of the personnel committee and the chair of the department). All of our faculty will be invited to give their opinions after your talk(s). We will, after getting your permission, solicit letters from experts in your field about your research; these will not just be the ones you listed as referees. After these letters are received, the personnel committee will vote on whether to make an offer to you. The committee will also prepare a report about your record and reports on two of your (more important) papers. Then the department's elected executive committee will vote, and finally the whole tenured faculty of the department will vote.
The preceding is what the department will do. If the decision is to make an offer, it still needs to be approved by the college's executive committee and, in the case of a tenured position, by the provost.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: At my institution (a research-intensive Canadian university), the "evidence of scholarship" component of assessment for tenure and promotion is *not* based closely on numeric summaries of citation count and impact factor. It is more holistic/subjective (which could be argued to be a bad thing, as it is less transparent and allows more scope for bias, but I personally think it's a good thing). For the "publications" component, some of the criteria considered are:
* volume (number of papers, and consistency of output)
* authorship (first or last/senior? out of how many authors total? we also value co-authorship with a candidate's trainees, but this falls under "mentorship" rather than "scholarship")
* quality of venue: we don't usually look directly at impact factors, but rely on the judgment of someone who knows the field (a reference or committee member) about whether the journals are high-quality/high-impact journals for a particular field. For better or worse, "tabloid" publications (*Science*/*Nature*/*PNAS*/etc.) do carry some weight ...
* judgment of reference letters about the quality and impact of the work, either of individual papers or as a body
We don't request any that candidates include information about impact factor, total citations, or h-indices in their folders, although this information is sometimes provided by candidates or by reference writers — we try to take this information with a grain of salt.
You could say that the criteria listed above are basically the same as "citation counts" and "impact factors", but subjective.
There are also criteria other than publications (presentations at meetings, invited talks).
Similar criteria are used for hiring decisions (especially at the state of preparing a short list of candidates to invite for an interview, before the process described in @AndreasBlass's answer takes place).
See also [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178415/73551).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a fair question, however it is based on a wrong assumption as I've explained in the original question referred to.
To repeat: **NO** credible university I am aware of, globally, considers directly impact factors of journals as a measure by which faculty members are being assessed.
All universities asses academic staff by intertwined, multivariate, *different* metrics:
* reference letters and peer evaluation
* places of publications: prestigious or not
* acquaintance of existing faculty members with the candidate (for recruitments)
* number of publications in selective places (not number of citations)
* service and teaching
* outreach
* international recognition based on invited talks, editorial membership etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: To echo the other answers: at least in math, in the U.S., appraisal of candidates for faculty positions is much more holistic than just a bunch of numbers. If nothing else, various candidates typically have very different trajectories, making any simple "scalar" comparison ridiculous and meaningless. (Well, sure, unless we just give up and "declare" some number created by a corporate publisher to be what we care about!)
In math, citation indices are a very, very volatile measure. For one thing, after a breakthrough paper that is refered-to for a while, the myriad "secondary" papers will have more relevant technical details... and the original is not cited any more.
Also, nowadays, quite a few people have realized that, for example, a "good mathematician" is more than "just a good theorem-prover". Plus, why hire someone, pay a salary, given them an office, and put up with annoyances, if we can just read the preprints and papers for free? :)
Yes, some people (not only administrators) over-simplify by using grant numbers as a bottom line. This has never made much sense in math, since we don't really need giant machines, etc. Still, some math people like "number of dollars" as a measure, because it *is* a scalar, and numbers of dollars can be compared... and context ignored, "for simplicity". :)
For that matter, even now, and quite a lot more so 30-40 years ago, the contribution that a math person might make was very subtle to judge. Some things were never "published" at all, but had huge influence. Sometimes people gave unrecorded talks that gave evidence of terrific ideas, and experts had heard the talks, and could strongly recommend the person for jobs. I think "expert opinion" is still the fundamental criterion, not paper-count nor impact...
(Yes, "expert opinion" can also become caricaturized/parodied, into insisting that only far-away big-shots' opinions matter... Nevermind.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The majority of universities in the United States have teaching as their primary mission and hire professors accordingly. While a PhD is required (or de facto required) for most positions, and having a publication or two is an advantage, the people hiring are primarily hiring based on how good an instructor you will be for their students. This is based on some or all of:
* The teaching experience you have.
* What you write in the statements with your application about how you teach and why you teach that way.
* Teaching materials you may be asked to provide with your application.
* What your letters of recommendation say about your teaching.
* How you respond to interview questions about teaching.
* A teaching demonstration, meaning a lesson you give either to a real class or to a pretend class, when you interview.
* A presentation to a general audience you give during your interview.
Note that students at different institutions are different, and hence someone could be a good or great teacher at one university and merely mediocre at another. This means the evaluation of teachers is localized; the hiring committee will be trying to discern from the information above whether you would be a good teacher at their university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Others have covered most of the obvious points.
In addition to those, we try to find someone who we can get along with and who will likely do well by themselves. Thus, beyond being a “good fit”, we look for compatible personalities and evidence of independent work.
We do this through the cover letters, by asking candidates to supply samples of their papers, by reading reference letters, by reading other recent papers of the candidates.
On the research side, is the candidate a cog in a large machine or was he or she significantly involved in the work? We often ask candidates to describe their role in these publications, to clearly understand attribution. On the teaching side, how well does the candidate interact with students in the “mock lecture”?
We have had candidates with very strong research CVs but obviously not so interested in teaching and student side of the business. On the other hand, we’ve seen extremely charismatic candidates with solid CVs leapfrog candidates that looked better on paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I don't think your example makes much sense. Your question seems to be asking how might universities evaluate research by methods other than crude citation counts, etc., whereas your example seems to be a case of not evaluating their research at all.
Of course, if you don't care about research there are many ways to evaluate candidates without using citation counts, limited only by exactly what it is that you *do* care about (and any applicable laws about things you're not permitted to care about).
If you do want to evaluate research more carefully than just using these metrics, then this is going to involve a more detailed look at candidates' track records, taking e.g. journal reputation into account rather than just numbers, looking at numbers and range of co-authors, getting opinions from people familiar with a candidate's research (including, but not limited to, their letter writers), and, in extremis, actually looking at the papers themselves. In fact universities already do all this, but it is much more time-consuming than looking at crude metrics, so they probably do it at a later stage after many candidates have already been eliminated (whether by doing badly on the crude but quick measures or for other reasons).
