date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2021/12/22
| 1,157
| 4,737
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m a postdoc (at a North American research university), and due to the high cost of living in the area, I’ve been rooming with other people. One of said roommates is an undergrad in a relatively close area to mine (different department).
Now university policies are incredibly vague about this sort of thing. Does rooming with someone constitute a “close personal relationship”? I know they’ll not be my student, at least for the coming semester, so there is not the usual, clear-cut conflict of a teacher–student relationship.
My question is: **What should I do?**
On the one hand, it doesn’t seem to be an issue to me; it’s just people trying to save money and live close to their obligations. Unless of course they enrolled in a course I taught, in which case I’d have to talk to the chair. One the other hand, I’m from a different culture, so I may be seeing this a different way.
I should add that I’m reluctant to move right now, since money is tight and so close to the holidays it will be almost impossible to find an apartment and movers. So at the very least I’ll have to live in this situation for at least a few months.<issue_comment>username_1: I would refer you to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/104846/79875) answer:
>
> The core ethical issue...is the power dynamic: it creates an ethical problem if you have power over her career, either in a way that could favor her (leading to concerns about favoritism) or disfavor her (leading to concerns about coercion)....In separate departments, that's not likely to be an issue...[though] there are still situations where issues could arise...unless your school has a specific policy on the subject, it's probably ethical, as long as you make sure to avoid being in a position that creates a specific conflict.
>
>
>
Now this answer was discussing a situation where a professor was dating a grad student in a different department. In your case, the student is merely a roommate rather than a romantic partner, so you may have even more latitude.
To summarize:
* Most post-docs have absolutely no power over most undergrads, so there is no issue at all.
* If you do have power over the undergrad -- for example, if they joined your research group or took a class that you were involved in -- it still might be possible to proceed, but you should disclose the relationship in writing and let your department administration decide what to do.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Unless you’re in some sort of position of authority over the student, which it sounds like you aren’t, there isn’t any concern right now. Undergraduates are (though you wouldn’t always know it from the way they get treated by most US universities) adults, and can choose to share accommodation with whomever they find it convenient to. Likewise, you are free to have a co-habitation relationship with anyone whom you don’t hold authority over (through teaching, advising, writing letters of recommendation for, etc).
That being said, it sounds like a teacher-student situation could conceivably arise in the future. So it would be a good idea to ask at your department what campus policies would imply in such a situation, so that you are informed and are able to anticipate any future concerns and act preemptively to eliminate them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't think there's anything particularly to hide here. People are free to live with whomever they choose.
In the event you actually are a professor/TA for one of the student's classes you can always at THAT time disclose to your department "this also is my house mate, what do I need to do to ensure there is no conflict of interest/appearance of conflict of interest" which I'm sure will have a clearer answer.
Them being an undergrad has nothing to do with this. They could've been a fellow graduate student, or even more extreme your wife/husband/partner. In all cases you would go about it the same.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm surprised people are even treating this as an issue. If you are just roommates and you are not this person's landlord, you aren't really in a position of authority over them. I've only heard of this whole issue come up over romantic/sexual relationships, by the way.
Also I think you have certain freedoms on how to live your life, and it seems ridiculous to me that you might conceivably be expected to move out of your apartment because some academic administrators don't approve of your living arrangement because maybe things will go bad and maybe you'll have some influence over them in the future. It's really an overreach in my opinion for them to go beyond romantic/sexual relationships in this arena.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/12/22
| 809
| 3,361
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first-year Physics student and I decide to challenge myself by taking a Math course that's well above my level. I was doing pretty well during the first half of the semester with offline lectures and was averaging an A. Until another wave of Covid hit and I have to spend the rest of the semester online.
My mental health was failing toward the end of the semester, I could clearly feel it as my insomnia and trichotillomania got worst day by day. I refuse to study and just listen to podcasts every day, and since it is my first year I barely have the chance to actually make any study group or have any friends that study with me. The day of my finals is the day I decide to make such poor a decision of using an online help website to aid with my exams, which I am clearly not proud of. After the exam, I deemed it as failed because I gain very little knowledge and also because of my dishonest action.
As expected, I received an email regarding my academic misconduct 2 days later, as such, I wrote an email back to them admitting my mistake, apologies, and accepting repercussions. In a few days, I receive an email that states that my grade will be deducted (Which result in a failure), and this decision will be recorded in the Register of Academic Misconduct.
At present, all I could feel is resentment and disappointment toward myself. I'm nowhere near as gifted as my peers in the field but I'm trying to stay firm on this path. I'm aware that academic dishonesty is a serious thing and my future career could be damaged by this incident. What should I do during the next few years of my study? Because I know this is just going to get worst and I know that I can't continue if I don't change. Furthermore, how much damage will a record of academic misconduct have to my academic career? And will I be able to continue in the future? Thank you for reading and sharing.<issue_comment>username_1: I understand you to have aspired to something, to have made a forgivable mistake in the way you pursue your aspiration, to have been found out, to have apologized, to understand the morals of it, and to have accepted the consequences.
Do not think you are unusual: we all "have skeletons in our cupboards". Therefore do not take on a burden of guilt that you then carry with you and unnecessarily admit to people who are more interested in your future than your past. This is important for your own image.
It is human to err. Learn the lesson, don't do it again, and look optimistically to the future with whatever qualifications you honestly gain.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is hard to predict long term effects, but it is fairly common, in the US at least, for such behavior to be punished locally but no long term record communicated outside, even if it is kept.
Some places (most?) keep records for repeat offenders to be caught, but it may be that only the university will ever know unless you broadcast it. There may be no indication of this on transcripts, for example, other than the grade. But policies differ.
It would be good to know whether that is the case or not. Whoever dishes out the punishment can probably tell you about that.
For the mental health aspects, find a way to talk to a counsellor/professional. You don't want to kick yourself longer or harder than necessary.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/22
| 4,100
| 15,772
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it enough to hold a contract as professor (be it a major university), to use this title in official communications?
What are the rules (also unwritten rules) in your country?
I am interested also in European and Asian countries, besides North Americans.<issue_comment>username_1: In Britain, when I applied for a new passport and gave my title as Professor, I was asked to provide evidence of entitlement, in my case a letter of appointment from my university. Without that formal letter from a recognized academic body my claim would have been refused. To claim title without formal appointment or recognition seems like fraudulent misrepresentation.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In Germany, there are two possibilities to become a professor:
As a postdoc, you either
1. work as an assistant professor for some years and then apply for a professorship, or
2. write a professoral dissertation and apply for a professorship.
If you then are appointed, you are a professor.
So basically, yes, it is "enough" to hold a contract as a professor. But it is really difficult to get this contract. You need to master several steps - PhD thesis, postdoc, assistant professor or professoral dissertation. And even then, it is not sure you will ever get an appointment. There are many researchers who fulfil all qualifications, apply for one professorship after another and never get appointed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm at a North American R1.
The water is a bit muddy because depending on context "Professor" can refer to different things:
* a formal job title, specified in your employment contract (this will be something like "Assistant Professor," "Professor of Practice," "FancyPants McRichDonor Distinguished Professor of Chemistry," etc.);
* a general class of employment ("person who teaches at a university");
* an honorific used by students when addressing anybody who teaches in a university classroom. This usage is acceptable regardless of whether the teacher's job title includes "Professor" anywhere in it and regardless of whether or not the teacher holds a PhD.
There are no formal rules about what you can call yourself (in North America) but the standard practice is:
* in *formal* communication (including letters of recommendation and anything else that's signed on university letterhead) you should use your exact, formal job title.
* in informal communication to students, or anyone else who would be expected to address you with the "Professor" honorific, you can call yourself "<NAME>."
* informal communication to people outside of academia is a grey area. I would use my formal job title in an email signature; but would call myself "a professor at University of X" in the body of text if I teach classes at UofX, regardless of job title.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are referring to *yourself* in any formal setting, use only titles that have been officially conferred. And qualify them as needed: *associate professor*, for example. In the US it is common to use the term informally for yourself in casual conversations and such.
For referring to *others* you can use the term in a more generic sense *most places* and in *most situations* as a synonym for a university faculty member. Some places are more formal (Germany, Austria) than others (US). US students do this pretty regularly, for example, to refer to their instructors.
If you have a title from one country/culture that isn't common in another, then you can give your official title, as given and suggest it is similar to a title from the place you are communicating with. But don't assume your translation is official in any way.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm from a regional US school with an almost split personality of small liberal arts undergrad and huge health sciences postgrad, and I've observed something here that I've never seen elsewhere: students call anyone with a PhD or MD "Dr", and everyone else "Prof." This bugs me greatly, in part because I did my time as a postdoc where I would have been ROASTED for calling myself Prof, and now I actually merit the title, I want to use it. I really don't feel it's appropriate when the lecturers get called Prof, especially if they don't have doctorates. I actually had one of my research students (!!) shyly tell me one time he just learned that I had a doctorate, and he thought that was really impressive - because he assumed I didn't since I signed my emails Prof instead of Dr.
My theory is that it's the med school's fault, that the MDs prefer Dr to Prof, and it's rubbed off on the rest of us. Don't know if this applies to other, similar universities, though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: **Australia:** The norm here is that you only use the title "Professor" if you are a full professor (i.e., you have a [Level E academic position at a university](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_ranks_(Australia_and_New_Zealand))). Applicable titles here are:
* **Mister/Miss/Misses/Ms (Mr/Miss/Mrs/Ms)** for an academic with no PhD at levels A-C (i.e. no special title compared to an ordinary person);
* **Doctor (Dr)** for an academic with PhD at levels A-C, or any other person with PhD;
* **Associate Professor/Reader (Assoc Prof/Reader)** for an academic at Level D; and
* **Professor (Prof)** for an academic at Level E.
This classification is formalised in the federal government classification of academics in Australia (see e.g., [*Higher Education Academic Salaries Award 2002* (Cth)](https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/consolidated_awards/ap/ap820200/asframe.html). I am not aware of any specific rules on using these titles in correspondence. However, use of an inflated title (e.g., using "Prof" when you are not a full professor) would be misleading behaviour and could constitute a breach of academic honesty rules. In any case, if you were to use an inflated title here it would reflect badly on you.
(One thing that often happens in academia in Australia is that foreign academics/journals email you as "Professor" even though you are not a full professor and would not use the title yourself. This derives from the broader American use of the term. When this happens you have to decide whether to correct the person on the other end of the communication, but this can get monotonous, so many academics here just ignore the disparity and allow foreign academics/journals to incorrectly call them "Professor".)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: In the **Czech Republic**, a *professor* is only a person that was confirmed for the professor (prof.) degree by the Scientific Comittee of their university and received the degree from the President of the country. Or people that hold similar full professor degrees from other countries.
The holders of degrees equivalent to an associated or assistant professor can *not* use the "professor" title. Associate professors, after their habilitation, use the "docent" (doc.) title. Assistant professors are simply "doctors".
The whole system continues the traditions from the past Austria-Hungary.
---
Unrelated usage exists at "[gymnasiums](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gymnasium_(school))" - a specific type of secondary schools similar to grammar schools. They are selective and prepare mainly for further studies at universities. Here all teachers are called "professors" informally, regerdless whether they are doctors or not.
This is again an old tradition going back to the times of the Austrian empire or Astria-Hungary.
---
BTW although the role of the President of the country is mostly ceremonial, the current president is known for refusing to appoint several professors for various reasons. Those who tried to sue him do not have their title yet.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Swedish usage:
A "professor" in Swedish is a title used for a person employed at university level with responsiblities for an area. To be hired as professor you need to have completed a PhD (or similar) and generally have to have a comprehensive portfolio of published papers (or similar).
The title as such is not protected in any way, so anyone may be free to use it without any legal consequences.
Other titels used when employed at university are:
"Docent" - requires you to a have higher scientific level above a PhD, generally at least four years after PhD.
"Lektor" - has a PhD.
"Adjunkt" - lower academic degree, often master.
"Doktorand" - employed to do PhD studies.
You might find postdocs as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: France
------
The general rule is that the title of Professor is associated with a position of "University Professor", for which you are nominated by the President. So you have to have the required "technical" prerequisites (a special diploma, an agreement of a special national body, ...), and have a position ay a university (or equivalent).
Then of course it gets more complex, we French being the holders of the "how to make bureaucracy complicated" prize. This includes the "but there is always a way" sub-prize.
You then have medical doctors that award themselves the title of "Professor" if they are the head of a department in a hospital (no matter if they have any relationship with academia or not).
Finally you have teachers who are called "professors" like everywhere else in the world, except that we do have a "professor in a school" kid of affiliation, legally defined (you are part of a special corpus of administration)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: In the US I’d say that there’s no reason to care. Anybody who has had or has a university or other scholastic position position with “professor” in their official HR title is literally entitled to use that word in their formal address. But to what end? Ego inflation seems to be the only value. It might get you higher on a reservation list at a fancy restaurant, but those days seem mostly gone. Some grants are limited to academics within a few (1,2,3, etc) years of their PhD or postdoc, but I haven’t seen “professor” be a requirement, especially given the differences across the country in when that title starts being used (Assistant, Associate, etc?).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: **Britain**
In Britain the title "Professor" is used only for select senior academics. Usually they are either heads of department or very senior researchers. To be a Professor you must have been appointed to a specific professorship (chair) by a university.
If you are a college or university level teacher then you are usually referred to as a "lecturer".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: In the **Netherlands**, the title was reserved for those who had the academic rank of Hoogleraar. This is a top rank and equates to the UK ranks of Reader (Hoogleraar 2) or Professor (Hoogleraar 1). The lower ranks of docent (lecturer) universitair docent (university lecturer) and hoofddocent (senior lecturer) are translated as lecturer, assistant and associate professor. However, they are not entitled to call themselves "professor" or use the "Prof." title.
This appears to be changing. It was that only hoogleraars could promote Ph.D. students, which was the justification for restricting the title. Recent rules changes have meant that by special dispensation, some hoofddocenten ("associate professors"/senior lecturers) can have promotion rights. I have seen some of these using the Prof. title. I am unclear whether this is legal or not. The title Professor is protected under Dutch law, and it is fraud to use it if not entitled.
In **Flanders**, a similar rank system exists, but docenten (lecturers) of all grades can have promotion rights. If they do, then they can use the title Prof. However, they could not leave it unqualified when written in full without being fraudulent. Use of "Prof." is specific to whether the academic is allowed to by the (main) supervisor of Ph.D. students or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: **The UK**
The traditional scheme of academic job titles in the UK was Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Reader, Professor. Nowadays many universities use the alternative scheme of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor. However, the title "Professor" is still only used for full professors (who would be a professor in the traditional scheme) or emeritus professors (retired or semi-retired academics who were previously full professors).
Someone whose job title is "Associate Professor" would normally be referred to as "Doctor X" (assuming they have a doctoral degree; this may be accompanied by an additional title e.g. "the Reverend Doctor Y").
These are not official rules in any sense I know of, but merely the way things are done. In any case the person might not bother to use their academic title outside of an academic context.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Mainland China and Hong Kong (I didn't bother looking up Macau or Taiwan):
---
In mainland China:
[<NAME>, the record holder for youngest female grandmaster, is said to be a 'professor'](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/36830/both-grandmaster-and-phd-doctorate/36831#36831) at Shenzhen university. But I doubt e has a PhD.
Therefore, in mainland China, you need not have a PhD to have the title of 'professor' unlike places like Hong Kong (ironic?) or some parts of the US where having a PhD is necessary but not sufficient to have the title of 'professor'.
According to several sources, <NAME> is indeed a '[full](https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/news/alumna-becomes-youngest-ever-full-professor-shenzhen-university)' professor, instead of assistant or associate professor. I'm unable to find a profile on shenzhen's website. Or even like a list of faculty members that includes h.
---
In Hong Kong:
I've checked all the maths departments in city university, chinese university, hong kong university of science and technology, hong kong university and The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, and not a single person is professor or even assistant or associate professor without a PhD. Meanwhile there are many PhD holders who are merely 'instructor' or 'lecturer'.
At least last I checked in early 2021.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_14: In the Philippines:
Not entirely certain. Professor is often used colloquially to mean 'teaches at a university', but technically I've yet to see a faculty member's profile where the person is said to be 'professor' (without qualifier; see next) without a PhD.