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/27
| 1,359
| 6,066
|
<issue_start>username_0: I contacted an author to obtain his data and code for a published paper because I could not figure out how he was obtaining some results, given that I was using the same dataset. Once I obtained the code, I started digging in and I found out that there are many mistakes leading to the published results. Or at least to the credibility of said results, since a major assumption is not satisfied as claimed in the paper.
What is the best practice in this case?
If the data and code were publicly available, I would be more prone to send a comment to the journal but since I obtained them directly from the author, I feel I would kind of violate his trust (even though the data policy of the journal is public availability through the authors). At the same time, this is one of the few results answering a specific question and I think it is misleading to see it published and cited.<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper is minor and of little consequence, there is probably nothing to do. And if the errors are relatively minor and easily corrected, then it is likely that few will care as the ideas themselves might shine through. But that is a bit subtle.
Otherwise, I'd suggest that the best course of action is to let the original author know of the problems, say that you want to provide a follow up - corrected - version, and invite collaboration on it.
The paper will be easiest to write as a collaboration than as a follow on since you otherwise need to be very careful about the possibility of plagiarism. It can be done, but it makes the result a bit more awkward.
But that assumes that the results you obtain will be significant enough to be published.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You should contact the author of the paper first, and ask some questions. These questions should be non-judgmental. The problems you found with the paper may not be known to the author, nor was it their intention to publish with such errors present. You have not given details regarding the paper, or what can be determined in the course of events regarding that author's research. But your totally objective and unbiased questions regarding the results may bring to light problems that this author is now seeing for the first time. They may wish to correct these mistakes.
This may open a collaborative effort that ultimately becomes quite productive and rewarding.
What else can you do? Put yourself in their shoes, and presume at the start they do not know of these problems. State you found this author's paper interesting regarding a problem in the nexus of your own ongoing research. You do not have to reveal more than necessary (in asking some questions) other than to say you are doing some background research (you may, or may not, be at liberty to discuss). See what they have to say, and note how they respond. You can set boundaries regarding how much you wish to discuss, and see how things develop from there. But be honest. Trust will come but not all at once. Keep in mind, this author may have adverse feelings about your asking questions regarding noted errors in this paper. Do they know you and can they trust you? They may get defensive, and you should be prepared for this. You may have to let go of discussing this issue, altogether.
Contacting the journal may not be a good idea. What are they supposed to do? A better way to approach this problem is in the publication of your own research. If the effort is collaborative with this author, then all is well. But, if you have to go it alone, do not *directly* mention that errors were found in another's work, or be critical. Rather, a more or less casual statement that is to the point, for example, would be to state that among papers *X* and *XY* discussing this problem, the current work provides an updated view of the analysis and results. No judgements, no discussion of errors or criticisms, just some objective and forward-looking comments and statements. Keep in mind, the author of the work we are discussing may be waiting for your work to be published. There is no reason that this author should feel badly about comments you may have regarding their work. There is no reason to leave adverse consequences for anyone.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Your main duty is to the broader scientific community, which should be presented with clear and correct results.
You should surely contact the authors of the wrong article. But you should cooperate with them only insofar as they really want to correct their mistakes.
Writing to the journal is possible and not at all a breach of trust, however beware that in practice journals can be reluctant to admit mistakes, may take a long time to do so, and may end up minimizing the issue. ("Minor technical glitches, conclusions unaffected.")
The best course of action depends on the particular field. If you are in a "healthy" community, cooperating with the authors may be best. If you are in a less healthy situation, you may have nothing good to expect from the authors and journal, and it would be better to raise your concerns directly to the public in a preprint or a PubPeer comment. You probably need advice from someone in your field.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: First: you are not a policeman, nor a judge looking to ascertain if anyone is guilty/innocent of whatever crime.
Write the authors, stating that with the provided code you are not capable of replicate the results.
Show a collaborative attitude. If they have a similar attitude, you may end up writing an errata on the same paper with the original authors.
If they are not cooperative, it is time to try to get published a comment on that paper. This do not imply stating anything about their intentions, just that the results are not reproductible.
Final note: writing a commentary paper is even harder than the paper itself. Be ready to endure a long path ... or try to publish independently on the same topic so the state-of-the-art goes beyond what is stated in the bugged paper you found.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/27
| 1,254
| 5,559
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student applying to graduate schools. One of my recommenders is my math professor. On the university's webpage and outlook email, his title is 'Fixed Term Assistant Professor'. So I included the 'Fixed term' when I filled out recommender's information on my application portal. Is this appropriate? Does that matter if I drop 'Fixed term' or not? Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: If the paper is minor and of little consequence, there is probably nothing to do. And if the errors are relatively minor and easily corrected, then it is likely that few will care as the ideas themselves might shine through. But that is a bit subtle.
Otherwise, I'd suggest that the best course of action is to let the original author know of the problems, say that you want to provide a follow up - corrected - version, and invite collaboration on it.
The paper will be easiest to write as a collaboration than as a follow on since you otherwise need to be very careful about the possibility of plagiarism. It can be done, but it makes the result a bit more awkward.
But that assumes that the results you obtain will be significant enough to be published.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You should contact the author of the paper first, and ask some questions. These questions should be non-judgmental. The problems you found with the paper may not be known to the author, nor was it their intention to publish with such errors present. You have not given details regarding the paper, or what can be determined in the course of events regarding that author's research. But your totally objective and unbiased questions regarding the results may bring to light problems that this author is now seeing for the first time. They may wish to correct these mistakes.
This may open a collaborative effort that ultimately becomes quite productive and rewarding.
What else can you do? Put yourself in their shoes, and presume at the start they do not know of these problems. State you found this author's paper interesting regarding a problem in the nexus of your own ongoing research. You do not have to reveal more than necessary (in asking some questions) other than to say you are doing some background research (you may, or may not, be at liberty to discuss). See what they have to say, and note how they respond. You can set boundaries regarding how much you wish to discuss, and see how things develop from there. But be honest. Trust will come but not all at once. Keep in mind, this author may have adverse feelings about your asking questions regarding noted errors in this paper. Do they know you and can they trust you? They may get defensive, and you should be prepared for this. You may have to let go of discussing this issue, altogether.
Contacting the journal may not be a good idea. What are they supposed to do? A better way to approach this problem is in the publication of your own research. If the effort is collaborative with this author, then all is well. But, if you have to go it alone, do not *directly* mention that errors were found in another's work, or be critical. Rather, a more or less casual statement that is to the point, for example, would be to state that among papers *X* and *XY* discussing this problem, the current work provides an updated view of the analysis and results. No judgements, no discussion of errors or criticisms, just some objective and forward-looking comments and statements. Keep in mind, the author of the work we are discussing may be waiting for your work to be published. There is no reason that this author should feel badly about comments you may have regarding their work. There is no reason to leave adverse consequences for anyone.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Your main duty is to the broader scientific community, which should be presented with clear and correct results.
You should surely contact the authors of the wrong article. But you should cooperate with them only insofar as they really want to correct their mistakes.
Writing to the journal is possible and not at all a breach of trust, however beware that in practice journals can be reluctant to admit mistakes, may take a long time to do so, and may end up minimizing the issue. ("Minor technical glitches, conclusions unaffected.")
The best course of action depends on the particular field. If you are in a "healthy" community, cooperating with the authors may be best. If you are in a less healthy situation, you may have nothing good to expect from the authors and journal, and it would be better to raise your concerns directly to the public in a preprint or a PubPeer comment. You probably need advice from someone in your field.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: First: you are not a policeman, nor a judge looking to ascertain if anyone is guilty/innocent of whatever crime.
Write the authors, stating that with the provided code you are not capable of replicate the results.
Show a collaborative attitude. If they have a similar attitude, you may end up writing an errata on the same paper with the original authors.
If they are not cooperative, it is time to try to get published a comment on that paper. This do not imply stating anything about their intentions, just that the results are not reproductible.
Final note: writing a commentary paper is even harder than the paper itself. Be ready to endure a long path ... or try to publish independently on the same topic so the state-of-the-art goes beyond what is stated in the bugged paper you found.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/27
| 333
| 1,468
|
<issue_start>username_0: I sent a manuscript five months ago to an APS journal (American Physical Society) and five referees refused to review my paper in this time interval.
Some of them responded after about four weeks and in the status it is written that: message received (not a report). My paper is about thermodynamics in gravitating systems. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: You can ask an editor for advice. If the editor has a plan for finding referees then you can probably leave the paper in place for a while longer. Otherwise you can consider withdrawing it and submitting it elsewhere.
But, submitting it to another journal might leave you at the beginning of the same frustrating cycle. There may be overlap between referees at different journals and it might be that your paper has characteristics making review difficult, or especially specialized.
If the journal publish a lot in that area then they probably have a lot of reviewers and some of the "turn-downs" might just be "too busy at the moment".
The editor has an interest, like yours, in getting the process moving.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This isn't your problem. It's the role of the editor to find reviewers. The only things you can do are:
* Do more exciting research so people want to review your paper.
* Suggest reviewers to the editor (you should have a good idea of who works in your field and hence is likely to be interested in your paper).
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/11/27
| 505
| 2,130
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to graduate school for mathematics. The school I am applying to requires the GRE subject test. I was unable to take it, however (both exams in Spring and Fall 2021 were cancelled due to the pandemic). I ended up emailing the generic grad school admissions office and they said that it would be alright if I submitted without the subject test (although they didn't really answer my question if my application would be seen the same as others--only something about "holistic" review).
There is no place on the application to mention how COVID-19 affected my application. So, I was wondering if I should mention the fact that I did really try to take the GRE subject test in my statement of purpose, which is the only place I can think of mentioning it (I guess I would like the admissions committee to know explicitly, instead of the email I sent to the generic grad school email). Or, should I just not even bother mentioning it?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't lose track of the purpose of the SoP. It is to detail your future plans, both for study and thereafter. It is not to explain the past or to make excuses.
I assume that if they are making exceptions for GRE scores then they will want to "level the playing field" for all candidates. I can't guarantee it, of course. But I'd assume that it can hardly hurt you if it is only used 'at the margin' for final decisions on a few candidates.
If you can work a short phrase (less than a sentence) into the SoP as an introduction to something more appropriate there then it is probably benign. But use the SoP to build your case for acceptance and your plan for achieving success.
However, you might also seek the same assurance from the math department on handling GRE that you got from general admissions. The admissions committee (if one is used) will be centered there.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should include
>
> The GRE Subject Test I intended to take was cancelled due to COVID.
>
>
>
but no further detail because admissions will be really tired of hearing about this problem.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/28
| 1,364
| 5,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am 3 months into a 15 months postdoc in the UK, so I am still into the initial 6-months probation period. My contract specifies I have to give 3 months notice before leaving (plus some further clauses about not leaving mid-term, but I think this is mostly for teaching positions, while I only do research).
This week I got a really unexpected offer for a 3-year assistant professor position in my home country. It is a fixed-term contract without tenure-track, but for various reasons I still think that accepting it will greatly increase my chances of finding a permanent position in my home country (which is my long-term career goal). Overall I think it is really a unique opportunity and I was really lucky to get the offer.
I explained the situation to current my supervisor, who understands the situation and supports my choice. I have already plans to continue the research even if I leave my current institution and I plan to bring the research project to the end.
The main problem is that, due to exceptional nature of the funding, this position must absolutely start in January 2022, so I can give at most 1 month notice and everything needs to happen very quickly. My supervisor emailed HR (while suggesting me to not email them for the moment), but we still have to hear back from them.
I can't deny that I would be devastated to lose this opportunity just due to some bureaucratic impediment. Thus, in the meantime I'd like to know if anybody has had similar experiences, i.e. leaving early without the appropriate notice period, especially with UK institutions. Do you have any advice? Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: As a matter of contract law, the notice period can be truncated provided both parties agree. It doesn't sound like there are any particular reasons here for the university to insist that you serve your full notice. (If you were teaching, or were responsible for feeding the lab monkeys, there might be a need to keep you around until a replacement could be hired.)
Your supervisor is probably the only person in the university hierarchy who actually knows or cares what you were hired to do. If they are supportive, I would expect HR to shrug and agree to whatever departure date you want to give.
Even if they say no, you could decide to break your contract. They are not going to send the SAS to find you and drag you back to your university desk. I am not a lawyer, but I believe the university's recourse would be to sue you for costs reasonably incurred in order to cover your duties during the notice period. I am quite confident that this is not something that the university's lawyer wants to waste their time on. (In theory, breaking your contract would be something that would be entered on your HR file and might impact your ability to get a good reference in the future. In practice, you will almost certainly approach your supervisor, rather than HR, for the reference - so provided *they're* happy it probably doesn't matter too much.)