---
In Cebu:
In the mathematics department of the university of san carlos in cebu (not to be confused with the university of south california, as the old joke goes), several faculty members ([see for yourself](https://www.usc.edu.ph/academics/schools/school-of-arts-and-sciences/department-of-computer-information-sciences-and-mathematics)) are considered 'assistant professor' without a PhD. None of the faculty members there appear to have a PhD, and no one is considered associate professor or (full) professor there.
---
In Manila (the capital):
I've yet to see an 'assistant professor' in, say, the mathematics departments of the university of the philippines or ateneo de manila university without a PhD though.
---
Edit to add:
>
> In my experience, in the Philippines, any faculty with the position having the word "professor" (asst. prof., assoc. prof., prof.) may be called "Professor." In the past (in the Philippines), it was possible to be a professor even if you didn't have a doctoral degree. So it was more prestigious to be called "Doctor" (which requires having a doctoral degree) rather than "Professor." Usually the term "Professor" is used when the person does not have a doctoral degree. – <NAME>
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/12/22
| 1,237
| 4,912
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interested in a Ph.D. in Robotics (possibly in the UK). But I have been working as a run-of-the-mill software engineer in the industry for the last 5 years. Browsing this forum, I am seeing people express widely varying opinions on how industry experience is viewed in academia.
As a part of my job, I wasn't required to read or implement any research papers. But I did gain substantial software engineering experience. I have been literally writing c++ code for the last 5 years more or less. Right now I am actually in a firmware development role. Robotics is all C++ development if I am not wrong.
But I haven't taken any classes in the 5 years nor did I have to take any exams. I am 30 years old exactly. Did I age out for a Ph.D. program?
Also on the flipside, will I be viewed more favorably than a similar applicant as myself but without the industry experience?<issue_comment>username_1: Go for it! Industry experience greatly helped me during my biology/physics PhD (which I started at age 27). My peers were spending time during their PhD learning how to code, and I already had lots of experience. This allowed me to focus more on the science story I was trying to research, rather than on overcoming hurtles necessary for starting to tell that science story.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is a mistake to try to second-guess things which you do not know about and over which you have no control ("How will they regard me? Will they think that? Will they think this? Am I too old? Am I too young? Will I be competing against a dozen other people who may not even exist?"). None of this speculation will help you to a decision.
If you want to do a PhD, try for it and present your experience as an asset. The best way to find out is to just go for it. If you have specific questions (for example, funding, support programmes, mentoring arrangements, supervision details, assessment criteria, and so forth) then raise them as opportunity arises during the application process.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are motivated and passionate about the topic of your PhD you should go for it! You are never too old for a PhD. I finished my MSc in 2007, worked in industry for 14 years and decided to go back to school to do a PhD. I am now about to graduate and I am 39 yo. I found that my experience in industry made a big difference on how I approached my research during my PhD.
Similar to you, I had not taken classes/exams in a long time, and I was a bit rusty. So it certainly took a bit of time and effort to get back to it. But since the topic was something I was passionate about, it didn't seem too painful. And I certainly learned a lot!
If you have already a supervisor in mind for your PhD, I would recommend to meet with her/him before you apply. She/he will very likely provide precious advice and gauge how your background fits in the PhD program. I've met with 3 potential supervisors (in 3 different departments) before I applied for my PhD. It helped me find out which department was the best fit for me.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You're right that there's widely diverging opinions on this. I take the view that ex-industry people are valuable in academia, and I see the industry experience as a big positive, depending on what you compare it to. Your industry experience will probably give you some ideas for research directions and it also means that you have some strong existing skills. Obviously if you want to go into academia you are going to have to upskill on research skills like literature review, writing papers, etc., but that is not an insurmountable obstacle. Your age is not especially advanced to start a PhD program, so that is not an issue.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: A couple of examples regarding age:
<NAME> (of Bézier curves fame) got his Ph.D. when he was in his sixties.
I myself am 71, and I'm thinking of getting a Ph.D. People often assume that I have one, and I'm tired of explaining that I don't. Plus, it might be fun. My memory and learning ability have declined with age, but 40 years of industrial experience have given me a lot of breadth and perspective. If I find that some institutions don't value my industrial experience, or think I'm too old, I'll just go elsewhere. I'm confident that I can succeed, and you should be even more confident.
Lots of other stories about old folks getting doctorates [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3426/how-old-is-too-old-for-a-phd).
At many US universities, age discrimination would be illegal (though it might be pretty hard to prove).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: You will likely be viewed as more mature by admissions committees. This is a plus. You understand why you want the degree.
I'm not sure it would be viewed this way if you had, say, 20 years of industry experience.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/23
| 601
| 2,365
|
<issue_start>username_0: What's the actual difference between what a Mathematical Physicist and a Theoretical Physicist do?
When I look at the curriculum from some Applied Mathematicians from the maths department at my university, the areas on which those work in look quite similar to the one some Physicists from our Physics department work in.
Allow me to make an concret example: There's one professor of mine, mathematician, whose research is centered in General Relativity, more specifically, QFTCS (Quantum Field Theory on Curved Spacetime), and some others. That's exactly the line of research some physicists have.
So how to properly differ what they do? That may be a very trivial or naive question, but, nevertheless, it's something that I really do need to understand. If anyone could help, I'll be grateful. Happy holidays for everyone!<issue_comment>username_1: Where the dividing line is drawn is very likely to vary from institution to institution. I used to work in a "Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics", and there, "Theoretical Physics" was understood to consist of High-Energy Particle Physics, General Relativity, and Cosmology, while the physics-y bits of "Applied Mathematics" included experimental and theoretical Fluid Mechanics, Biomechanics, Planetary Science, realization of Quantum Computing, and Glaciology.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There’s quite a bit of theoretical physics contained in “others”.
There is a lot of fascinating theory work in condensed matter theory, including statistical mechanics - beautiful results on spin chains, Ising model etc, antiferromagnets. [<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_B._Laughlin) or [<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Kadanoff) stand out a names with international recognition, as is [<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jun_Kond%C5%8D).
These days there is also a lot of work in quantum information theory, with [<NAME>](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexei_Kitaev) a shining example of a theorist working in this area.
So theoretical physics is much broader in scope than the mathematical physics done in math departments. The topics you list get a lot of public attention because they capture the imagination of many, but there is *lots* of good stuff in theoretical physics at large.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/12/24
| 721
| 3,023
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently reading a paper in some journal which described part of their method in the following way:
>
> Our goal is to perform [something] on our data, which is drawn from [distribution]. This poses a problem because [reason]. We therefore *took inspiration from Author et al. (1970) and* propose to augment our method by [description of the modifications, including equations]. There are two challenges in this case: [first challenge, including a citation] and [second challenge]. We solve these by [mathematical description, including equations].
>
>
>
I wanted to learn more and looked up the cited paper (from different authors). Unfortunately, there wasn't more to learn as it turns out that the description (about 2 paragraphs, including the brackets) was copied near verbatim. In the quote above, the italic part was obviously added, and the wording was slightly changed a few times (e.g. from "there exist many ways to ..." to "there are many ways to ..."), but most of it is completely identical.
IMHO, this is way above the threshold of plagiarism. But it is a good idea to do something about it (e.g., contact the journal, or politely tell the authors to get their scholarly act together if I happen to meet them at a poster session) or is it better to let it go?<issue_comment>username_1: Plagiarism is not about computer programs (or humans) counting the number of identical words and comparing them to an arbitrary threshold. ["Plagiarism is the representation of another author's language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions as one's own original work."](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism)
In other words: if they solve the same problem as the original authors in a different way, and explicitly cite the paper used for inspiration, this is not plagiarism. If the problem is the same as in paper A, it makes sense to take the problem description from paper A. If it is cited correctly (which it is - very explicitly even), this is not plagiarism. It could possibly be a copyright issue if the wording is copied literally, but copyright and plagiarism are different issues.
Of course this changes if the *solution* presented in paper B is the same as in paper A, and the authors of paper B pretend that they came up with the solution themselves and only cite paper B for the problem statement, that would be plagiarism.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: So article A copies from article B while prominently citing article B. This is technically plagiarism since the text copied from B is not clearly presented as a quote.
However, this type of plagiarism is harmless if not beneficial to science. After all, the authors of A have rescued the old article B from obscurity and made it more easily accessible.
You might ask the authors of A to add explicit quotation marks, but this looks like a waste of time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Post about your suspicion on [PubPeer](https://pubpeer.com/), a platform for post-publication review.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/12/24
| 1,337
| 5,503
|
<issue_start>username_0: For instance, <NAME>, key researcher in mRNA technology in immunology and therapies got a bunch of awards in 2021 as a result of the COVID19 vaccine being developed based on her work.
Did someone on Karikó's behalf fill out applications and nominations for each of these awards/prizes/medals, or had the publicity from her work just lead these organizations to pick her because they just know how impactful and important her work is?
*Edit: I want to emphasize the question is not about self-nomination, it's about getting awards without applying or being nominated at all.*
**The question is, does anyone ever win awards/prizes/etc. because the accomplishment is so major and widely known that the committee just says "There's no doubt, this is the clear winner, it's so impactful that no nomination/application is required or expected."**
*The COVID19 vaccine based on mRNA work is a prime example. It literally affects every human being on the planet in a life or death way, right now.*<issue_comment>username_1: For prestigious awards, I'd suspect that self-nomination is rare, but nomination by someone in the community is very common and likely required in almost all cases. A committee is unlikely to choose on its own to avoid questions of bias, such as in-group bias.
A friend of mine won a top award in CS from ACM. A group of us were involved in his nomination and support for that nomination. He had no part in the process and was surprised when it happened. Certainly Nobel prizes work that way, though some people lobby for nominations.
For minor awards, however, self nomination might be acceptable and accepted. In the ACM, one can apply for Senior Member status (IIRC), though it has little prestige value. But Distinguished Member requires outside nomination.
But for some local things, such as teaching awards from a university, a committee might decide to give the award and the recipient will be surprised when it happens. This just happened to my daughter. This works locally since the community has knowledge of potential awardees and can easily gather more information.
But nomination in some form has to happen. They don't spring forth from the forehead of Zeus. It is possible that someone in the committee makes a nomination/recommendation, but, as said above, for prestigious awards they probably come from outside, perhaps, as in the case of my friend from several people who can support the reasons for the nomination.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, the process of awarding awards is as follows:
1. The organisation bestowing the award has an 'award committee' (which may deal with one or more distinct awards). Often this will include ex-officio representatives of the organisation and (perhaps) previous awardees.
2. The committee solicit nominations for the award. Usually there is a prescribed form for the nomination package, e.g. a one-page statement on why the individual deserves the award and a copy of their CV, plus a certain number of letters of support. There will usually be some restrictions on nominators: commonly, self-nominations are not accepted, and a nominee's recent collaborators/students/supervisors/etc may be excluded from writing letters of support. Often, nominators have to be connected to the awarding organisation in some way. Members of the award committee are often barred from supporting nominations directly, but they may be influential in encouraging others to make nominations.
3. The committee meets to consider such nominations as have been received, and select a worthy recipient.
Of course, when self-nominations are not accepted, people can (and do!) ask friends or colleagues to consider nominating them for particular awards.
**In response to question edit:** No doubt there are exceptions, but usually an awarding organisation will have bylaws (or similar) that stipulate the procedure that must be followed. The committee cannot disregard these. However, the individuals on the committee may choose to put less effort into advertising and encouraging nominations if the outcome is 'obvious', and the meeting to determine a recipient may be brief.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The vast majority of awards available to scientists are given out by scientific organizations. Eligibility is limited to dues-paying members of the organization, or a subset thereof. The award takes a small portion of the dues paid by members and returns them to a member.
Receiving the award is indicative of:
* willingness to pay dues to the organization
* popularity among a small number of organization's members who select the award recipient
A small minority awards available to scientists, like Nobel Prizes, do actually reflect major achievements. They are not self-nominated. In most cases, a scientist's achievements are recognized by publication in an important journal and the award of grants. These are "self nominated" in the sense that the scientist submits them to journals and funding agencies.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Perelman#Fields_Medal_and_Millennium_Prize) solved the Poincaré conjecture and for this a committee voted to award him a Fields Medal but he turned it down. Since that was also a Millenium Prize problem, he was offered that award as well but similarly turned that down. So in a sense, his work spoke for itself but he just chose not to accepted the awards.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/12/24
| 939
| 3,638
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote to a professor whose area of specialization aligns with mine in pure math and I wanted to discuss the possibility of a PhD.
I got the following reply:
>
> Dear X
>
>
> thanks for your message and interest. We can in principle discuss the
> possibility of a PhD with me, but I should warn you that it's unlikely
> to work out in the end - first of all, most likely I won't accept any
> new PhD students for the next year.
>
>
> If you nevertheless want me to consider accepting you, please send me
> your Master's thesis and ask at least one of your recommenders to
> directly email their recommendation letter to me.
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> XX
>
>
>
Should I discuss the possibility further? On the one hand, the professor says that it is unlikely to work out in the end and on the other he says that if I still want him to consider accepting me, I should send my masters thesis and recommendation letter. I am confused and I would like to know what exactly I should do.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is pretty clear, actually. If there is some special reason that you want to work with this particular person, then do as they ask. But don't put much hope into a successful outcome.
If your letter writer has some standing in that research community and can boost you enough then it might work out.
Beware that they might be so busy that even if you do get in the door there might be little help with your research if they are very busy. OTOH, note that they seem willing to give your thesis a look (or have someone close to them to do so), so they offer to put some effort into evaluating your potential.
Don't give up other opportunities as this one is a long shot.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If I'd written this I can tell you what I was thinking.
>
> I want to warn you that there is little chance of working for me, but at the same time I don't want to send you a short form rejection for several reasons:
>
>
> * maybe you can benefit from some mentoring; if I find your background and qualities promising, maybe I can encourage you or give advice.
> * maybe I have other colleagues here or elsewhere to whom I can pass along your information.
> * maybe I can help in some other as-yet unknown way.
> * maybe I have a policy of always rejecting everyone and waiting to see which people have that extra "push" or won't take no for an answer, or who can't be easily discouraged. See [this answer to *My advisor wants me to quit the program. What should I do?*](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/178997/69206).
>
>
> But I would not want to offer such things with any indication that this could lead to a job with me.
>
>
> There is a very small possibility that something *might* work out with me, perhaps I can apply for extra money, perhaps you are so exceptional that I can figure out a way to fit you in. But right now I don't want to give you any indication of those remote possibilities.
>
>
>
---
I'm purely speculating, but if you think a discussion or at least some further interaction *has the potential* of being beneficial and it doesn't require an unacceptable investment of time or travel and you can take a second "no" after the first one, then this *might be* worth pursuing.
In principle it's almost always of some benefit to talk to anyone who's willing to talk, as long as you are prepared and careful and as long as there aren't any known downsides to it.
Academic careers take totally unpredictable turns often based on who you meet and with whom things might "click" either immediately, or years later.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2021/12/24
| 238
| 1,106
|
<issue_start>username_0: I attempted to reach the corresponding author, for an article I had questions about, but her university e-mail was seemingly disabled because she left academia.
Learning that she started to work at a corporate job, I looked for alternative sources of communication such as business e-mail, which I failed to find as well.
In this scenario, is it acceptable to contact the secondary author since I really have no way contacting the author listed as corresponding author?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can do that. I see no problem. You might explain that you also tried to reach the corresponding author unsuccessfully.
It is unlikely that the volume of such email will be a burden. And, they might just give you contact information for their colleague the corresponding author.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: All authors are responsible for the contents of the paper. So the corresponding author is only listed to facilitate orderly and consistent responses to any queries. But each of the authors needs to respond to good-faith queries.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/24
| 533
| 2,186
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote to 6 professors whose research aligns with my interests (all in Europe) on December 21 for disussing PhD opportunities and attached my CV along with the mail. One of the professors replied after 3 hours that he doesn't have an opening. The rest have yet to reply. I came to know that it is also holiday season in Europe. I am from Asia.
How long should I wait before sending a reminder E-mail given that it is holidays there?