**Edited to add:** My comment that the university is unlikely to pursue someone who 'breaks their contract' is specific to the situation of a postdoc who has no responsibilities beyond research, and who is unlikely to cause the university any substantial loss. The situation might be different if, say, you are halfway through teaching a major lecture course. Then, the university might incur substantial costs (either to get someone to step in, and/or to compensate students for the ensuing disruption) and might be inclined to pursue you *pour encourager les autres*.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I once resigned from a post-doc in the UK with less than one month's notice. I did this by emailing my Head of Department and his secretary, after talking about it with my supervisor. The secretary replied the next day to say that this was fine. There are two reasons to recommend this course of action:
1. Given my experience of working in several UK universities, I would expect that the person who has the power to waive your notice period is the Head of Department, and not your supervisor or HR. Sometimes, but not always, this has been explicitly stated in my contract. If your supervisor is happy for you to leave and you have no teaching or other duties, then it would be surprising for the HoD not to approve this.
2. In all the departments I have worked in, the HoD's secretary/PA has been the person who has dealt with HR matters that can be handled within the department without requiring the involvement of HR specialists. This includes responsibility for staff arriving and departing.
Admittedly my experience has all been in maths departments in research-intensive universities so I can't be sure that practices are the same elsewhere.
Since you are still in the probation period, I will also mention that some but not all of my contracts have stated that the notice period is reduced to 1 month during the probation period. This might be stated either in the section on termination or in the section on probation. I assume you would have seen this already if it was the case.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Sorry to come to this thread late, but some anecdotal information that might help: in late 2019, I found myself needing to resign from a faculty position in the UK, without serving out the notice period specified in my contract (the sudden-onset illness of a relative needed my full-time attention). My line manager, deputy HoD, and HoD were supportive, and I suspect that they and other colleagues had to put in quite a lot of work to make the process go smoothly, both for me and for my students. In particular, my line manager and deputy HoD handled any necessary negotiations with HR. I think a crucial element in making it all work, though, was that I engaged with my line manager straight away, as soon as there were indications that I might need to make a swift exit.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/28
| 1,156
| 5,086
|
<issue_start>username_0: Journals allow some leeway for editing images as long as you do not selectively edit parts of the image and the image edits do not change the evidence provided by the image.
In practice this seems to mean that:
* exposure / levels
* white balance
* contrast
Are allowed.
But I am unclear where the limit might be. If I develop a RAW image in Adobe Lightroom, there are a lot of tools available and I am not sure if it is appropriate to use them.
The tools I have in mind are:
* The HDR edit tools (highlights, shadows)
* Tinting (green-magenta adjustment)
* Color sliders and color grading
* Curves (in general, black-white and color)
* Texture and Clarity
* Sharpening
* Color calibration
(Other image editing software have similar tools but I am familiar with Lightroom)
Which of these should I avoid using? Some things like sharpening are already applied by default to a JPEG image from a camera.<issue_comment>username_1: Is it likely that the raw data from the image will be used for future analysis? If so, I think you are better off not applying any manual corrections to the images, or at least give enough detail that a reader can undo your changes to reproduce the data you started from exactly. If not, I think it's probably ok so long as you are upfront about what you did, although my personal feeling is that you generally shouldn't do more than standard-in-your-field and easily explained tweaks (as I'll explain below).
Keep in mind that "I altered the data" will be a red flag for some subset of people, even if the changes are minor and you only made them for aesthetic reasons, so you need to be prepared to explain exactly what you did and why. Sometimes, it's easier to give up on aesthetics in order to avoid this discussion, which can easily (and pointlessly) distract people from the main points you want to convey in your paper.
If you do show altered images, you need to use your judgment about exactly what and how much to say. If it's standard in the field to, say, adjust the contrast of the image, this probably doesn't need more than a passing mention. In this case, it's probably enough to say something like "Note: the images in this figure were adjusted for contrast; the raw data are available at X" (assuming you are releasing the raw data in some supplemental material).
But I suspect the more advanced (and likely proprietary) Adobe Lightroom tools you are talking about like color grading are not commonly used. For the rest of this answer, I'm going to assume we're talking about using such a non-standard, black box tool primarily for aesthetic reasons (as opposed to something like contrast, which is relatively easy to understand). Even if the changes you make the data are "minor" in that they don't affect your conclusions, you generally should only modify data displayed in a results figure for a well-explained scientific reason. Even if you don't notice any major differences, people may see things you miss and be misled by an artifact of your post processing.
One way to explain why this is important that the "results" section should show your results without any interpretation, while the "discussion" section should have your interpretation of the results, so that readers can take your results and give a different interpretation if they want to. Modifying the image in a way that you claim does not change the main results necessarily relies on your interpretation of what the most important features of the image are. Another way to express the point is to ask yourself how sure are you that (a) the black box tool you are using *won't* introduce any subtle artifacts that could be misunderstood as an important feature, and (b) that you can explain why it won't to a skeptical person? I wouldn't recommend proceeding if you aren't very confident in your answers to both questions.
Finally, what you show in a paper should be reproducible, at least given some reasonable starting point. Adjusting a slider on a black box tool until the image looked good to you is probably difficult to explain in a reproducible way. More pointedly, "I added tint to the image so it looked better" is a hard thing to justify to a hard-nosed referee.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: As others have said, this is really going to depend on what you are doing, but it should not alter the actual evidence contained within the figure. There are a lot of fields that use methods such as false color imaging which require "altering" the image, otherwise you would be unable to tell what's going on.
For best practice, you should:
1. Generate the highest quality image at the capture point to minimize post-processing.
2. Always submit the raw images (unless asked not to), store the raw images on a local repository, and upload the images to a third-party site where others can access them.
3. If you do alter images, use software that tracks the changes or be sure you can adequately describe what you have done in the materials and methods section. Explain your reasoning within the manuscript.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/28
| 550
| 2,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an international STEM major graduate. Immediately after I obtained my BS degree in the spring semester, I went on a funded Ph.D. program in the following Fall semester. However, 2 months into the program, I received a very generous "a tenure like" job offer in my home country that guaranteed, after working for a year, that they will fully fund my education and all related expenses with retirement benefits. This led me to quit the Ph.D program after merely 2 months into it. However, right after I quit covid restrictions delayed my employment but I was able to get the job. Now after working for a year, I am applying again to Ph.D. programs in the same field as the program I quit.
Should I mention this in my statement of purpose? Would not mentioning this reflect badly and be considered dishonest?<issue_comment>username_1: The statement of purpose is not the place for this. Don't use it to explain the past, and especially not to excuse past decisions. The SoP is a place to detail future plans, both of study/research and thereafter, and how you intend to achieve them.
If you can make a personal statement also, put it there. Or in an introductory statement. At most you might give hints that both COVID and other opportunities caused a delay. If asked in an interview you can expand a bit.
Nothing you say sounds dishonest or disqualifying, but use the available application materials to build a positive picture of the likelihood of your success and some plan, even if not fully formed, about the future.
What you have written is an interesting "coffee room" topic for discussion, but not a reason to accept you into a program.
If you can say "cover and other opportunities" in a few words as an opening clause in some sentence about more vital things then you can make it work. But not as much as a full sentence.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If your employer is going to fully fund your PhD, you should state that very prominently in your application. Include the dollar amount, if you have it. Financial factors are often very important in PhD admissions decisions.
It's perfectly fine that you quit a PhD program because you found a new opportunity with better funding.
Hiding your 2 month period of enrollment would be considered dishonest. I see no benefit from the dishonesty, either.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/28
| 1,197
| 5,187
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a collaboration with a group and a paper is published as the result of this study which includes many experts. The study was done in groups where each group had a leader, we had multiple meetings, passed our research notes according to our study, the group leaders then wrote the paper. However when the paper was submitted we were not informed, we were informed only after it was accepted.
I am included as Consortia, which goes like: Author1, Author2,..., Author8 & Consortia
and then in the paper the names of the Consortia is included in a table. The main author says we are co-authors but how does it work? Am I an actual author? Can I list this paper as my paper? I am not asking for a mere CV but I need to add this to a formal system that keeps track of my papers. I could just skip doing so (and not get points from the paper) but then again I actually should include it as I also represent my affiliation.
I have seen that this is often done in natural sciences or in companies research teams. Can anyone who has experience / knows how it works let me know?<issue_comment>username_1: As you describe it, I'd consider it a breach of ethics if you aren't considered an author: "passed research notes, meetings, ...". Moreover the lead author considers you to be authors.
Note that there are papers (often from CERN) that have hundreds of authors, all of whom were essential in some way to a large study. There are a few in which the list of authors is longer than the body of the paper itself. A google search will turn up a few of these.
Note that I don't assume you were a group "leader", but do assume you weren't just hired to carry out a defined function (and paid).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, you are author, even though your lead authors did not include you sufficiently in the publication process.**
I've been a lead author on a number of papers with consortium authorship, [the largest of which has a little over 2,700 co-authors](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252263). The purpose of consortium authorship is explicitly to acknowledge that a large number of people are indeed co-authors on a study, while at the same time keeping the formatting and submission management tractable.
In the studies that I have participated in, we have used a three-tier system of authorship:
* Primary authors are the lead authors who did most of the actual organizing and writing.
* Secondary authors made personal and clearly distinguished contributions to the project, but not at the level of a primary author.
* Consortium authors are all of the others who meet [CRediT standards of authorship](https://casrai.org/credit/). In most cases I have seen, this means they contributed to data acquisition in some manner, which may or may not be further distinguished.
The actual writing mostly gets done by the primary authors, who obtain specific inputs as needed from the secondary authors and circulate drafts with them until the primary and secondary groups are satisfied. The paper then goes out to the full consortium for review and inputs with a deadline after which non-response will be taken as equivalent to approval (typically ~1 week). We do the same for every round of revision, though once a consortium worth of co-authors have looked at something, it usually sails through peer review pretty easily (desk rejections are a different story).
From what you have written, I do think that **the primary authors of your paper have failed in their duty to keep their co-authors appropriately in the loop for the writing and approval process.** This can both feel problematic and can *create* problems with regards to [the ICMJE recommendations for authorship](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_authorship#Authorship_in_medicine). Consortium authors obviously pass the first criterion for contribution, but if they are systematically excluded from the drafting process that can create a problem with regards to the other three criteria (drafting/critique, approval, responsibility). The process that I describe, however, does invite the full consortium of co-authors to critique, raise objections to submission, and shares the responsibility for flagging issues, thus allowing consortium authors to be full and proper authors by ICMJE standards.
Let me close with an analogy that I find very useful: I like to think about authorship like movie credits. The primary authors are the stars and producer and director, the secondary authors are the minor parts, and the consortium authors are all the rest of the crew. You darned well belong in the movie credits, and should be listed in all of the appropriate databases, and it's the database's problem if they haven't caught up to using CRediT to distinguish between directors and makeup artists.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Yes you are an author, but you might choose to cite yourself as “<NAME> (Consortium Author)” or something similar on your CV and in presentations and such. I have a colleague that calls herself out this way. Her self-citation this way jumped out at me while we were working on a report this year.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/11/28
| 375
| 1,682
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to apply for a university-wide position and have already communicated with my target department. The department chair liked my CV and research a lot and strongly suggested I should apply for the position. But since the position is for the entire university, it is not clear if they have someone from the department in the search committee or can make any recommendation. So, I want to include this conversation in my letter. How can I possibly do this (professionally)?<issue_comment>username_1: There are at least two options. The first is to just let that chairperson know you are applying so that they can make an informal background recommendation if they wish. I would guess that they will if the place isn't so huge as to make this impossible. Some places, of course, have strict rules about these things, but they will know what is appropriate.
But the second is just to write something like: "I initially explored this position with Professor X, head of the Y department, who encouraged me to apply".
Note that the tone implies that you initiated the contact, rather than just "Professor X suggested I apply" which is less proactive.
And, it is possible that both approaches can be taken.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let the department chair know you've applied and thank them for their encouragement. They may/may not decide to reach out to the search committee to say, *"Look at this person, I like them."* Either way, leave it up to them.
I would not mention this previous contact in your cover letter to your application; I'd be concerned it might seem like name-dropping and a request for special treatment.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/29
| 738
| 3,446
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm considering going back into school to get my graduate degree. A large part of my decision is the ability to Open Source all of my code. I'm really not familiar how the idea of IP reconciles itself with University as a concept, my experiences lie in corporate environments, where IP is a closely guarded secret. From what I've seen Open Source as an idea isn't yet a large part of the research process, though the process has increased in popularity considerably.
If I were to attempt to publish research to a journal where the research relies heavily on code, what challenges would I face if I made my code open source? Would there be any additional challenges if I shipped the examples from the paper in the source? What if I put the paper itself into the project as part of the source (IE releasing it under a copyleft license)?<issue_comment>username_1: It is standard for academics these days to release source code and other creative works as open source. That’s fully consistent with how academia works and how university IP policies are structured — such policies typically claim ownership for the university of patentable inventions, but leave the researcher as the owner of all copyrightable material.
In mathematics and several other disciplines, it is also standard these days to upload a preprint version of every article one writes to the arXiv or other paper repository, under a Creative Commons or similar license. So, even research papers themselves are largely open source and open access (although this is not the norm in all disciplines, and in the disciplines where it is the norm, it applies to preprints but not always to final versions of published papers). Not all researchers take advantage of the freedom to make their work available in such a way, but almost all have at least the option to.