In general, how much time it takes a professor to reply to an e-mail of a potential PhD candidate?<issue_comment>username_1: At the holiday season, wait many days. Send a follow up after the first of the year, perhaps. A mail sent at the start of the holiday season might actually get "lost" if they get a lot of mail.
Note that a very short reply ("Nope, sorry") is likely to come quickly, but one requiring thought will take longer, especially with end of term running in to holidays. In lab situations, a professor might even need to consult with some folks about current needs and openings. That takes time.
Unless there is a serious deadline, give it some time and pursue those options where you have some information.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You can go search for their university calendar to get a better idea when it's a good time to prompt. The universities I have ever been a student / worked for all put their calendars online.
If the calendar cannot be found, maybe prompt them on the 10th? Meanwhile you can spend your time bugging those folks in countries that don't do Christmas, but still make sure you avoid Christmas Day and New Year Eve / New Year.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This close to the holidays, your email may get overlooked. Definitely follow up in the new year, as I suspect many will not respond before then. Outside of holidays, professors are generally very busy and need/welcome email reminders. If you really want to work with them, follow up a few times. However, six professors is a lot, so make sure your messages are tailored to them and their interests and not boiler plate -- otherwise they will be much less likely to respond.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2021/12/24
| 941
| 4,183
|
<issue_start>username_0: As Chief Editor, Associate Editor, or Handling Editor of scholarly manuscripts, mainly but not solely focusing on cardiovascular disease), I have often the last say on which potential reviewers to invite.
I am becoming more and more conscious of the need to support female authors, and I am not sure whether just picking peer reviewers based on expertise, past review quality, and willingness to support the journal is enough.
Indeed, I believe that manuscripts which can be easily identified as led by female authors (eg because of a woman being 1st author, senior author, and/or corresponding author), should be sent out for peer review mainly to female peer reviewers.
Is this reasonable? Is there any evidence in favor or against this approach?<issue_comment>username_1: No, that would be ridiculous as well as wrong. Is there "female science" and "male science" and never the twain shall meet? Would you only select male reviewers for "male authored" papers? Black for black? Handicapped for handicapped?
If you think there is bias in reviews then you might consider double blind reviewing.
And, you should probably do some things to increase the number of female (and minority...) reviewers and get them involved in papers, but not by matching in some way.
And, it is also possible that you could be considered insulting if women, say, think you are selecting them *only* for the papers of women, and that they aren't in some way *worthy* to review the papers of men. Backfiring.
Select reviewers on skill and experience. Seek to have a wide range of experience and viewpoint. Ignore extraneous factors.
---
Caveat. In some scientific studies the population considered for sampling is not indicative of the whole population. This is a special problem in medicine if some sub-populations with special characteristics are excluded either intentionally or otherwise. That problem needs to be solved, but not like you suggest. Nor do you even give this as a reason.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There is evidence that female academics do more service work than male academics. If you select certain manuscripts and only ask female academics to review them, you will be increasing the amount of unrewarded service work performed by female academics. This seems likely to make it harder for female academics to succeed in their careers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are concerned about a bias from reviewers related to the gender (or any other issue), as an editor, why not rather push instead for a double-blind review process? That way, you kill biased reviews at the root by making it impossible to know which gender the authors of a paper actually have.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This sounds like a great scheme to undermine the credibility of papers authored by women, which if your policy suggestion is implemented, will now be seen as not carrying the stamp of legitimacy of having been reviewed by reviewers picked “just based on expertise and past review quality”.
In other words, this is the exact opposite of “supporting female authors”.
Of course, “past review quality” could legitimately include any knowledge you have of a specific reviewer (male or female) being biased against female authors. In such a case, it seems reasonable to avoid such a reviewer even if they are an expert in the subject matter of the paper, just like you would avoid them if they previously did a sloppy job, were bad at meeting deadlines or have any number of other issues that hurt the scientific mission of your journal. But avoiding male reviewers for female authored papers as a matter of policy does not support either female authors or science.
Also, as others have noted, to the extent that it’s possible to eliminate gender or other identity attributes as a factor from reviewing altogether through adoption of a double blind reviewing policy, this seems like an excellent device to eliminate bias. In the analogous setting of orchestra auditions, such policies [have been credited](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_audition) with a significant increase in female representation in orchestras.
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/12/25
| 385
| 1,615
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a polymer chemist doing a postdoc. I would like to pursue my career as a researcher. However, I have only 5 publications (all first author) 3.5 years after my PhD graduation. 2 more should be submitted within 6 months.
Will it be possible to continue my career as a research scientist?<issue_comment>username_1: A couple of peer reviewed articles per year sounds a respectable record. Why doubt yourself? Equally, why assume anyone can predict your future on so little information? What interests you? What path do you wish to pursue? What makes your work important? Are you a good person to have in a team? Do you need support from others or do you give support to others? Does academic prestige matter more to you than money? All these questions, and more, need answering before anyone can see or assess you properly.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I know nothing about your field, nor the general expectations there, but you've clearly been active. "Only 5" may be an overly pessimistic view.
The way to know whether you are employable either in academia or industry is to apply to a few places. Don't wait until your postdoc ends, though. And gather colleagues willing to support any applications.
If your field requires extensive lab equipment in order to do research, then you might be limited in the places that you can work, unless you have a way to fund that equipment through grants and such. So, you might also think about how you should go about that. Bringing a grant with you to a new job is definitely a plus in the hiring process for most purposes.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/25
| 373
| 1,659
|
<issue_start>username_0: I took an online exam a month ago and ran into some technical issues which caused me to do it on another device. I realize now that this can be seen as academic misconduct since it shows me leaving the test page quite a few times near the end and going on the LMS. A month has already passed after the exam and my final grade is out. Should I still contact the instructor in the circumstance that they look back on completed courses to spot for signs of cheating, or is this just overthinking on my end? This has been on my mind a lot and I would like some advice as to whether I am overthinking this one issue. I’ve been reading about Some people getting accused months later have been giving me anxiety since I do not want to be falsely accused, and I would like to know how often this happens and whether I should reach out to the prof, or is this unnecessary for my case since all I struggled with were technical problems.<issue_comment>username_1: Teachers usually understand that technical issues come up, and yours probably already saw what happened and figured that it wasn’t a big deal. Especially if your test wasn’t proctored or recorded I would think that leaving the test browser is one of the lesser signs of cheating they would be looking for.
As for people being accused months after finishing their class, I’ve personally never heard of it and would imagine that your justification will be just as reasonable if you do end up in such a situation sometime down the line.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that you have nothing to worry about, just make sure you inform them of so just in case.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/12/25
| 910
| 3,861
|
<issue_start>username_0: My understanding is that while a traditional publisher invests its own resources to market and publish a book with the hope of getting enough revenue to cover their costs, vanity publishers charge the author a fee and then the author takes the risk. With the latter, this allows for less regulation in what exactly is being published.
Now I’m sure that, for textbooks covering (reasonably) broad topics, traditional presses exist along side vanity presses.
I also am aware that out there exist some incredibly niche ‘textbooks’ (some might be a bit thinner than a stereotypical textbook due to their niche-ness but fill the same purpose) over a variety of hyper specialized topics in various fields.
For these hyper niche textbooks (let’s say something you wouldn’t read unless you had a graduate level background), the target audience is incredibly small, so are there traditional presses for these kinds of textbooks?
Surely sales on the textbook will be small since the target audience is so small, which means less of an incentive for a traditional press because of less sales. If they don’t use traditional presses, does this force authors for these kinds of textbooks to use vanity presses or is there some kind of special type of press that deals in these? Or do most use self-publishing?<issue_comment>username_1: Traditional publishers definitely publish this kind of book. They're known as "[monographs](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monograph)".
[Here's](https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/series/5064) an example of a monograph series published by Wiley.
>
> Surely sales on the textbook will be small since the target audience is so small, which means less of an incentive for a traditional press because of less sales.
>
>
>
Yes - these books usually sell a couple of hundred copies at best. It's also why they are so expensive. Even then there's not much profit per monograph. That's partly why publishers are constantly looking for new projects.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Publishers like Springer, Elsevier, Wiley, <NAME>, Cambridge University Press, etc. do publish graduate level textbooks. Sales for these books are typically a few thousand copies rather than hundreds of copies.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Contrary to the assumption in the question and other answers so far, highly specialized academic books are not bought and sold individually. While they are often advertised individually for sale at high prices to the public, that is not how the business works.
In reality, libraries of wealthy universities purchase academic books in bulk at a discount. Academic book publishers sell a certain quantity of books in bulk, and then they find enough book authors to fulfill their sales contracts. The librarian who purchases the books in bulk relies on the publisher's editor to select the books. The librarian does not buy self-published books or books from vanity presses because they only buy in bulk from familiar publishers.
The number of libraries making bulk purchases of books matters. That number is declining. The number of people who want to read an individual book does not, because the buyers are not selecting books one at a time.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The answers given are correct. There is a lot more to be said about the topic from both historical and economical perspectives, but let me just highlight one point, which is that traditionally, putting out world quality monographs adds to the academic range of a publisher, which adds to its prestige, even if not a lot of money is made.
If you can only find a vanity publisher for your work, chances just might be that it is not world class, but I do not mean to presume or offend.
It is true that vanity-published work is generally viewed as worthless.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/26
| 984
| 4,292
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been admitted to a **PhD in Curriculum and Instruction** program in the USA. However, both my supervisor's research interest and mine are Education Policy. I also want to work in the field of **Education Policy** after graduation. So, are there any big problems when my program is named Curriculum and Instruction? If yes, how should I do to focus on the Education Policy topic when pursuing that program?
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: I have no insight into this degree but my experience is that it does not matter. People will care about what you do and what you have done, not what it’s called.
In addition, there is now a (deplorable IMO) trend to come up with fancy degree names so that graduates of this or that program are differentiated, perhaps giving them an edge in some *hypothetical* situations: gone are the days of plain old vanilla physics degrees. As a result, there’s considerable public confusion into what a specific degree is. Thankfully, professionals are rarely fooled by this kind of masquerade, so it is highly likely that the actual name will have no impact except if you need to impress someone unfamiliar with your field.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect this may vary between fields, but in my personal experience, the name is completely irrelevant. For instance, my PhD is officially in "Life Sciences", a title as vague as it is meaningless. In reality, my general field is bioinformatics, and my PhD was focused on comparative genomics and evolution of a specific family of genes. In my CV, I say I have a PhD in bioinformatics, and that's how I present myself in real life if it comes up.
This is not lying, it is the honest truth: my PhD *is* in bioinformatics no matter what it may say on the official diploma. All of my published papers are about bioinformatics, that's what my PhD work was about, and my career has been spent working in this field. My classmates in the PhD program in Life Science I was enrolled in worked on a very wide variety of life science related fields, from molecular biology, through ecology, to bioinformatics. I doubt any of us would describe our PhD as being in Life Sciences, we would all give the specific field we were actually working in since that is what we really have expertise in.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In the short term it might matter somewhat, but in the long term you are in control.
To have a career in education policy you have to get hired, probably by some school of education or department of education within a school. For some places the specialties will be silo-ed to some (maybe a great) extent, and for those places your initial job would probably have expectations that you can produce in curriculum and instruction. If there are no silos, such as a general department of education, then you might just get hired to produce in education generally.
In the long term, however, if you can get tenured, then you can define pretty much what you do, especially in research, though you may be expected to teach courses outside your specialty, as most people must.
There are, I'm sure, plenty of places that don't have strict subfield silos. If your job search is focused there, then it might not matter at all, either short or long term.
I'm assuming that the general research *process* in the two fields is pretty much the same: gathering data and using statistics to analyze it. Something similar is likely required to produce good curriculum and to produce good policy. It would be harder if the process were very different, though still not entirely impossible. Math and history are pretty far apart in process for most things.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I would think carefully about this and talk to several people in your direct field (especially your letter writers, etc.). I think there are disciplines where the exact degree can matter as a signal when on the job market. The reality is that there are 100s of applicants for a position and it is best to come from a well known and clearly aligned program. I know folks who graduated with education policy dissertations in public policy programs and had a tricky time applying to education policy departments. There were just better aligned applicants.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/27
| 509
| 1,957
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to finish my Ph.D. at the ripe old age of 34. I plan to stay on and try to become a part of the faculty at a university. Considering the time it takes, not to mention the competition involved, to become an assistant professor and then get tenure to become an associate professor and then finally a professor. What are the problems one might face because of completing a Ph.D. at an age quite older than most other candidates?<issue_comment>username_1: Your chances of "rising to the highest ranks" of academia are small. But no different from anyone else, no matter their age at completion of a doctorate. The bar is the difficulty of doing good, publishable, recognized research. True research is delving into the unknown. And it is, well, ... unknown.
Additionally, at the moment, the job market is tight and you need to get in the door. But once inside it is up to what you can accomplish, in your thirties or .... seventies (more).
Additionally there is a worldwide pandemic that you need to avoid if you are to have the time to progress. Plus all the other issues that might wind up resulting in your early demise (too many guns everywhere in US...).
But note that none of that has anything to do with age.
Get hired. Do good work. Stay healthy. Make a lot of friends. Work with your colleagues. Hope for some breakthrough. If it comes, it comes. If not, live a good life anyway.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: *Is it practically possible to rise to the highest ranks of academia in STEM in the US system after finishing a PhD at 34?*
**Definitely!**
If you mean ``highest rank'' as in Full Professor, it is definitely possible, and 34 for PhD is not late at all. I agree with username_1's answer, only that I would add that in my experience there are **many** full professors who got their PhD at the age of ~35, and many in elite US universities. So 34 is not even exceptional in this case.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/27
| 354
| 1,421
|
<issue_start>username_0: I hear this phrase time and time again, mostly from very senior professors:
>
> "Do you know the new book by [person]."
>
> "Yes. He was a student of [famous guy]".
>
>
>
Before anyone asks, it's mostly male individuals in the discussion.
What is the social function of that phrase? That phrase gets mentioned almost immediately and unprompted. I guess it shows the importance of academic pedigree.<issue_comment>username_1: It means "What a stroke of luck: I've thought of something vaguely apposite to say! I'd better say it quick before I get a reputation as the uncommunicative, socially awkward one."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There is sometimes some information communicated by this.
A scholar's research interests and general approach to the topics they work on can be quite difficult to describe succinctly. If it's possible to relate them to the interests and approach of some well-known scholar, this would be a good way to communicate this information briefly.
If the author is a relatively junior scholar likely still to share interests and approach with their advisor, this is useful. This frequently happens in fields where research is frequently communicated by books, where it's common for a person's PhD dissertation to be revised and published as a monograph. If the author is a more senior scholar, the other answer applies.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2021/12/27
| 652
| 2,894
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am very interested in **artificial intelligence** and its relation with pure mathematics topics such as differential geometry, topology, algebraic topology, analysis, probability, etc. I am finishing my undergraduate degree in mathematics and I also have an engineering degree. I don't know whether to apply for a PhD in applied mathematics or computer science given my research interests (AI, Computer vision, ML). Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: Find research papers that do the sort of work you hope to do in grad school. Then check the departments of both the PhD students and faculty members in these papers. These are the departments you should be applying to. At some universities, these may be CS departments, while at others these may be math departments. Equally importantly, perhaps more importantly, these faculty members are potential PhD supervisors. It's the advisor that matters more than the department, even though admissions criteria is determined on a per-department level.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This may only be valid in US. And, without knowing more about your background it is hard to give good advice. So, it is a bit tentative.
But first, note that pure math, which you have been studying, is very different from both applied math and CS. Different in the questions asked and the methodology for answering them.
I think that an applied math program is probably the least valuable if you want to study AI, which is normally a CS field. And you need to learn about methodology in CS. And, unless you are very careful in selecting an applied math department, you might find it hard to find people who know much about CS and, especially, AI. They exist, I'm sure, but you need a good search.
I'd guess, with the little information given, that the best bet is a program in CS at a place with a strong focus on AI. If you can bring other ideas, concepts, and tools to the study of that you will do ok. Your main techniques and processes and would be those of CS, but knowing math would be a plus. The other way round, studying math and trying to apply it to a specialized field like AI seems much harder.
But, one reason for suggesting that this may only apply in US is that comprehensive exams tend to be very important here and you need to pass those before the dissertation work gets totally serious. Advisors want to know that you have a clear shot to the end and that only happens when exams are behind you. If you are at a place where such exams are required then passing them will assure you have the background for serious research in that field.
There may still be some departments in which both CS and math are taught and if you can find one then there may be people there who have a lot of experience in both fields. I think that is disappearing, but would have been viable a couple of decades ago.
Upvotes: 3
|
2021/12/27
| 1,658
| 7,279
|
<issue_start>username_0: Textbooks are expensive. If I want to buy one, I want to make sure that the content will be worth it. The sample chapters on Amazon might not be enough to make a careful evaluation. Some websites offer pirated copies of textbooks for download. Is it unethical to use such services just to evaluate the contents of a textbook, and then buy an original copy if the content is deemed worthy (and of course, deleting the pirated copy after evaluation)?<issue_comment>username_1: Lots of nuance required here and these sorts of questions are triggering for some. What you suggest is possibly a violation of copyright law in the technical sense, but, assuming you delete the downloaded copy after a *reasonable* period it isn't likely unethical. Or not seriously so. Note that law and ethics don't always conform perfectly.
After all, for a physical textbook you can browse it in the bookstore or library. You can also purchase it online and return it (soon) if it isn't suitable. Both of those have the same overall effect as what you suggest and neither is unethical.
There are some, I'm sure that will disagree with me in both directions, either seeing it as inherently unethical or not having any problem at all with pirated content.
Another ethical consideration, however, is whether such a practice *supports* piracy in some way. Likely not here, but something to consider generally.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a tough question. I'm not sure. I think there are some clear-cut subcases:
1. If you intend to pirate it but then find it on, say, amazon's "look inside" feature, review it there, and decide based on that - no, that's fully ethical. The author (or publisher or other designated person) intended you to have access to this material for the purpose of making a purchase decision, and that's exactly what you did. Whether or not you intended to commit an unethical act, something (outside of your will) affected you and led you to a different course of action fully in line with your obligations towards the creators and purveyors of the content.
2. If you download it off some sketchy website, start reading it, and decide against buying it but end up reading the entire thing anyway "while you're at it" and get the same impact you would have from a purchase, then, no, that's not ethical. Similarly, if you decide not to buy it but keep it and reference it later anyway, it's unethical. Other people have created something for the purpose of providing it to people like you for compensation, and you have both made use of their product in the fashion intended and have deprived them of said compensation, which is in violation of the social contract we have: that wasn't your material to use in that way.
Of course most situations would lie in the middle. I think we can ask a few more questions about the details:
**Have you fulfilled your obligations to the author?** Ie, did the author receive compensation from your activity, whether directly or from a friend's or library's purchase?
**Have you fulfilled your obligations towards the publishing system and therefore towards all those who rely upon it for access to material?** Whether or not publishers are sometimes or always evil, there's very real value in the work they do, from basic copy-editing to content revision to the kind of marketing and curation which connect you to the books you may actually be interested in and insulate you from the chaff. Are your actions consistent with the publishing community's continued health? From a Kantian point of view, if everyone acted as you do, would you all still be able to read good books?
**Did the author or other responsible persons intend you to have access to the book in this fashion?** There's some level of expected access here; are you "pirating" in name only because the laws haven't caught up to the times to cover the kind of e-purchasing you do, or are you doing something that a reasonable author or publisher would feel is inappropriate? In the physical world, would you be picking up a book at a bookstore and flipping through it, or would you be sneaking it out the door under your coat?
Assuming no further more complicating details, it sounds like you're quickly reviewing the materials for the purpose of purchase, so you're probably clear on the last question, and that you do often purchase books, so you're probably clear on the first few. Of course there are still some interesting questions here... Are you purchasing books from publishers which treat their authors appropriately and provide them appropriate compensation? Does your use of "pirating" mean that you're in violation of enough laws that you're contributing to a general disregard for law in your society, and does that in itself have a deleterious effect on the health of your community by encouraging others to disregard laws which may be more essential?
What an interesting question! Thanks for starting this conversation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Hmm, interesting and nonobvious question. I’d say it’s mostly ethical.
My reasoning is as follows: if the publisher’s business model relies on a significant number of sales of their textbooks going to readers who buy the book but end up disappointed that it didn’t fit their needs and wishing they could undo the purchase, then that business model is itself somewhat unethical. Your evaluate-before-you-buy strategy simply neutralizes the harmful effects of such a business practice, and therefore increases the pressure on publishers to offer high quality products and better (legal) pre-purchase evaluation options for their potential customers. The only legal right you’ve taken away from someone is the publisher’s right to dupe you into buying a product you don’t need. While they may have that right legally, I don’t think they have it as an *ethical* right.
Now, there are also several arguments going the other way, which is why I said it’s *mostly* ethical. For example, violating copyright law encourages disrespect for the law in general, which makes our society less law-abiding and can therefore be seen as unethical in a way. (And one can again counter that by saying that it’s really lawmakers who pass unjust laws that lead people to disrespect the law in such a way, so it’s them who are acting unethically. And then one can further put the blame on the voters who elected the lawmakers. This sort of logic is a bottomless pit…)
Maybe the most compelling argument against your proposed strategy is that it creates a considerable temptation to conveniently “change your mind” after you downloaded the pirated copy or end up “forgetting” to purchase the legal copy, after you skimmed enough material from the downloaded copy during your “evaluation” to gain some particular knowledge you were after. Basically humans have a strong tendency to rationalize much of what they’re doing as ethical even when that’s not unequivocally the case, so that’s a pitfall to be mindful of. But if you are a person of strong enough character and moral fiber to resist such temptations, then we go back to my original conclusion that your evaluation method, if implemented faithfully and literally as you described it, seems mostly ethical.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/28
| 618
| 2,662
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work in bioinformatics (almost no lab work) in Europe. I have been offered a Postdoc position in California and just found out that I am pregnant. What should I do? Should I disclose my pregnancy this early considering that I don't even have a second heartbeat yet and miss the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity? Or go ahead with the job? will it give me problems during delivery and in the foreseeable future?<issue_comment>username_1: Since you really need some advice on this, let me jump in. The comments are all worth considering but don't answer the question.
Yes, in the US, medical care is good, but financing for it is poor. Very poor compared with some parts of Europe. University employment normally comes with medical insurance that is "fine" by US standards, but maybe not by European standards. The numbers are shocking for unexpected medical expenses. Unrelated to reality, in some sense.
Parental leave is poorly supported here, though California is one of the better parts of the US for such things.
I don't think (but don't know) that there is anything in the law that requires you to disclose a pregnancy, but nothing that forbids it either. I doubt (but don't know) that an offer could be withdrawn if you reveal a pregnancy. I certainly hope we are beyond that, and California is one of the better places for such safeguards.
Let me suggest that you at least consider talking this over with the PI and get their advice on what is best and what your options are. In particular, it might be an option to delay the postdoc for a year. You might also be able to get, from the right PI, assurance that they will do "whatever it takes" to make it work out. Not everyone will be as accommodating, so there is some risk, but you need information as much as anything and they might be a good source of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, I would recommend checking what the local law says about informing an employer about the pregnancy. Second, it is a good idea to check with the HR of the university what benefits you are allowed to receive while on the specific postdoc contract. When you have all this information, you can think about the options which would fit your family best: either take the job or maybe it just would not be possible to financially support this.
In general, my advice is to think about yourself, first of all. Explore, plan and decide. If you decide that you can make and accept the offer, don't worry about disclosing this information asap. It's your private matter. You can inform your PI either when the law requires or earlier if you feel it like that.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/12/28
| 849
| 3,919
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am asking in regards to the European Union ERC grants but this could apply to **any grant application with no set guidelines for references formatting**.
The ERC guideline states:
"*Please use a reference style that is commonly used in your discipline such as American Chemical Society (ACS) style, American Medical Association (AMA) style, Modern Language Association (MLA) style, etc. and that allows the evaluators to easily retrieve each reference*"
Two of these are numeric the third is the author name (Smith et al. 2020). Personally I don't think the numeric citation style allows for "easily retrieve" because it requires to go back and forth between text and references. In my discipline there is no commonly used style, but I have seen often the numeric style used to save space in grant applications.
**Do grant reviewers prefer name style citations? Will they get annoyed by the numeric style or should I assume that everybody uses them so there will be no penalty for using it?**<issue_comment>username_1: Note that grants are typically reviewed by subject experts just as journal papers are. The reviewers aren't likely employees of the funding agency, but outside experts.
So, the "easily review" statement means that the likely reviewers should find the references to be just as those otherwise used in that particular field. What you think of as easy and what a reviewer will be familiar and comfortable with might not be well aligned.
It isn't a prejudice for one over the other by the agency, but an attempt to ease the work of reviewers who may "expect" things to be familiar. Follow the advice.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I am pretty sure that virtually no grant reviewer bases her/his assessment on the citation style you use as long as it is consistent throughout the document, includes all necessary information and is common enough in your field. A numbered citation style makes it easy enough to find the sources. This is more a question of personal preferences.
You might rather consider to include something like titles or DOIs into the references which can be used directly in a web search if you want to optimize the accessability aspect.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I have reviewed for ERC (and for other funding bodies).
Your choice of referencing style is very unlikely to make any difference to the evaluation of your proposal, considered on its own. But although this is a minor style point, it may be correlated with other presentational factors that reviewers will notice -
* Style which is not conventional for your discipline may give the impression that you are not conversant with the field.
* Unclear presentation will make it harder for readers to understand what you are proposing.
The material supplied to ERC reviewers gives quite close guidance about what reviews can say, as well as specific prompts that are vital to the success of the application (e.g. "does the proposed research address important challenges?"). Citation style, or style in general, is not asked about.
But I would say it does have an effect on the state of mind of a reviewer - imagine especially somebody who is short of time and trying to finish their work before the deadline. If it is easy for them to read and digest the proposal, then they will be more able to identify positive features within it and write a good summary. If they have to do more work to figure out what your idea is all about, then you may find that reviews miss (what you considered to be) the point, and come out less favorable in the end. So it is a good idea to give reviewers something in the format they expect, and where the writing is as clear as possible.
If your area really has no firm preference, then I would say to use your best judgement, don't overthink it, and use the rest of your thinking time on polishing the proposal content itself.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/28
| 530
| 2,360
|
<issue_start>username_0: My manuscript has been in review for several months. I would like it to be published soon because it is supposed to be part of my thesis. I have already contacted the editor and was told that they are having trouble finding reviewers. At the same time, there is another journal within the publisher, even more relevant to my manuscript, in which, from what I noticed, the review time is much shorter (probably they have a larger base of reviewers). Am I allowed to ask the editor to transfer my manuscript to this other journal in order to speed up the review process?<issue_comment>username_1: You can ask, but generally speaking you can ask anything. But an alternative would be to suggest reviewers to them. That is also normally acceptable and common practice for some journals.
If you ask for a transfer you might phrase it as a question rather than a request: "Would it make sense to transfer the paper to X, and is that even possible?"
And note that starting over with another journal might not actually speed it up, since it will be starting over.
But, talk this over with your advisor, who might, among other things, provide suggestions for reviewers as well as general advice.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't do that at all. Firstly, I think there's a small chance you'd be burning bridges with the editor and that journal, and secondly because reviews take time and you probably have little real reason to *really* need your thesis published quickly.
Lastly, if you really wanted to move your manuscript to another journal, the right way to do it is to contact the current editor to withdraw your submission, and simply resubmit to the other journal. There's zero reason to ask for a transfer. There is no set work flow for that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If the other journal is published by the same publisher, there's a high chance that the two journals use the same editorial management system (EMS), and furthermore the EMS might even already be configured to facilitate easy transfers between the journals.
So yes, you can ask, and the editor might even be able to do the transfer for you (or if they can't, the publisher can operate the EMS for them). I wouldn't mention review times though, just say the other journal is more suited and you would like to transfer there.
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/12/28
| 859
| 3,710
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question applies to both data set I generated from my own research and public data set I reproduce in teaching.
Suppose in a data intensive course, I used a publicly available data set as an example (with proper citation), and, for purely non-scientific reasons (e.g. to avoid a politically sensitive issue), I removed a variable (among many variables) from the data set. The modified copy is stored in the course management system with no explanation given as to why a variable was removed. The removal of the variable is obvious --- anyone who actually looked at the data would notice.
Strictly speaking, a data set is not faithfully reproduced. Of course, if I simply select a handful of variables that are interesting and discarded the rest, and I explained why I do that, that would certainly *not* be a misconduct. But I am now less certain if *all* but one variable are reproduced and no explanation is given. (Of course, no good explanation exist)
In this context, is the removal of a variable from public data set a misconduct?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it would only be misconduct if you tried to publish the revised data without comment and without permission. And, citation is needed, of course.
But, for purposes of teaching it is good to let the students know the original source, but sufficient to label the revision as "extracted from ..." or "revised from ...", or similar.
Some data sets can actually be artificially constructed so as to make certain insights possible and easier to gain than they would be from a more "messy" version. It depends on the goals. At some point students need to be able to deal with the world as it is, but not necessarily from the very start.
So, point to the original, and label the revision as such. Don't publish the revision outside the student's view without some form of permission.
But even in research, it is allowed to ignore certain variables if they aren't germaine to the current needs.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No. It would be inaccurate to describe it as the same data set, either explicitly or implicitly.
I have taken the same putative data set from two different archival sources and found that the data sets were different. The difference was that a small number of variables were recoded as missing in one of the two data sets. There was no documentation of the difference except in the data itself. There was no explanation of why this was done.
I thought it would be more responsible to give some description of changes that were made by one of the archives.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you changed the dataset in any way, you should at the very least mention that you did so. And you should make sure that you are complying with the terms of any legal license under which the dataset is made public.
I don’t think you have an ethical duty to explain *why* you removed the variable, assuming it’s for a good faith, ethical reason. (E.g., an *unethical* reason would be if your intention is to mislead people into an inaccurate interpretation of what the data means.) Wanting to avoid a politically charged subject doesn’t strike me as an unethical reason, at least for the kinds of politically charged subjects I am able to imagine.
Is it misconduct if you didn’t state that you changed the dataset, and/or didn’t comply with the legal license? I don’t think so, not unless you acted out of malice or an unethical motivation, which it sounds like you didn’t. It wouldn’t be an ideal practice and would mean you made a small mistake, but not any small mistake that anyone makes is misconduct. Correct the mistake if you can, and move on.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/28
| 780
| 3,362
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently received comments from the reviewers on my research paper. In my paper I look at the impact of X on Y and find that X negatively affects Y. One reviewer has commented that while my findings are interesting, they are uncomfortable with the idea because of existing literature that has found Y negatively affects X. In my literature review I have briefly discussed the literature on Y->X before moving on to the literature on X->Y (which is my focus). However, I am unable to understand how to respond to their comment that they are uncomfortable with my finding as a strand of literature has discussed a contrasting position.
Would appreciate any help. I'm in Economics, if it matters.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it would only be misconduct if you tried to publish the revised data without comment and without permission. And, citation is needed, of course.
But, for purposes of teaching it is good to let the students know the original source, but sufficient to label the revision as "extracted from ..." or "revised from ...", or similar.
Some data sets can actually be artificially constructed so as to make certain insights possible and easier to gain than they would be from a more "messy" version. It depends on the goals. At some point students need to be able to deal with the world as it is, but not necessarily from the very start.
So, point to the original, and label the revision as such. Don't publish the revision outside the student's view without some form of permission.
But even in research, it is allowed to ignore certain variables if they aren't germaine to the current needs.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No. It would be inaccurate to describe it as the same data set, either explicitly or implicitly.
I have taken the same putative data set from two different archival sources and found that the data sets were different. The difference was that a small number of variables were recoded as missing in one of the two data sets. There was no documentation of the difference except in the data itself. There was no explanation of why this was done.
I thought it would be more responsible to give some description of changes that were made by one of the archives.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you changed the dataset in any way, you should at the very least mention that you did so. And you should make sure that you are complying with the terms of any legal license under which the dataset is made public.
I don’t think you have an ethical duty to explain *why* you removed the variable, assuming it’s for a good faith, ethical reason. (E.g., an *unethical* reason would be if your intention is to mislead people into an inaccurate interpretation of what the data means.) Wanting to avoid a politically charged subject doesn’t strike me as an unethical reason, at least for the kinds of politically charged subjects I am able to imagine.