In short, you will encounter no challenges and have absolutely nothing to worry about.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, code produced as part of academic research is not automatically guaranteed to be open source. Universities, like companies, have technology transfer offices, and if you create a very influential piece of software (like one that could have patented parts, if you can do software patents) the university technology office may want you to keep it closed-source so the university can license it and the patent.
That said, I think it is very rare that universities will exert that control over software products (they usually do that over the other results like new materials, processes, etc.).
There is a growing trend to release code with papers (but not typically as part of the paper text itself) to aid in the reproducibility of the results. This is usually done by adding it to archival services (like Zenodo or Code Ocean), or through a different method chosen by the publisher (some are still zip attachments in the supplementary materials).
There is also a growing movement for "software papers," which are papers that describe and document a software tool that other researchers can use (such as a toolbox of analysis methods, simulation frameworks, etc.). This kind of paper can be more difficult to get into the large journals of a field unless they have a section more dedicated to experimental/research methods, but there are some software-specific journals like JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software) that publishes them.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/29
| 524
| 2,222
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a 3.8 undergraduate GPA with almost entirely A's in all courses. After obtaining my undergraduate degree, I took courses for fun in various subjects at two remote graduate schools. Because I was working full-time, I was exhausted a lot of the time and didn't focus on the grades. I got mostly B's, although I withdrew from a course or two when I couldn't handle both work and the courseload at the same time. I didn't get a degree but really enjoyed learning new things.
Now I'm applying to graduate school and have a real problem. I'm applying to top programs and applications want me to submit transcripts from *all* programs attended, but my grades on these "freelance" graduate courses are quite poor. How can I explain that I took them for fun and knowledge, and didn't focus much on my grades, but I'm very capable of getting good grades if I want to?<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, there is a section on an application to explain "special circumstances" or otherwise make comments about your academic history. It would be perfectly legitimate to mention that you took these courses a) outside of a regular degree program, b) when working full-time, and c) "just for fun". And for these reasons, the grades you received do not necessarily reflect your potential in a future graduate program.
In fact, it may even be a net positive if you can spin it as evidence that you were being proactive: it was a low-stakes way to get exposure to advanced material and test whether graduate school would be of interest to you.
Full disclosure: I have never served on an admissions committee
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How can I explain that I took them for fun and knowledge, and didn't focus much on my grades, but I'm very capable of getting good grades if I want to?
>
>
>
There are no magic words for this --- just be forthright and honest about your circumstances. Roughly speaking, you explain this by saying those words you just said to us. Applications for graduate programs always give you a chance to give a cover-letter or give additional information on your application, so find an appropriate spot for this and just tell them what you told us.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/29
| 576
| 2,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received an email from a person that is completely unknown to me, who claims that they were in an online master's program provided by my university department. They are asking for a recommendation letter for an application to a PhD program.
However, I am a postdoc and don't teach any classes. By quickly looking things up, I could not confirm that this person was ever even a student; however, it is in principle possible that they maybe audited some courses or otherwise didn't leave much easily accessible data.
My thoughts are that I should not even respond, because the request is, at best, entirely unreasonable, and at worst, an attempt to commit some kind of academic fraud.
What would be a best practice approach in this case? Would it be more professional to give a negative answer? Should I perhaps report this request to the department?<issue_comment>username_1: It doesn't really matter whether you ignore the request or reply with a negative response. You do not know this person, they may or may not have any actual relation to a course you didn't give. I would just ignore the request.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It has become fairly common in the last few years for hackers and spammers to conduct phishing attempts by emailing university staff/faculty and pretending to be students, while asking for letters of reference. I receive mails similar to yours every 2 to 3 months, and just by me doing some Googling on the student's name and info mentioned on the email, it is usually pretty clear that the information on the email is taken from public profiles on the internet.
If you do not know the student, or if the email seems to be somewhat generic (that is, the student's field is only tangentially related to your topic of research, and the student's email shows that they did not bother to do any research about you in advance), then you should do the following:
* if possible, do not open the emails (check the subject and email
preview only)
* do not click on anything written on the email, do not open or
download any attachments whatsoever.
* immediately mark the email as spam and delete everything inside the
spam folder.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I would give a negative reply, telling you could not find him. Then he tries harder to reach the right person. Otherwise he might wait for too long, hoping for an answer which is never coming, finally hurting his PhD application.
I think it is impolite and a disservice to your employer not responding with two sentences.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/11/29
| 568
| 2,341
|
<issue_start>username_0: Making literature review I typically browse google Scholar, cite interesting work, download BibTex from scholar into my .bib file on overleaf - that is it.
Which is more than fine for me... until the publication time, when typically editors ask for detailed and professional bib entries (with DOI, issue, publisher, etc.) - which are typically missing from Scholar.
So what I do is I browse this works one-by-one and go into the publisher (elsevier, springer, taylor-francis - whatever) and download the full .bib file - replace it into my .bib file.
Which is doable... in like 3 hours of tedious manual work.
**Any help on this - can this be automated?**<issue_comment>username_1: **tl;dr This cannot be automated, because too many bib entries that can be found on the internet are inaccurate.**
When I am reviewing papers, I always see the same mistakes\* recur in bibliographies. This is because someone influential once made a mistake in generating a bib entry for the paper, and this bib file propagated through the internet, where it is downloaded time and again by people who want to have a quick solution for generating the bibliography.
Do the manual work. While doing so, keep two things in mind:
1. the more often you do it, the quicker it will go: in the future it will surely cost you much less than 3 hours per paper.
2. publication time is the final moment when you have influence over exactly what will be in the paper with your name on it. Instead of seeing it as tedious work, see it as your final chance to present your work in its best possible form.
\*two specific highly-cited papers in my field each have an author with a double last name, and the bib files mistake the first half of the last name for an additional first name, which gets initialized. So instead of "P. Lastname Anotherlastname" this person is written as "P. L. Anotherlastname", which in turn screws up the alphabetical sorting of the entry.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Once you have the actual paper's DOI, you can use [doi2bib.org](https://doi2bib.org) to generate a bibtex entry of a paper that includes all of the relevant information. doi2bib is not flawless (because the DOI records are not), but I've found it sufficiently accurate and correct 90% of the time to be a very useful service.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/11/29
| 588
| 2,374
|
<issue_start>username_0: A question about terminology here...
When creating schedules or timetables for our school, the first thing we do is to allocate a teacher for each course that is to be given. Example:
* John will be teaching...
+ ...Math 1 for student group A
+ ...Math 1 for student group B
* Mary will be teaching...