Is it misconduct if you didn’t state that you changed the dataset, and/or didn’t comply with the legal license? I don’t think so, not unless you acted out of malice or an unethical motivation, which it sounds like you didn’t. It wouldn’t be an ideal practice and would mean you made a small mistake, but not any small mistake that anyone makes is misconduct. Correct the mistake if you can, and move on.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/28
| 572
| 2,639
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a final exam of mathematical statistics, a set of required statistical tables are allowed to be used. As a junior instructor of Mathematical Statistics, I want to know whether I can provide a sheet of some useful but huge formulae in the final exam. For instance, in the case of interval estimation there are some intervals for estimating difference between means,then can I provide them in final exam?<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing wrong with that in principle, but you need to discuss it first with the department head, especially since you hold a junior position. A tenured professor wouldn't need to clear it first, but you should.
An alternative, however, is to let students bring one sheet of paper, of a size you specify, on which they can write anything they like. Both sides. It might be as small as an index card. If you do that, you can initial them yourself so that students don't try to bring multiple sheets and switch them.
The advantage of this suggestion is that when the students provide their own "cheat sheets" they will have done some active learning to prepare them. The very preparation might make them redundant.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Over the years, my philosophy on exams has changed substantially and yours will probably too. My take on it is that I want to see student *understanding*, not *doing* or *memorization*. As a consequence, I no longer see value in students trying to remember complicated formulas (or indeed *applying* complicated formulas), and as a consequence my exam question sheets have often gotten quite long because they contain all of the relevant formulas as part of the question. Instead, they ask students to outline to me how a proof could work, or how one would decide between using formula (A) or (B) to assess whether a data set supports a hypothesis or not. This perspective is mostly driven by realizing that I want my students to be able to apply what they learned in the real world, where they can always look up the exact details of a formula, but where knowledge is pointless if there is no corresponding *understanding*. So I test understanding, not knowledge.
Applied to your situation, the question you should then ask yourself is not "is it *acceptable* to provide students with a collection of formulas?", but instead "what is it that I want my students to demonstrate?", and if you know what that is, you can ask yourself whether students need to *remember* formulas for that. If the remembering is not important to what you want students to demonstrate, then give them the formula.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2021/12/29
| 848
| 3,445
|
<issue_start>username_0: I spotted a 2019 paper which literally copy-pastes paragraphs from a 2011 paper and doesn't cite them. The author (who is different than the 2011 paper's) claims that as their own research paper. Should I report this to the journal?
The paper has six pages of copied content. Out of 46, 6 pages are complete copy-paste.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. Such a grave case of academic misconduct should have publicly visible consequences. Let the editor know; the journal should issue a retraction as the whole article can be deemed to be unreliable.
As retractions can take a long time, it would also be useful if you comment on the suspicion of plagiarism on [PubPeer](https://pubpeer.com/). (The authors could respond with a defense there if needed.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, draw it to relevant attention.
Not least because if its a mistake the authors should have a chance to fix it; if (more likely) it isn't then who knows what the implications will be, down the line, of dishonest papers. People could spend years of their life doing work, only to find its invalidated and wasted, because underlying material was unreliable. Or, you don't say what the field is, but real harm could arise in many cases. People getting hurt or at risk, due to faked or inappropriately copied material (do you know what a plagiatlrist - a dishonest academic writer -will do next?!). Businesses and products based on these in part,not knowing the authors are dishonest.
You may want to consider best ways to disclose - who to tell and how to best approach it. This falls under academic whistleblowing.
**But that's a different question.**
Should you make the publisher, or some other relevant academic/s aware, in some suitable way - absolutely. Even if at worst, its simply an anonymous post showing the 2 papers side by side so it's unmistakable, and a link sent to various places where it'll do good.
*(I don't necessarily know if that's the right way, but I use it to show that even if fearful of repercussions, there's a way. You need to ask how to disclose, too, but that as I said is a different question.....)*
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would also try to check if the 2 papers are both graduate student papers where the 2 authors were graduate students at the same time for the same advisor. There are some subjects where the first 6 pages is boilerplate as things are getting set up. If the advisor tells the 2nd student to copy the first 6 pages from the 1st student's paper, that is lazy but not exactly dishonest.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: In cases of academic misconduct where you are not personally involved, it's often better to go do something useful instead of filing complaints.
There's lots of plagiarized papers out there that nobody's going to read. Limit your complaints to academic misconduct that involves you personally or has importance to research or safety.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: As others suggest, I would report this, but - depending on the circumstances, and if you want to help the author save face somewhat, you might contact them first. You wouldn't ask "Have you plagiarized this section from that paper?" But rather "I've been reading your paper X and believe that sections Y might be a verbatim quote from paper Z. Is this correct?" ... then depending on their answer you'll know how to report this to the publisher.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/12/29
| 2,645
| 10,345
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the US, except for professional master's degrees like MSW, one can get a master's for free, in less time (and even get paid a stipend) by starting a PhD then dropping out.
(In my PhD, you could do this with nothing but one year of ordinary coursework and a single modern language test.)
And starting a PhD program gives you the option of continuing.
So, why does anyone pay for a master's degree in cases where they could instead pursue the above plan?<issue_comment>username_1: One possibility is that if you did want to do a PhD later on, you'll find it much harder to get back into a one if you dropped out of one already.
Also, I've found there are usually many more positions available for master's students than PhD students at a University. For a Masters's, space is usually limited by space in lecture halls, while PhD's are hard limited by the number of supervisors available. For master's projects, each supervisor can usually have several at the same time (in the same year), while for PhD's (depending on the field) supervisors may only take one (or a small number) students per year. Thus it would be easier to get into a (paid) master's as opposed to a PhD.
Finally its a bit of impolite move on the students behalf. Depending on how the funding is structured (for the supervisor) they may not be able to get a another student after you drop out, to "take over" the project. Thus they have wasted time on their project. Its also pretty impolite to the other students who could have taken your place and seen the PhD through to the end.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that there are a lot of factors.
One is that there are a lot of universities in the US that have masters programs, but no doctoral program. Some of their masters students just continue on from a bachelors at the same place.
A second factor is that there are more needs out there for education and "mad skilz" than you might expect. Programs in management, for example, are often taken by employed (night school masters) for advancement in their current job. Employers used to pay for this, but I think that is rare now. But an advance will come with better salary and more opportunities. I've seen the same to be true among software developers. They want to modernize their skills, but not do research. The masters may be tailored for these needs where doctoral study is not.
A third factor involves what a student's advisor will support. Some will recognize that a student isn't really suitable for a career in academia and will only write letters for masters level applications.
A fourth (probably minor) factor is that not all students understand that you don't need to get a masters first to join a doctoral program in the US and, perhaps surprisingly, no one tells them otherwise.
A fifth factor is that some people just have different goals than others and, while they want to learn more, don't really consider doctoral study and/or don't want to game the system in the way you suggest they can.
A sixth factor, of course, is that the standards and requirements for admission to doctoral study are pretty high and the competition is pretty fierce. Someone faking it will probably give of "tells" that can be caught during the process. If you don't express true commitment in you SoP then you are probably less likely get in.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the other answers:
* People pay for expensive masters degrees because they have been tricked by clever university marketing. This is the same as other expensive unnecessary purchases, like oversized, inefficient vehicles.
* Many people think you have to pay for a PhD.
Many masters programs exist only to generate revenue.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Consider the example of [Stanford](https://cs.stanford.edu/admissionz/ms-versus-phd). It is significantly easier to get into the MS program there than the Ph.D. program. So, if you can only get admitted to the MS program, and think it will help your career enough to be worth the money, then you might choose that route. I think companies will sometimes pay for all or part of a master's degree.
Other universities simply offer stipends and research positions based on qualifications, independently of whether the student intends to leave with a master's or stay for a Ph.D. And some universities will admit students to the Ph.D. program without promising funding. So it's not always a matter of "pay for a master's, get paid for a Ph.D."
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: *why does anyone pay for it* - because human behavior is rarely optimal. **The question is posed as a fantasy about a global optimum that barely amounts to a local one**. There are differences between programs, and what you see as "of course everyone should" is just an indication of limited experience, nothing more. There's no question here really. It's a ruse :)
One program I'm familiar with expects you to take the PhD qualifier in the first 2-3 semesters if you are on a funded PhD track. For an MSc student, it's basically unnecessary stress, unless they enjoy redundant examinations (how would that jive with the "let's optimize everything" worldview begged by the question?). 2nd failure and you're out, BTW, and you're then nominally barred from the same field of graduate study in that department - no matter whether it's masters, doctoral or post-doc.
Another program I'm familiar with has much more funding available for Master's students than for PhD students, and all good MSc students there are funded just fine.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: In many places you are not even allowed to start a PhD before you have finished a MSc.
There also are places where no one would actually pay to get either degree but where stipends or employment at the university would pay for the studies.
Well... unless you count "opportunity cost" as an actual cost.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: In India, PhD programs are extremely scarce, while Masters are offered at almost all universities of repute. Given that about 1/5th of all graduates in the world are in India, that might be a substantial influence.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: Just going to add another perspective here for people pursuing a masters degree while working. It may be more financially advantageous to pay for a Masters instead of quitting for a year to work on a PhD.
Just to give an example, let's say I'm offered a [$33k/yr](https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/phd-student-salary-SRCH_KO0,11.htm) stipend to pursue a PhD. One option would be to quit my job to get a PhD, but drop out after a year and get a new job with a [21.4% pay increase](https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2015/article/should-i-get-a-masters-degree.htm#:%7E:text=In%202013%2C%20the%20median%20annual,%2412%2C000%20a%20year%20wage%20premium.). Then let's say the cost of getting a Masters is [$66,340](https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-a-masters-degree). I would need to make more than $124,175/yr to be profitable staying with my company and doing a 2-year Masters program compared to taking your approach. There may not be many people this applies to, but there probably are some, especially if they can get lower tuition and/or can't get a good stipend for their PhD.
I will say that as an alternative approach, you may get the opportunity to do a PhD while you work as well, possibly as a collaboration project between your company and the collaborating university. If you do this though, I don't see a good reason to drop out early with your Masters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I just retired and started an MS program. Why didn't I apply to the Ph.D. program?
1. Admission to the local Ph.D. program is *highly* competitive. The MS program, not so much.
2. The requirements for the MS degree are not onerous, no prelims, no qualifiers, I only have to find one other referee besides my final project advisor, i.e. no putting together a thesis committee that may end up having to sit for 4-6 years.
3. I have enough savings that I can take care of tuition and living expenses without a strain. I've been a TA before. No thank you. I have other things I want to do with my time.
4. Because I'm funding myself, I can study whatever I can convince some faculty member to advise me on.
5. The program can be part time, so I can adjust my MS work load to accommodate my other post-retirement activities.
6. I'm not seeking to start a new career. I'm just exercising my curiosity in a more rigorous way than a self directed reading program.
There are a few other retirees in the program. I accept that we're a bit of an edge case. Most of the other students are already working at jobs they like and that are quite remunerative, mostly in engineering or software development. Taking a position as a funded Ph.D. student would require them to give up their well-paid job for a not so well paid TA or RA. If they really wanted a Ph.D. they could try to convince their companies to given them time and funding to work on their research project at the Ph.D. level. Certainly possible, but a much higher bar.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: For smarter peoples, getting into a PhD program with the intention to leave with a Master's degree (MPhil maybe?) is, simple put, not *profitable*. We're not even considering the fact that PhD positions are scarce and require *significant* devotion and perseverance to.
PhD programs usually spans across 5 years or more, and it's rare that you can "quit as Master" in the first two years. More likely, the options are "quit with nothing" and "struggle for another year". On the contrary, one can normally finish their courses and receive a Master's degree in less than two years, and you can start a good-paying job right away. The one-year difference can be much larger than you'd imagine. You can earn more than 3 years' worth of PhD stipend *plus* your Master's tuition. It's even worse if you failed to "quit as Master" in year 3 and have to struggle for longer, which further amplifies the difference from job-after-Master.
Not to mention that it's easier to hunt down a decent job right before you graduate as Master than when you're quitting a PhD program, and all the efforts to enroll in PhD when a Master is much simpler.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/29
| 934
| 4,175
|
<issue_start>username_0: As discussed previously, having applicants draft their own recommendation letters (or at least provide inputs) seems to be quite a common practice.
However, I have noticed that a few (American) universities require applicants to affirm that they "will not write any portion or have any involvement in [the] drafting, translating, or submission" of their letters.
What is the best way to handle this? In particular: if a professor requests a drafted letter, would it be proper for the student to provide the draft while indicating that the draft should not be used for schools with the above clause?<issue_comment>username_1: This seems to be more of an "aspiration" rather than a rule. There is no enforcement mechanism possible, since it is the professors that submit the letters that control the process. It is probably also counterproductive in the sense that the "top researchers" in the field who would produce the best reference letters are also likely to be the busiest and most likely to ask students for a draft of a letter, or at least a list of accomplishments that might be mentioned.
I can visualize a situation in which a student asks for a letter and the professor says "write a first draft" and the student then says, "but, but, but,..." and the professor says "Just. Do. It.".
I don't want to suggest ignoring such instructions, but other things should be balanced against it. I also don't want to suggest lying about it if asked.
And note that it is the professor who puts their own reputation on the line in any recommendation, no matter how it is created.
---
Students writing drafts, however, is a different issue than students directly submitting the letters. That can be enforced.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My advice would be, if at all possible, to **find another referee**.
The culture around writing references does indeed seem to vary somewhat, which is precisely **why** some institutions feel the need to specify a non-involvement clause. This suggests that the institutions in question feel it is important and are making a serious effort to avoid the potential for misunderstandings arising from “cultural differences”.
You say (in a comment to another answer) that “I did not see the non-involvement statement until final review”, but I would be very surprised if the institution’s website had not articulated these expectations around references on the “information for applicants” pages somewhere. So, it is probably **your** fault.
Another answer suggests that you can probably get away with the candidate-drafted reference, but keep in mind that you would be telling a direct lie on a formal application form about a matter that the institution deems at least somewhat important; if you are ever caught, it could have serious consequences for you, including revocation of an offer or expulsion from the institution.
Finally, I think it is worth saying that the idea of a candidate drafting a reference is quite widely regarded as anathema, so you should be uncomfortable about doing it even if the institution had not asked you to confirm non-involvement. You say that candidate drafting “seems to be quite a common practice”, but is it a practice declared openly? Personally, I have **never** heard of a referee saying “This reference has been drafted by the candidate, before being edited and approved by me.”.
Practices that are acceptable might include:
* referee showing the reference to the candidate (after having sent it);
* referee dictating short character reference (one or two sentences) to a candidate, then signing it;
* one person (not the candidate) writes reference, but another, more senior one signs it (in some institutions, it is common for the director to sign all references, but to delegate the actual writing of the references to someone else).
And it is quite common for a referee to ask the candidate whether there are any particular aspects to highlight or downplay (but without any actual reference content being exchanged). The reason for this is because the candidate may have a clearer idea of what the institution is seeking.
Upvotes: -1
|
2021/12/29
| 644
| 2,829
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wonder if it is legal/acceptable to teach standard scientific material for free on youtube. The concern is about copyright issues. I assume that it is okay to upload youtube videos explaining standard results in math, physics, or computer science, given that it is standard and already available on Wikipedia, for example.
One thing I also find strange is copyrighted videos for universities teaching, for example, Newton's laws in physics. Newton's laws are due to Newton, so what rights does the universities have? Is it about the syllabus, the way of teaching, or something else?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can do this, but you can't used copyrighted materials of others without permission (or in certain limited but permitted ways). The copyrights you see are because copyright is about specific expression of ideas, not about ideas. So, yes, you can teach anything that is common knowledge and anything that you develop yourself, and you can even copyright it.
Lots of books express the same "ideas" and can be copyrighted since it is the expression that is covered. Ideas aren't property. But the expression can be protected by various IP laws for some (hopefully) finite period of time.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The copyright holder of standard results in math, physics, etc is *not* the author of the paper. Newton did not hold the copyright to Newton's Laws. The author holds the copyright to how they chose to present the work. The copyright holder of a lecture is the person who gave the lecture, so you cannot just record someone else's lecture and upload it without their consent. However, if you are making your own videos, then you hold the copyright, and it's legal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The way this is expressed by authors (at least five different ones in my personal direct experience, plus lots of them in writing) is this. The copyright is for the arrangement of words. Or the image in the case of graphics or art and such. The copyright is *NOT* for the ideas. Once the idea is out you can use it. You must not copy the words. (Or the pictures etc.)
You *MUST* put it in your own words. And make your own pictures. And, as much as possible, you should cite the source of the ideas. At least as far as where you got the ideas. If you can then cite the person who originated the idea. Some cites of people who worked with the idea would also be nice for your learning audience.
There are already several YouTube channels that do some of this. Some of them are useful and interesting. My suggestion would be to try to avoid duplicating the ones already there. Find a niche that is not already filled that you can fill. Then do a good job at explaining topics not already explained. That will get you an audience.
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/29
| 1,270
| 4,933
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question is whether it is common for researchers in combinatorics to advertise their results, and then not to publish them? I am motivated by 1 particular example which I will state. But first I suggest an answer: they produce too many interesting results to publish them all. Posting slides and communicating to other mathematicians is sometimes more efficient.
The example is the generalization of Chung and Feller's theorem about the number of simple walks with a given number of points on the walk above the $x$-axis (for a point on the $x$-axis one considers it above if the previous point was, for consistency).
[On Fluctuations in Coin Tossing](https://www.pnas.org/content/35/10/605) Theorem 1.
At least one textbook, McKean's, stated the problem for odd numbers of steps.
[Probability: The classical limit theorems](https://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/mathematics/abstract-analysis/probability-classical-limit-theorems?format=HB&isbn=9781107053212) Exercise 3.4.2 on p139.
This could possibly be interpreted not as a literal exact combinatorial problem but rather as an exercise for recovering Lévy's arcsine law in the continuum limit. Gessel stated the answer in one of his talks
[Chung -Feller Theorems](https://people.brandeis.edu/%7Egessel/homepage/slides/chung-feller-slides.pdf) last few slides.
And finally Grünbaum gave an article with the result here
[A Feynman-Kac approach to a paper of Chung and Feller on fluctuations in the coin-tossing game](https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.06092v1)
published in [Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society](https://www.ams.org/cgi-bin/mstrack/accepted_papers/proc)
By my count there was at least 1 and maybe 2 people who knew how to calculate this result but did not publish it. Incidentally, Feller seemed to revise his classic textbook once or twice as he obtained better and clearer pictures of this topic, the last using a graphical derivation of <NAME>. An excellent reference is the set of lecture notes online by <NAME> Border
[Lecture 16: Simple Random Walk](http://www.math.caltech.edu/%7E2016-17/2term/ma003/Notes/Lecture16.pdf) (not to be confused as a replacement for looking at Feller, itself)
This all makes it difficult to know what has already been done. Of course the online slides and lecture notes make it easier for newcomers to learn those results and knowledge. How do professional combinatorics researcher navigate all this, if some of the best among them do not publish all the results they know?<issue_comment>username_1: Surely it is common for researchers in *all* fields to not publish all their results? I think many of us have mentioned something informally in private communication or in a talk or two, perhaps looking for feedback. There may be an intention to pursue those ideas further, and sometimes that gets [delayed](https://mathoverflow.net/a/412841/69504) - in some cases indefinitely. Some results are not "ready" yet, others are seen (rightly or wrongly) as not significant or interesting enough to put in the effort to turn into papers. And, of course, some results were written up, but dropped after the submission was rejected.
Note that the significance bar is highly personal. The best in a field can be the most likely to find some important result and then drop it (at least for the time being) or delay publishing because they are busy, have other more interesting ideas to work on, are less worried about having to publish for status or grant money, have exceptional self-imposed standards for what they choose to publish, etc.
Maybe your impression that this happens more often in combinatorics than in other fields is correct, or maybe you're experiencing a Baader-Meinhof phenomenon. I don't know. I'm no mathematician myself, and I doubt there are good statistics on this. Either way your observation is a good reminder that a field is more than the sum of its published papers and books, and that there is a lot that can (only?) be learned from speaking to experts.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Elaborating on your "too many interesting results to publish" idea, I wonder how much of this is affected by personal webpages and the arXiv.
For well-known researchers, a notes section on their webpages might get as much attention as certain journals. An extreme case is the [personal journal](https://sites.math.rutgers.edu/%7Ezeilberg/pj.html) of <NAME> and his computer. See also his [opinions](https://sites.math.rutgers.edu/%7Ezeilberg/OPINIONS.html) section which includes commentary about refereed journals and whether they're worth the effort.
And while the arXiv doesn't post everything that is submitted, it does provide a place for material to be publicly available without the sometimes long hassle of journal publication. I know of people who post things there without any intent of further publication.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2021/12/29
| 259
| 1,095
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for multiple internships over the summer and most of them require 2 LOR's, is it okay to ask one professor to write me a LOR for each? I am a freshman and don't have many teachers who could write me a recommendation.<issue_comment>username_1: Ask a couple of professors who best know your work and think highly of you. Tell them when you first ask that there will be several letters for different internships. If they know in advance then they can easily do it, even if each needs a bit of tailoring. Ask early but follow up a week or so before they are due.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It depends on the requirements of your internship. If it requires academic recommendation, it is best to ask your professors. Professors here does not mean they are really "professors". You can ask your current lecturers/tutors who know you the most or you get a high score in that modules.
If it does not require specific people, you can ask your previous employer to write one of the letters of Recommendation.
Good luck with your application!
Upvotes: 0
|
2021/12/30
| 831
| 3,076
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a mathematics PhD scholar (particularly in number theory). I have a question in mind.
In general, a PhD scholar doesn't have much publications (or no publication) upto a certain stage. Suppose I don't have a good CV or personal webpage to track me, except some information in research-gate/arxiv.
Suppose I think one of my research papers is good enough to communicate in some top most journals (e.g., Q\_1 quartile in web of science). I also suppose most of the math journals follow single-blind peer review process.
Should I worry about my previous publication record when I try to communicate my research paper in a top journal?
Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher?
If this really happens, how to avoid such situations? Should I post my whole CV (academic record) in researchgate?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Do the referees see the profile of authors?
>
>
>
No. Referees only get the manuscript. That's not to say referees cannot Google for the authors, but I don't know how many referees actually do that.
>
> Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher?
>
>
>
It's possible, but I have never seen a report go "The author is an inexperienced researcher, so ..." - not even in confidential comments. There can still be subconscious bias, however, so it doesn't prove that it doesn't happen.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you think you have results good enough for a top journal you should submit them. They will get a fair evaluation independent of your history. I think that is generally true for any journal.
That said, you might consult with your advisor about whether they think your results are that good.
I have never reviewed for a top journal. When I do review (single blind, for less prestigious journals) I sometimes look up the author after reading the paper if I am inclined to reject. If the author is new to the profession I try to make a rejection seem less discouraging.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: When I referee, I note who the authors are for one reason only: to check for self-plagiarism.
>
> Should I worry about my previous publication record when I try to communicate my research paper in a top journal?
>
>
>
No.
>
> Do the referees give think it is less important or become skeptical of the work of an unestablished researcher?
>
>
>
Good referees do not care. In certain elitist journals, editors may be incentivized to increase the impact factor. The editor might try to estimate how many citations your paper will get by looking at your past publications. But they should not.
>
> If this really happens, how to avoid such situations?
>
>
>
Write more good papers.
>
> Should I post my whole CV (academic record) in researchgate?
>
>
>
[ResearchGate: an asset or a waste of time?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16870/researchgate-an-asset-or-a-waste-of-time?rq=1)
Upvotes: 2
|
2021/12/30
| 1,461
| 6,034
|
<issue_start>username_0: Here are the details:
I'm a Ph.D. student in mathematics.
A year ago, my supervisor ask me to try to generalize some results, saying that this "question" is given by one of the famous researchers in our domain of work, let's call him X.
Four months ago he asked me to add the name of X to the paper, and I did.
Now, the paper is almost finished (after a lot of discussion/presentation with my supervisor), but he never read it until this week.
Today, he asked me "kindly" to remove his name and the name of X from the paper and send it to a journal without including their names, he thinks that this is not research for three names, (which sound like: it is not significant enough), knowing that I did what he asked me to do exactly, and I tried my best.
---
I know that I can submit this paper alone, but the whole situation is very strange, it makes me very sad and anxious for three reasons:
1. I feel that my supervisor is giving up on me in this.
2. Not having his name on the paper will surely affect its chance of acceptance.
3. suppose the article is published, what will be the interpretation of not having your Ph.D. supervisor's name on it?
---
I will appreciate your help!
---
**Edit:** Many thanks for your useful answers, I will keep you updated.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, in (pure) mathematics, I would find it unusual to find the names of "authors" who didn't contribute to the work. I think that the request to add X, if they didn't participate, was wrong, but removing it was right. Adding the name of the supervisor is less common in math than in some other fields, but I think the same standard should apply: they are authors only if they make an intellectual contribution to the paper.
So, in the wider math community you will be fine. The supervisor's name isn't expected. The paper should be judged on its merits and will be by reputable journals.
I can't say much about your supervisor. I don't know if he is "giving up" on you. I hope not. My hope is that he is just doing the right thing here, but I don't have much faith that such is true given earlier actions.
The world of math will just judge that you did the work. If it is good, then good for you.
---
Applied math can be a bit different.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In pure mathematics it is common to see both papers that are coauthored by a PhD student and their adviser, and papers that are authored solely by a PhD student without their adviser. Both of these things are considered completely normal and neither of them is likely to cause any prejudice against your paper by a journal or anyone else who looks at it.
It is also normal for professional mathematicians to decide that a paper is not significant enough, or that their contribution to it is not significant enough, for them to wish to have their name on it as coauthors. That is a signal that, by itself, contains almost no information. In particular, it doesn’t automatically imply that the paper is a bad paper from the point of view of the PhD student who was the main driving force behind the work. It could be a perfectly nice and worthwhile paper for a PhD student to write and publish as part of their PhD dissertation research.
What the above observations mean is that your stated reasons 1-3 for being anxious are somewhat misguided. None of the information you gave us logically implies the negative conclusions you seem to be drawing.
Does that mean you have no legitimate things to be anxious about? Not necessarily. If you believe that your paper simply isn’t good, not because of the information you gave us about the coauthorship issue but because of other more detailed information you have about it, that is a valid reason for disappointment and frustration. Or, if you have other reasons to think that your supervisor “is giving up on you”, obviously that’s not good. But, at least, the coauthorship thing is just a distraction and by itself means nothing.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It's probably best to separate anxiety related to your advisor into different bins like (a) progress on your qualifying exam, (b) progress on your dissertation, (c) progress on publications, and (d) your professional/social relationship. Since everything is cyclical during a dissertation (ebbs and flow, progress and anxiety), what you feel anxious about today won't matter in 3-6 months, or 1-2 years. Your advisor probably didn't do that much work on the paper, and merely suggested pulling his name simply for that reason -- so just submit the paper after others have signed off on submission and agreed to the journal of choice.
Regarding the manuscript (paper) itself, don't ever assume a submission is going to pass reviews with flying colors, without negative or unrealistic comments. If the reviews suggest the manuscript is terrible, or it's rejected, or it needs significantly more work, at that point, would you still be anxious about your advisor pulling his name, or still speculate your advisor is giving up on you? Probably not. I've known other PhD students whose advisors would not meet with them for up to 6 months, only because they were busy - but they did eventually finish.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I had a very similar experience. I wrote a great paper, mostly alone but under the general (and very kind) supervision of my thesis director (the area was physics).
I added him as a secondary author (which he deserved, at least in my opinion) and he asked to be removed. He said
>
> It is a great paper, you do not need to dilute your authorship with my name.
>
>
>
That was nice of him. Now, he was was a full professor ("tenured"), head of the department, and one of the vice-presidents of the university - so he did not really need another paper. But in any case, I appreciated very much the kind attention (and thanked him vigorously in the acknowledgments section).
So maybe just ask him at the occasion why he wanted his name removed, who knows?
Upvotes: 4
|
2021/12/30
| 1,472
| 6,121
|
<issue_start>username_0: I spotted a paper with around 106 citations, around which 86 are just the author citing himself. Now I understand that people do this to work on their previous studies, but 86? That's around just 20 citations you've received for your paper. Another paper of his has 96 citations with 87 being self. Is this normal or excessive?<issue_comment>username_1: Citations are neither a competition, nor a prize. They are simply a tool to refer to previous scientific work in order to establish the scientific case of the paper.
The fact that some people have decided that citations are in fact a good measure for "success", or a good case for "promotion", does not mean that citations should be perceived as anything else than a scientific tool, rather than a merit, prize or a favour.
Thus, there is nothing "excessive" *in itself* in loads of self-citations. Each citation should be evaluated solely based on the scientific justification of the cited work and its relevance to the current work, and there is nothing in your question that provides a witness for an unjustified citation. In other words, it is impossible to answer your question based solely on numbers and percentage of self-citations.
---
In other words, the question about many self-citations is whether the citations are relevant or not. Some authors work in a specialized field, or with specialized approaches in a popular field. So it is relevant to cite themselves. Overall, **the problem of high percentage of self citations is different:** if they are almost the only ones working in their subfield or using their approach, then maybe it's not a good approach?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: 86 self-citations out of 106 is definitely abnormal. Most (all?) editors would want to investigate. It's not necessarily malicious, but it's something to check out.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Self-citations are valid, but too much is a bad sign:
* On the one hand, an author with an ongoing research program will generally have significant prior work that needs to be cited.
* On the other hand, all scientific work exists in a larger intellectual context for which [Joy's law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joy%27s_law_(management)) applies: lots of other smart people are doing related work that needs to be acknowledged.
High rates of self-citation thus generally indicate authors that are either:
1. intellectually isolated,
2. delusionally arrogant, or
3. deliberately manipulating citation statistics.
But how high is too high?
As a rough heuristic, I have come to regard 1/3 as a useful upper bound on reasonable self-citation. That means that most citations are elsewhere, even for papers with very strong prior work to cite. I also generally find that the higher the total citation count, the lower the fraction that are self-citations (i.e., volume of prior work scales more slowly than complexity of scientific context). Conversely, the ratio may break down entirely in short works with artificially limited citation counts, e.g., in extended abstracts where all but a few absolutely mandatory citations are pruned for reasons of space.
Applying these heuristics to the cases that you describe, I would assess the citation ratios 86/106 and 87/96 as almost certainly indicating deliberate manipulation of citation statistics. If the fractions were similar but the citation count was small (e.g., <20 total), then it might be legitimate or a result of intellectual isolation. Even with lots of prior work, however, there is almost never a reason to cite so many different pieces of it, as a prolific author will generally also write review papers that are better to cite than the individual papers that went into them---and review papers have limited self-citation because they are describing other people's work as well. The author might be delusionally arrogant too, but there's a lot more citation manipulators out there than researchers who are both delusional and highly prolific.
**Bottom line: probably deliberate citation manipulation.**
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: 1. There are certainly cases where a researcher is a pioneer in a specialty field, where they may have produced a large volume of work on a "niche" topic that comprises a large fraction of all of the work.
2. There are certainly cases where a researcher is *invited* to write a survey or review paper or one that covers the evolution of a specific research topic.
It is possible that these two could be concurrent.
So asking about a single instance without describing the nature of the paper along those two axes leaves open the possibility that this is *by design*, i.e. what the journals' editor(s) hoped for.
*However:*
>
> Another paper of his has 96 citations with 87 being self. Is this normal or excessive?
>
>
>
Ya, could be, unless the concurrence happened twice; the author was invited to write *two survey or review papers* and you happened to find both.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, it is normal and it is the equivalent of doping in sport.
If your competing organisation is self-citing, and both your competitor and you are equally piffle in doing research, then the only way to survive for you is to self-cite as well.
This has two interesting consequences:
* the larger the research group the higher the number of artificial citations the participants can get.
* the doped paper that go through blind peer review is de facto not anonymous (the self citation points eloquently at the authoring research group): two competing organisations can help each others to dope up the number of citations (I approve yours self-citing paper, you approve mine).