+ ...Physics 3 for student group B
+ ...Social Studies 2 for student group C
* ...and so on
In my native language we have an established and well known term for this, which translates directly to "service distribution" where our word for "service" is closely related to "employment".
**My question:** Is there any established terminology for this type of teacher ↔ course assignment in English? If not, what would you say is a good term?
My candidates (but I'd love to hear other suggestions):
* Teacher allocation
* Teacher deployment
* Teacher-course allocation
* Teacher-course assignment<issue_comment>username_1: At University of Michigan and University of Washington, where I've taught, these were called simply *"teaching assignments"*. If a given class is taught to multiple groups of students, e.g., at different times or by different instructors, those are called *"sections"*. Non-teaching assignments, e.g., serving on a committee, are called *"service assignments"*.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The general term "scheduling" is used pretty frequently. There isn't a dedicated term in English, actually. Instead, descriptive terms are used and they vary pretty widely (US). "teacher scheduling", "instructor scheduling", "course scheduling", with various substitutions for "scheduling" possible.
An individual university will have a term of art, but it will differ if you look more broadly. And, being descriptive, those using different terms will probably understand what is intended.
And, of course, there is no one-one correspondence between the terminology/words in different languages.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You might be looking for the word "preps". In your example, John has two sections, but only one prep; Mary has two sections and two preps. See [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44822/what-is-a-teaching-prep-in-terms-of-teaching-load).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Scheduling. Or maybe Timetabling. Both are succinct and clear.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/11/29
| 484
| 1,960
|
<issue_start>username_0: To give specifics about my questions, I am on track to completing my Master's degree in Europe (Switzerland) and I have been looking at applying to the U.S. in case I cannot get a Ph.D. at my current school.
I have heard through the vines that since I will already have a Master's degree with a fair amount of work done related to research, it will make my application much more persuasive.
In this thread, I would like to confirm if that is true (or closer to the truth given the data)?<issue_comment>username_1: At University of Michigan and University of Washington, where I've taught, these were called simply *"teaching assignments"*. If a given class is taught to multiple groups of students, e.g., at different times or by different instructors, those are called *"sections"*. Non-teaching assignments, e.g., serving on a committee, are called *"service assignments"*.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The general term "scheduling" is used pretty frequently. There isn't a dedicated term in English, actually. Instead, descriptive terms are used and they vary pretty widely (US). "teacher scheduling", "instructor scheduling", "course scheduling", with various substitutions for "scheduling" possible.
An individual university will have a term of art, but it will differ if you look more broadly. And, being descriptive, those using different terms will probably understand what is intended.
And, of course, there is no one-one correspondence between the terminology/words in different languages.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You might be looking for the word "preps". In your example, John has two sections, but only one prep; Mary has two sections and two preps. See [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44822/what-is-a-teaching-prep-in-terms-of-teaching-load).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Scheduling. Or maybe Timetabling. Both are succinct and clear.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/11/30
| 941
| 4,035
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few weeks ago, I sent an email to a professor in a western European country in the hope of getting a Ph.D. position in the field of management. I have 17 years of work experience and 8 years of academic experience at the same time, I am a 45-year-old man, married, from Iran. Although the first round interview was successful, the professor called me on the phone and said that my age and marital status is his concern and the scholarship can only cover my expenses not my wife, I said I have enough money to cover my wife expenses and the evidence which was my life-time saving is available. At first, he said OK, but still do not receive any contact from that university. I have already asked questions that if my age can affect my Ph.D. application? Almost all of my friends said no, and I am almost sure that this is true in The United States and Canada. But I was shocked for the first time when I had such a conversation with that professor. I do not mention the name of the country and the university because it may seem immoral. Another question is whether it is moral to record all the interview by an application or software, and if you are judged by your age or any other personal issue then we can bring the case to the court of law?<issue_comment>username_1: Whether or not something is legal depends very much on the jurisdiction. There is nothing we can help you with without knowing what the country is (and even then it would not be a suitable question for this particular forum). This also pertains to the question of whether or not it is legal to record a conversation without the other person's knowledge -- this is different even from state to state within the US, for example.
As for the actual concern: Whether judging an application by the applicants age and marital status is legal is something that I cannot evaluate, as mentioned above. But from the perspective of a potential employer or student supervisor, it is a concern one could have: If you have a family and the university cannot cover your family's living expenses, it is probably that you might not finish the entire program or stay with the research project. If you have a family, you may also not be able to work as many hours as a 24-year-old single person. I would like to stress that I do not think that these are *legitimate* concerns to have without concrete evidence -- for example, one could have a conversation with an applicant about these specific points -- but it does not surprise me that some potential supervisors may have such concerns.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is illegal to discriminate based on age in the area of employment and occupation (and often, a European PhD position is a form of "employment"). The legal framework is the same in all European union countries, based on [directive 2000/78/EC](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32000L0078). Martial status is not covered by any European regulations, but some individual countries do have laws concerning this.
All European countries also have a [national equality body](https://equineteurope.org/what-are-equality-bodies/) that can investigate alleged cases of discrimination (and provide a lower barrier-to-entry than the formal judicial system). They might be able to help you out and provide you with additional information. However, if you did not record the phone call and have no other evidence concerning the alleged discrimination, this will make it much harder to succeed.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It might not be discrimination from the professor or department but instead legal restrictions and limits on mature students.
Some scholarships do have age restrictions for example the Rhodes scholarship is for 19-25 years. It might not be something in the professor's control.
Additionally, some countries have age limits on student visas for example Switzerland has a 30 year age limit on visa for Master's degrees. They may have another restriction for PhDs.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/11/30
| 458
| 1,974
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied for an associate professor position in data science and new technologies. It was a real surprise when the committee chose me out of 16 persons to be the first among many.
After 2 weeks of the notification of me being #1, I was asked to present a potential new course in data science on data driven decision making for a master student program.
My teaching expertise is low since I have been doing a lot of research. Would you please advise me what might be helpful when asked such a request? The presentation should be 30 mins and students and staff will be invited to the seminar.
Currently, I am going to include a title, course objectives, learning outcomes, 5-6 modules, and some teaching strategies I will use.
Thank you so much for the helping out. This will be a life changing for me if accepted!<issue_comment>username_1: The things you mention are good components of your presentation. Consider adding a slide or two on how your course connects to the rest of the program. In which subsequent courses would you expect specific lessons learned in your course to be useful? What is the prior knowledge your course requires from your students, and where in their program have they acquired this knowledge? You will make a good impression on your future colleagues if you illustrate that your course will be a useful part of a bigger whole.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to the [suggestions of Wetenschaap](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178598/75368) consider adding something about student activities (exercises, projects, exams...) and about evaluation. What will student "grades" be based on. Note that the latter may be bound by local custom or rules that you might need to conform to.