The positive note is that this mechanism is only doping up the bottom. Honest and really breakthrough research work have a number of citations that is unreachable for the self-citing research groups.
For example the paper by Nakamoto, "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" has alone more citations than the total number of citations of the self-citing professor in his whole career.
Upvotes: 1
|
2021/12/30
| 722
| 2,906
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is no work that is free of error and people make mistakes :) But that is not what I am after, I am seeing advise on how to go about asking for clarification.
Recently a paper was published in the field of civil engineering in a reputable journal. In that paper, there is a mistake/discrepancy between the written material and the equation stated. Basically, the text stipulates *1=True and 0=False*; however, if you use the equation and plug the numbers, *1=False and 0=True*.
To get more clarification on this, I emailed the corresponding author about 1month ago and still have not received a reply. I was thus wondering and seeking a advice on the following:
* When/How often should I email/followup with the corresponding author
for further clarification?
* Should I Email the journal editor, and if so after how long?
In my true belief, this is just a simple mixup and a reply should be quick to generate. However, it is just dragging.
Edit: It was pointed that this maybe similar to [What should you do if you spotted a non-trivial error in a highly cited paper?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18911/what-should-you-do-if-you-spotted-a-non-trivial-error-in-a-highly-cited-paper) .
In my opinion, the error is so trivial and doesn't require a paper to be written to correct. The point is I want to know what the authors' meant. Is it *1=True* OR *0=True* and want to know the most effective way to reach out to them to obtain that clarification. Basically, I dont want to overshadow the previous person’s work or contradict what they originally wanted to portray in their work.<issue_comment>username_1: In general it seems discourteous to nag the author, who may be discomfited by your discovery and may be seeking to check and correct. Nevertheless, it seems odd they have not acknowledged your communication so one more query about its receipt may be justified.
If you have not received satisfactory reply after a couple of months it would be reasonable to ask the editor, who may wish to issue a correction if the author (or independent referee) agrees that you are correct.
Apart from these two routes it is not really your business to do anything else.
If you are referencing the material in your own work, a simple reasoned statement that you have found otherwise would suffice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It sounds to me like you're saying it's a simple mixup that anyone reading the paper can correct with no bearing on the paper's overall results. If that's true, then you should just ignore it. If you need the equation in your work, you can make the necessary correction and put in a footnote that there was a typo in the original.
I expect that, on average, I have more than one mistake of this kind per paper I have published. I've had to make a correction with a footnote of one of them in a subsequent paper.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/01
| 933
| 4,152
|
<issue_start>username_0: (PI: Project Initiator, I get this term from proposal-writing) I am an undergraduate student (and have been off and on over the last 7 [now almost 8] years). I went to a professor at my university with a novel idea. I was able to provide good answers to their questions and they are willing to conduct the experiment with me. This would likely take the form of a "Research Problems" 1 to 3 credit course this semester, and next semester, and a few grants, including possibly a grant to work over the summer on the project (they would be listed as a sponsor).
I am wondering about credit, I came up with the idea, and I would mostly be focusing on this (and maybe one other project at a time) for the next year (I am planning to take less classes to focus on it, and even graduate even later). It would probably be less of an "assistant" role. I am wondering about how credit would be shared or what my professor might expect. I know often the first name on the paper matters a lot, would the professor expect to put their name first? If so, if I take on the role I expect too, would it be interpreted that I was an undergraduate assistant of some sort that sort of helped? I just don't want to lose credit/recognition for the idea and be recognized for the work I am planning to do (as a foundation on which to submit future articles -- possibly without an institution or company attached).
I am hoping to maybe become an independent researcher, and I want to start building my reputation with this.
Thank you
EDIT:
I think I may have misunderstood the term "PI" a bit. I just basically meant the person who came up with the idea and got the project started/organized (but not necessarily remaining in a managing role or providing oversight). Perhaps I was a little "overzealous" in saying it.<issue_comment>username_1: If you enter into a project with another person, you should set the expectations of everyone at the beginning. You need to discuss this with the advisor, If you tell them that you are hoping to be first (or sole) author on the work when done, then that has implications about how much they need to guide you and participate.
If you make it clear that you want the "credit", then you are also making it clear that you want to do the intellectual work to make it happen. Another person could still advise you with feedback, but if they contribute intellectual content to the work then they are an author also.
Since the original idea is yours, you probably have a claim, at the moment, on first (or sole) authorship, but that can change depending on the participation of the other person.
But don't make up titles for your role, such as PI.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: For funded work where money is coming from your school or a government agency the Principal Investigator is the person responsible to the grantor for prompt reporting and correct use of the money according to the applicable regulations.
Government agencies typically have long documents that explain how proposals are to be prepared in response to their Requests for Proposals or similarly titled things. Your university probably has a department for grant handling called something like the Office of Sponsored Projects or similar who actually legally sends the proposal from PIs to the agencies and handles the bureaucratic issues (depending on US state and agency). Each entity will have rules on both sides for who is PI eligible mostly depending on position and educational background. Both ends must agree. Exceptions are possible, but I’ve never heard of one being granted to an undergraduate researcher. Position permanence is also part of the formula and undergrads tend to graduate before projects complete. Professorships are generally more permanent, and those kinds of personnel tend to stick around long enough to not worry about them leaving the project midstream. If you’re not at a university, then you’d have to learn all those regulations yourself or hire a specialist company to do it for you. Each agency’s programs will say if who is eligible and if companies can apply.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/01
| 1,602
| 6,583
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm looking for an efficient way to organize academic papers on my bookshelf. I'm a CS PhD student and continue to amass a large number of papers that I periodically need to refer to. The PDFs of these are very easy to deal with, but the physical prints end up in small piles throughout my office (each project/article/paper gets a pile). This is getting out of hand and not very efficient in many ways.
I really like reading hardcopies instead of PDFs as there's only so long I can stare at a screen. This must be a common problem among PhD students, right?
My plan is to place papers into labeled manilla file folders, then horizontally stack these folders on my bookshelf. Is this the way to go? Has some academic found a clever way to handle this better?<issue_comment>username_1: I used to use a piling system - it works great until you have to move office, and the piles are all in new places. Also, putting things on top of each other makes it awkward to pull out those further down the heap. Filing cabinets were invented for a reason, and work really well ... again, until you have to move. Which may be quite often if you are still a postgrad.
It depends a bit on how many papers you have.
I'm not a great fan of arch files/binders as they are awkward to handle when reading and - especially ring binders - are very inefficient in terms of shelf space taken up compared to how much paper they have inside. But, for 20-30cm worth of A4 I'd stick to binders and stand them on the shelf.
For more than that, you could look at either "archive boxes"/"box files" (which can stand) or the traditional cardboard "document wallets". Both can be labelled on the side, so you can read the label even while they're in the pile.
Of course, it also helps if your reference management system can record which folder a particular article is in (and also write this on the paper itself, so you can easily put it back in the right place).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As suggested in comments, use a filing cabinet, ideally with **hanging file folders** that require no punch holes. **But don't mix physical location and semantic organisation**. This would be highly inflexible.
Do this instead: Note down a running number or date on each hardcopy. This is the call number of your hardcopy.\* Now write down a range of numbers or dates on each folder, and file the hardcopies accordingly. For example, hardcopy number 143 goes into file 130-150.
To find and retrieve your hardcopies, use a catalogue, either on paper (unwieldy) or digital (better). The latter can be in the form of some database, BibTeX file or reference manager like Zotero. If necessary, just repurpose one of the lesser-used fields to store the call number (e.g. "note" or part of the "abstract" field).
In your catalogue, you can assign multiple tags and projects to each hardcopy, no matter where it's physically stored. This removes the need for duplicate hardcopies.
In case you want to temporarily reshelve some papers, say, for a project or because you take them to a conference, just assign a secondary "call-number" that describes the current location, like "widget conference binder" or "brief case". This isn't strictly necessary if, every few weeks, you put straying hardcopies back to where they belong, which is easy enough, since they now have an address written on them.
\* You could also use more elaborate call-numbers based on some [classification](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/95517/is-there-an-official-widely-used-subject-classification), but I prefer to keep things simple. A running number or date also maintains the only advantage of the pile "system": Quick retrieval according to "It must be here somewhere, I've only used it a week ago".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I've found it useful to use **large ringed binders** for papers. One binder per project/subject is usually sufficient, though you might sometimes have to use two. This works well if you can separate your papers into groups based on subject area or project, but you might need to double-up papers in some cases (i.e., have more than one printed copy of a paper). Within each binder I separate the papers using coloured tabbed separators, with papers included in chronological order (i.e., reading earliest to latest). I add a first page in the folder that lists the full citations of all the papers in chronological order. Reading papers in this order is nice to give you an overview of the development of the literature over time.
This type of organisation is nice if you are working on a project or trying to refresh your knowledge of the literature pertaining to an old project. You can easily grab a single binder and take it down to the cafe to read it while you have lunch/coffeee. I am like you --- I much prefer to read the printed copy than stare at a screen all day. There is a bit of initial time required to organise the binders and cover-sheets, or update new cover-sheets occasionally, but I find it is generally worthwhile.
In practice I actually use a hybrid system that consists partly of these binders and partly of the "piling system" you described. I have quite a few left-over papers that are in piles, which didn't fit into particular projects or which were printed out of curiosity about a subject, without attendant literature. Ideally I would take the time to be a bit more systematic, but business sometimes gets the best of us!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_1: (I've since been reminded of another option which *I* don't think will work particularly well in this case, hence this separate answer, but ultimately it's for the OP to decide such, especially if they don't have as many paper papers as us oldies.)
In the past I've had good results from making up mini-compendia of related articles using semi-permanent binding techniques such as wire or comb binding: a wire-bound A4 booklet of papers is much more pleasant to browse and read than stuff in a ring binder with heavy rigid covers flapping about. The down side is that it's more effort to put together, and of course you need access to the specialised punch/binding press.
While I generally feel that wire-binding makes for a nicer volume, in the present context I'd note that combs have spines that can be labelled, and also with some care it's possible use the machine to partially unbind a comb-bound volume so as to add newer papers.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/01
| 941
| 3,992
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the world of academia what exactly counts as a **novelty**, when we talk about a novel idea or more specifically when we say **Academic Novelty** ?
I am trying to start writing on a particular topic (details of which I am not at liberty to divulge) but I am a bit confused about the aspect of novelty regarding that topic.
While discussing the general outline of the work, my advisor told me that what I am trying to do, does not count as a Academic Novelty. If it were a product for the industry, it would be a good innovation.
I was also told that I have to think more in an academic mindset instead of thinking in a product/industrial mindset.
I am very confused and I am in need of some guidance to figure out what to do ..
I will provide some context : I'm a M.Sc.(thesis) Computer Science student and although I have a journal publication prior to starting grad school, I do not have any publications (conference or journal) during my M.Sc. studies. I am rather eager to publish during my studies.
Can anyone please make explain in very simple terms about how I can resolve this concern of novelty?
P.S : I have another question about novelty as well, but I will ask it separately<issue_comment>username_1: Your advisor has fallen into the trap of thinking there is a significant difference between academic and industrial/product thinking. The truth is that there is a continuum between the two and that little good comes from the lofty or pretentious imposition of bipolarity on that continuum. Such academic stereotyping often indicates unwillingness to apply one's work to the wider world, and a desire to inflate its importance within a limited self-defined sphere.
Some academic ideas are trivial and useless, some are far reaching and influential. Some industrial/applied ideas are trivial. Others pose intellectual challenges that easily exceed the self-chosen and self-defined themes of a limited academic idea.
I doubt there is a convenient catch-all definition of novelty that would allow you to categorize your work reliably. If the idea has not reached the published peer-reviewed literature or the authoritative textbooks it is probably academically novel.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: First, don't expect a hard boundary between the two concepts. It is a matter of more or less of one or the other. So, the "exactly" in your title can only be approximated.
While research in industry is now only occasionally anything beyond product research, it wasn't always that way. Some places still do research much like is done in academia. And some universities get involved in some product development, often through collaborations.
But, on the academic side, "novelty" is involved *more* with what is known or knowable or what it *is possible* to do. And on the industrial side novelty is *more* involved with doing things that might have economic value by being different or unique in some way. Some toasters, for example, have a "novel" design that appeals to people. But an academic paper on the design would be unlikely.
However, there are things that might be hard to classify. The transistor, for example, invented at the old Bell Labs was novel in the knowable, doable sense and could be considered valid academic research. The exploitation of the transistor to make useful products (faster, more reliable computers) was less likely to be have novelty in the academic sense thought it does in the industrial sense.
In CS, creation of the object oriented paradigm (Simula and/or Smalltalk, depending on your view) was academic research. Creating the Ruby programing language probably not so much. But not entirely one or the other.
So, in the final analysis, judgement is required and your advisor has made a judgement that your suggestion was too far from the (very) fuzzy line. That doesn't make it worthless, but it probably makes in impossible to develop into a dissertation, at least with that professor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/01
| 961
| 4,131
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a 3 year pure math BSc in Europe, currently on my 5th semester, definitely can graduate by the end of the spring semester of 2022. I have heard in this SE that graduating earlier than planned (for example in 3 years in the US) is only impressive to yourself, but what about intentionally delaying my graduation, would it be detrimental for grad school considerations?
What I mean is fulfilling all requirements of graduation (all mandatory subjects, credit requirements, thesis) without "clicking the **I graduated!** button". I have not checked the technical details about this, as it would require talking to my coordinator/advisor and I'm still in the exploratory phase about this idea.
My (probably very very dumb) reasoning is that I want to retake some very important classes, real analysis, ODE, differential geometry. I also realized that I want to take measure theory which is only offered in the fall semester.
If I were to do this, I might extend by a semester..., maybe two since most programs start in fall anyway.<issue_comment>username_1: If you want a job in industry, I suggest that you get in the market and see what options you have there. You can decide that you have good enough options to jump sooner or that, from what you learn, you should 'bulk up' your resume somewhat.
But, there is no reason that you can't "relearn" the stuff from older courses without retaking them. If you have grades enough to graduate you have probably learned enough to continue on your own. And those online courses still exist if you want something like lectures.
I think that the finance industry is probably going to start out any new hire in a probationary position, regardless of their grades and such. I can't speak for the validity of measure theory for finance as my (long ago) course was very theoretical and not available to undergrads. Great course, but you'd have to be sure that it actually has application.
So, I suggest a "dual" track. Work so that you can go either way if you come to a fork in the road. Make the decision when you need to.
---
If you were headed to grad school instead, I'd suggest that you don't delay. You can take measure theory there, I suspect (certainly true in US, anyway).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you intentionally delay your graduation, people might question your ability to make good financial decisions.
That will not stop professors from selecting you as a graduate student. After all, choosing to be a professor is often a poor financial decision too.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you would like to take some additional courses (or re-take some you have already taken) then it is okay to delay graduation to do so. Just bear in mind that there is an *opportunity cost* to this decision, since the time spent on those courses is time not spent gaining experience in a graduate program or in the workforce. Since your goal (which you mention in comments) is to upskill in probability theory/stochastic modelling, it is perfectly reasonable for you to take or re-take formal courses for this purpose. I recommend augmenting this by learning how to program in at least one commonly used statistical programming language (e.g., R, Python, SAS). I would be surprised if a relatively short period of re-learning is held against you by any admissions committee, even if it delays your graduation.
Aside from bearing in mind opportunity costs, another thing to be cognisant of is the possibility that you may be experiencing trepidation about leaving the comfort and safety of your existing degree program for the uncertainty of graduate school or the workforce. Sometimes students who are approaching the end of their degree program experience fear of undertaking new challenges, and this can cause them to shy away from progression to the next step in their career. If you find you are delaying graduation excessively (e.g., by more than a year) then this may be an indication that you should self-reflect on your long-term goals and your feelings about taking the leap into the next stage of your career.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/02
| 1,839
| 7,408
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, it is January 2022 and like me, many are waiting to hear back from the universities to which we applied last month. This period feels like purgatory. Since I am an International student, I didn't go through this during my bachelor's and master's. In my country, decisions are very fast. How did y'all deal with the fear, anxiety, and limiting beliefs while waiting for Ph.D. admissions decisions? To me, it feels like my life depends on it and the overthinking is killing me.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all, I think it's a feeling that we all understand. After all, research seems like a hugely important part of our lives, and we want to get into a good PhD program.