Note that students learn by *doing things* not just (or primarily) by listening to lectures.
I don't think you need to be very detailed about exercises and such, but don't omit mentioning evaluation.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/11/30
| 2,045
| 8,496
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been studying remotely at my university since September 2021. Each of my weekly classes on Zoom has around ten people. I always turn on my camera. But I still do not know any my classmates. Some turn on their camera, some do not. I have corresponded with nobody outside classes.
I want to get to know some of them...to see how they find our course...to study together. I am keen to audio or video chat on Zoom. ***Doubtless I am not going to mass email every one on the same email.*** **But will it be kooky or stalkerish, even if I email each member of my classes SEPARATELY?** Will my email appear out of the blue? And if the classmates gossip, they will know I emailed each of them SEPARATELY with the same email. This can appear as spam!
Any advice please? I plan to start emailing classmates who turn on their cameras. Turning on camera manifests extroversion and neighborliness?<issue_comment>username_1: Why not email all of them together in one email? Considering that they are taking the same (remote) course as you, they might be sitting in the same boat (not having any contact with the other students). Something along the lines of
>
> Hey classmates, since this is a remote course, I have not had the opportunity to get to know you in person. Would any of you be up for a (digital) meeting to discuss the course, organize study groups or similar activities?
>
>
>
is completely appropriate and not "spammy" at all. I would imagine that others of the group might appreciate a meet-up like this as well, but maybe they have the same reservations of just emailing everyone. Someone has to take this step, and it just as well might be you.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: Your classmates who don't turn on their cameras may still be interested in making friends and discussing the course material. But perhaps they would be more comfortable doing this in a way which doesn't involve video or voice chats, so consider text-based communication options. Text-based communication also doesn't have to occur in real-time, which may make it more convenient than video calls.
I suggest you create an online group space for this (e.g. a Discord server, a Facebook group, etc.), and send one email to invite all of your classmates to join it, with some explanation of what you think it could be used for.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Other answers have suggested a mass email. [One answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178619/43873) suggests setting up a specific online space for this. I have seen students request GroupMe and Discord groups to communicate outside of class.
I would like to address how to communicate your new group and invite people to it. Instead of emailing everyone, here are some other ways to invite people:
* Drop a link in the chat area of your weekly Zoom
* If your class uses Canvas or Blackboard and has a discussion area, drop a link in a General discussion post
* Email your professor and/or teaching assistant to ask whether they could communicate the group to make it semi-official
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I would suggest a combination of the answers already given. Send a mass email as per @username_1's suggestion, but include a link to a group that you've set up as @username_2 and @username_3 suggested. This is pro-active and it's easier for your classmates to just click a link than have to email back and forth to set something up. I also recommend cc-ing your prof/TA as they're usually very keen on this sort of thing and may even be able to promote it in your next session.
Personally, I don't agree with what you've said about turning cameras on. I'm very happy to make friends within my course, but I leave my camera off because it doesn't add anything to the lecture. So please don't take it to heart if others have their cameras off - it's generally a personal preference, and not an indication that they don't want to make friends!
Seeing as your course is so small I'm sure the others will feel the same way. It's really nice to be able to message each other about the course outside of lecture hours, and organising study sessions (even if on Zoom) is a great way to learn together. You will probably find a lot in common. If your main goal is to make friends, I would also suggest looking into the societies that your university has to offer.
PS. It's highly unlikely that they'll all get together to gossip about you - and if they do you're far better off getting on without them!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It can be a bit daunting to get to know classmates in an online program. Chances are there are other students in your class that also do not know how to approach meeting students online.
My experience as an online instructor has taught me that many students are incredibly ambivalent regarding reaching out to classmates and getting to know them.
It is really not all that different from meeting classmates in a face to face classroom. Ask them how they are feeling about the course or mention a recent assignment and you will be connecting in no time. All of the friends that I made in my graduate ( on ground) and post graduate ( online) studies began with talking about the course work. It is a good place to start.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: It is honestly really depressing and sad that so many people, including the OP and several anwers' authors themselves, are so eager to label awkward usage of Internet communication as "creepy". It could get unusual, or as I said, awkward. It definitely could give the impression of the communication's initiator being a bit socially uncallibrated. But creepy? Are you serious? A person approaching you at 2 AM, in a dark deserted alley, laughing maniacally and trying to strike up a "casual" conversation about life after death, and then asking you whether do you think that death by bleeding is painless or not: yes, that surely would be creepy. Hearing a baby's laugh at 2 AM in your home while you are living there alone would creep me out to the point of making me insane. But some friendly and polite, even if random and clunky attempt of reaching out to fellow students? Maybe cringy at most. Come on.
We are all in a strange, unprecedented situation and there hasn't really been anything on which we could base the correct etiquette of reaching out to classmates from online course. No matter how you do it, it is inevitably going to appear more or less unusual. However, that is because the situation itself is unusual. I would expect your classmates to be able to have compassion, easily empathize with you and not deem you creepy, because they are all aware of how difficult it is to socialize in current times.
Not all people will be willing to socialize, though. But that would be independent of communication attempts: even in face-to-face settings not all people are willing to socialize, and that has nothing to do with you being "creepy". It just happens.
About potential gossip: even though it can be undesirable, it is a human thing to gossip. There are not too many interesting things happening while you are sitting home on remote learning, so anything out of ordinary is a fair game to gossip about. And people who would gossip about you, your e-mails, etc. could as well end up being great friends of yours once you get to know each other a little bit better. A few times I surely have had, *post factum*, some of my friends from university courses admit that they had been in fact gossiping about me before we got to know each other. Their admission was a convenient ice-breaker that allowed us to be more quick in advancing from just acquintances to actual friends who routinely tease each other in a friendly and honest banter.
I would advise using e-mail instead of Zoom. E-mail is asynchronous and wouldn't apply unnecessary pressure for people to respond at instant. In my experience, lecturers frequently and habitually send the exact same e-mails to the whole aggregated groups of students (for example, students who belong to the same group). And yes, such is *modus operandi* of spammers. However, real, actual spammers are people/bots who abuse the e-mail system to send messages that are **completely unsolicited, contain commercial advertising, non-commercial proselytizing, phishing, attempting to scam the recipient, etc**. And I am 100% sure that your e-mails to your fellow students will not contain any of those.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|