The situation is not actually unique to PhD applications. I think here's some thoughts that you can think of instead when stressed:
1. Since you've already submitted your application, your current thoughts won't really impact the outcome. So there's no guilt in thinking about anything negative.
2. Beyond PhD, there will be many situations in life that require you to patiently wait. Take this opportunity as a practice. In short, be curious.
3. Instead of dwelling on these thoughts, focus on something fun. Again, you will be reminded of the negative thoughts, but things will be easier.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Although I'm not religious (and therefore disregard the theistic aspects of the saying), I find that the [Serenity Prayer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer) gives the most rational advice on dealing with such situations:
>
> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I do not know your particular situation, but in general there is a non-negligible chance that one will not receive any offers. What would one do if one does not get any satisfactory offers?
Most people would look for a job. Why not just get started now?
On the other hand if your applications are so strong that it is inconceivable that you will not get at least one satisfactory offer then why worry at all? If you have the resources, I would just take the time off before you are too busy with your studies to just relax.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: These thoughts are actually useful, because they tell you to care about your well-being and security. But too much of them will only cause stress and exacerbate your anxiety. So in the spirit of username_2's good answer, but slightly more secular, you could respond by thinking:
>
> Thanks for caring about my well-being, but I'm good for now.
>
>
>
There are various methods to cope with acute anxiety. One of them is to focus on your body and its sensations. How do your hands feel - cold, warm, tingling? Can you feel the ground beneath your feet or the pressure of your body against your chair, etc.? This helps to interrupt any thought spirals by redirecting your attention somewhere south of your brain.
Another method I found useful is called [RAIN](https://adaa.org/living-with-anxiety/personal-stories/rain-mindful-framework-addressing-anxious-thoughts):
>
> *R*ecognize what is going on. (Oh, there's that thought pattern coming up again.)
>
>
> *A*ccept the experience as it is. (No need to punish myself for it or to push it away.)
>
>
> *I*nvestigate it, especially its physical manifestations, with curiosity and kindness towards yourself. (That's how this feels -- I'm getting antsy and my chest feels tight. Let me see if it feels any different now than a minute ago.)
>
>
> *N*on-identification: This isn't me, and this isn't permanent. It's just an experience that comes and goes like everything else.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As a first-year graduate student who applied last year during the pandemic, I understand and sympathize with how you must be feeling. Waiting for results alone is difficult -- and I will never forget the added anxiety that came with a pandemic incredibly complicating matters. For me the waiting period were some of the toughest months I've ever had to sit through, and it's always hard to not take any rejections very personally.
During my waiting period I got very into running. It wasn't much, and it was hard to push myself out the door on particularly hard days, but it really helped. It's only especially evident now how much it helped after looking back now and thinking about how much worse I could've been without running to clear my head.
I encourage you to do the same! Not necceserily running (though it is a wonderful hobby you can joyfully bring along into graduate school afterwards), but some activity you can fully envolope yourself in. I heavily recommend though you do something that brings you outside and gets you active! Bonus points if its something you can do with others, like frisbee or soccer. It'll help get your mind in the right place and, contrary to what you'll believe before you step out the door, will lift your mood afterwards quite a bit.
I'd also like to recommend against opting out for an indoor activity like video games. I tried this at first, but I just found that it rarely helped me feel better, and solving puzzles in games even felt difficult on rougher days. Really try to pull yourself outside and get yourself to enjoy life with people close to you. I remember too well how long the waiting period felt, and just as some reassurance, it does end eventually. I understand the anxiety is from just caring about your passion and hoping to continue towards it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: I’ve found the best way to manage these feelings, especially when there’s nothing to be done to influence the outcome, is:
* Distract yourself — Exercise, take a trip out into nature, spend time with friends and family, start a personal project that you’ll enjoy.
* Share how you’re feeling — With friends, with family, talk about how you’re feeling, any fears you might have. No doubt they, especially older folks in your life, will have experienced similar things. Talking about it can help you manage your anxieties.
* Think about alternatives — Sometimes, it helps to know you’ll be okay if the worst comes to pass and sometimes that means imagining your life in such a situation. I imagine you’re on the younger side of you’re applying to PhD programs. Life takes you in strange directions and the unexpected can often be a blessing. Even if you don’t get in, you can always reapply, and challenges tend to breed wisdom.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I'll give an answer that is not about accepting things that are outside of my control. There is a website called [Grad Cafe](https://www.thegradcafe.com/survey/index.php). Other applicants update this site with their admission decisions.
When I applied for graduate school, I checked the site daily. This way I knew if the decision emails went out to the programs I applied to. Some schools send their acceptance decisions first and then the rejections. So if I didn't get an email, I knew that I had been rejected and I didn't have to wait a few more weeks until I received an email with a decision.
Don't check it too frequently, once a day is fine. Search your school and degree program and you will see if others have received a decision (accept or reject).
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/03
| 785
| 3,412
|
<issue_start>username_0: With pre-preprint servers readily accessible, I'm wondering if it is possible for graduate students to directly publish their work without their advisor. Is this taboo?
If a student conducts independent research whose intellectual property has been acknowledged (in writing) by the advisor to belong wholly to the student, is this sufficient permission for the student to publish independently?
For context, I've shared my findings with my faculty committee who all gave my work positive feedback, and I work in a competitive field with a risk of being "scooped". My PI manages a big lab and my paper has essentially sat on their desk for several months. Is it within my rights to publish directly ie. on bioRxiv?<issue_comment>username_1: Ethically, if the intellectual content of the paper is yours you can publish it as a sole author. You need to acknowledge the help you get that doesn't rise to the level of authorship.
However, in some fields, it is difficult to separate the "contributions" of people like advisors who provide an environment in which the work can be done and which couldn't be done otherwise. In some of those fields, the advisor is traditionally also an author of all work. Some will disagree with this convention (I'm one), but it exists.
It is also, for a student or often a postdoc, a mistake to anger a supervisor as they have power over individuals that can be, and too often is, misused. So, you need to analyze your situation and act in your best interests. You may need to accept a less-than-optimal solution if it advances your career and gets you to the point of independence.
If you don't know how your advisor would react to your publishing without them, then it would be useful (essential) to find out, perhaps with a conversation with them in which you can judge their reaction.
What is ethical and what is optimal, or even advisable, may not align.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In general it is very good for students to publish single-authored papers. If you later apply for a position, people studying your application will not have to wonder which part of the work you did.
Your advisor's career might benefit marginally from being a coauthor, but it also benefits from your academic success. So even a selfish, unethical advisor should not object to you publishing independently. Only a very abusive advisor would. (Think of a certain chloroquine guru.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the question in the title has been answered by others on this and past threads.
I think it's worth noting that if the paper has sat on your advisors desk, then it is already somewhat implicit that they will be a coauthor on the paper. Thus, acting unilaterally to post the paper to a preprint server and/or trying to publish it yourself might be viewed differently by your advisor than if you had written and submitted the paper completely without their input or knowledge.
In any case, the best thing to do is talk with your advisor. Even if you can ethically publish the paper yourself, dealing with the fallout of an upset advisor may not be in your interest. If your advisor is reasonable they won't hold such a conversation against you, and if they are unreasonable, then the consequences of having such a conversation are likely to be much smaller than the consequences of publishing the paper without them.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/03
| 1,371
| 5,776
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a research assistant in an university.
I'm advising some students, in the capacity of co-advisor with another colleague, to write a work which is necessary for them to graduate and which will add points to the final marks they get.
They have sent the work in some time ago, but I didn't have time to read it until today.
I started reading it and was honestly quite poor: bold claims without citations, general statements over and over, the few papers that were cited were cited in too much details. Also some formal problems: inconsistency in citation style, quite a few typos, inconsistency in formatting and layout, quite elementary english (I'm not saying mine is good).
So I started to carefully review their work: commenting where citations needed to be inserted, telling them to insert them; commenting the out-of-scope parts, telling them they were out-of-scope; fixing the grammar now and then, planning in my mind a more general response where I would tell them how to improve and what was expected, for instance not to talk in details about a single paper but rather to express an overview about what the literature has said and done.
Suddenly the style changes drastically: the english is now perfect and scientific.
Since it's more than one student doing this work, I though that they had split the work among them, and the latter student was better than the former.
By continuing to read some other things don't square. The citation style is now consistent. As there are changes in the substance too: they now compare papers among one another, they tell a whole story by citing papers, the flow of the discourse is congruent with itself.
I thought that this new student was substantially better than the former, but then a new thought came into my mind, and I checked since well it can't harm to check.
They have "copied" whole paragraphs from published papers.
And by "copied" in double quotes I mean that they have changed some words, or added some useless specifications in parentheses, or changed the order of the words, so that the kindergarten teacher wouldn't realize the passage is copied.
I felt really angry and also physically ill, as I have spent quite few hours reading their thing. I also feel teased, duped and laughed at. I fell that what I'm doing has no sense anymore.
I don't know exactly what to do.
I sent an email to my colleague and to the professor. My colleague said that it's "common" for these things to happen and that we will "talk to" them at the next meeting (she used an expression which in my language means "talk to" but like in an angry and reprimanding way).
The professor has yet to answer.
I don't know if I'm still supposed to follow or advise them, and what my role would be consistent with the fact that I can't imagine seeing them again in the face, and honestly I'm not willing to help them anymore.<issue_comment>username_1: Do **not** take this personally. These students are not teasing, duping or laughing at you. They are trying to take the easy road to a good grade. They did it in a very obvious way. Either they do not know that this isn't allowed, or they do not care. They wasted your time, sure, but they've wasted their own time even more. And they did not do this to you specifically.
Your co-advisor said that you will talk to them. Listen to their explanation, figure out a good punishment if appropriate and if they seem uninterested of dishonest in their explanation, discuss with the professor and your co-advisor whether to stop the advising.
Finally, talk to your professor about the fact that you take this personally and how you can learn to let this go.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Since it seems you are a graduate student: This is your supervisor's responsibility. It's good you already informed your supervisor. Ask your supervisor to address the problem.
It is also possible your supervisor or someone else in the hierarchy already provided you with instructions on how to address this situation. Do not make up a new method if an existing one is available. Follow the procedure your university has established.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This behavior is a serious breach of the academic code of conduct.
If the document were submitted as a finished product the proper way to deal with the problem would be to refer it to the appropriate disciplinary body at your university. The minimum punishment should be failure for this work.
But it's just a draft, and you are just an advisor. So it's hard to decide what you should do (which is why you are asking here).
They need to understand how seriously they have erred. That what they did is "common" is no excuse. The angry "talking to" in your question in your language might be "[give them a talking to](https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/talking-to)" in English and may be the best you can do under the circumstances.
When you confront them, start by telling them how serious a problem they have. Document the sources from which you know they have copied. I would not give them an easy opportunity to explain why they did it. Tell them you have referred the matter to your professor. Tell them that if you were their professor you would fail them for this work. Tell them that if this were officially submitted they might be thrown out of school. You might conclude by noting how lucky they are that this is just a draft and you are only an advisor, so they have a chance to mend their ways and never do this again.
Perhaps they can even learn something that will save them from future grief.
Here's what I ask my students to read and paraphrase in writing: [https://www.cs.umb.edu/~eb/honesty/](https://www.cs.umb.edu/%7Eeb/honesty/)
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/03
| 2,999
| 13,147
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have thought about setting up a quiz as part of a job application form (see background below for details), where I ask about 5 multiple-choice questions which are trivial to answer (or require a minimal Google search) for people in the right field, no more than 2-3 minutes altogether. These would require a significant amount of effort to answer for people without a matching background for the position, since they would need to Google around for a while until they find the correct answer. The application submission will be possible only to those whose answers are correct, effectively blocking many of the applicants with a background mismatch who do not want to spend this much time to apply for a position they're not qualified for (at least this is my hypothesis). That is, the job application form can only be submitted if the quiz answers are correct, in addition to having completed all other requirements (name, current institution, referees, etc.). Otherwise the form will return an error until all the answers are right.
I would like to know what are possible issues I should consider with this system logistically and, mostly, ethically (I cannot really think of ethical issues here, but that's why I'm asking, to make sure). I would also like to know whether I should expect some of the relevant candidates (i.e., those with a matching background) to get annoyed by this system.
---
**Background**
Every time I advertise a position (at the postdoc or PhD student levels) I get lots of applicants whose background doesn't match the requirements (with wide ranges of mismatch, from wrong subfield to wrong field). Some times this is obvious from the beginning, some times I need to read the application materials in more detail. These applicants often just copy-paste their application materials from some previous call, which generally means they put little effort into it.
I have a system in place to try and minimize the amount of spam/wrong background applications I get. Essentially, there are text fields where the applicants need to insert information, like a description of how they contributed to up to 5 publications. I use this system because 1) the effort is bigger than just attaching a precompiled PDF and deters the laziest applicants and 2) it is easy to quickly spot the most uninterested/unqualified applicants because they tend to leave the 5-publication fields empty.
Still, many bad applications make it through the system, and I end up spending lots of time sorting through applications with approximately zero chance of success. If I spend 10-15 minutes per bad application, going through it plus sending a rejection email to the applicant, it's still a significant amount of time (let's say I have to go through 20-30 of these, that means between half and a full day of work wasted on this, which I could have spent helping my group members with their research).
I want to avoid all of this wasted effort, since the situation is unfair to everyone involved, including those candidates with a matching background whose applications I need to review in less detail than I would like because those spam applications are sucking time away from it (I would say, for any given opening, I usually receive only about 30-40% of serious applications, meaning all strong *and* weak candidates with the *correct background*).<issue_comment>username_1: Frankly, if I were a good candidate for your position, I might find it insulting and look elsewhere.
Note that if you try to automate the hiring process in some way, even partially, you will get both false positives and false negatives. The false negatives are something you really want to avoid if you are looking for good candidates. And those who look elsewhere are a lost opportunity.
If you are going to spend a few years working with whomever you hire then spending time in selection is reasonable. Make it seem friendly, not unfriendly.
You could, perhaps, depending on rules in place, even get others in the lab help with the initial sorting.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think one important question you have to ask yourself is would this system have prevented any of the actual people you hired (and are happy with) from getting their position / applying for their position? Maybe you could even make the effort and ask them.
And while I get your frustration with applicants that do not fit the bill, some that may be from a field that is not 100% percent yours might in the end still be the right candidate and even bring in new ideas that a person with the "correct" background would not be able to see because of being to focused on one topic. A system like the one you proposed could be detrimental for applications of such persons.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I partially agree with username_1's answer, although I would not use the word offended, rather irritated. If they would be super easy for me to answer I would wonder where the catch is (and probably not realize that they might be hard to answer for people outside the field).
Something to consider as well: Multiple (or single choice) questions are hard to pose in an unambiguous way, making them sometimes quite hard to answer. If this would happen, and I would fail for such a reason (assuming I would be a good fit), I would try to submit 2, maybe 3 times and then give up. Others might beat the system by submitting 20 times or just being better at googling stuff than me. From this I would say adding this might only cause good applicants to reconsider and the resilient ones to apply nevertheless. In any case, if you do this I would let people send in their first guess (no rejecting of wrong answers). Then you can look into the applications ranked by number of correctly answered questions.
You mentioned questions about e.g. contributions to papers. Could you maybe just extend this and ask another question like: How would your current learnings from your papers would help you for research in my group/the project you are applying for? Or something like: How would you approach Task X (where X is a task the prospective student would work on), specify some specific methods and how they would help you in doing X successfully.
I would guess such questions immediately show you who made an effort to look into the research of your group and think how they can really apply their skills for you. In addition the answers also already show you a little bit about the candidate and their motivation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Advertising a position is a bureaucratic process with serious regulatory, legal, and university policy implications. If I were you, I would absolutely refrain from implementing any creative, nonstandard idea like what you’re describing without running it by your university’s HR department and getting them to approve it.
Even if HR approves it, as others have said, it may simply be a poor recruitment strategy. Mainly, I think it would be a way of signaling to prospective applicants that you are the kind of boss who considers his own time too precious to spend on the tedious but necessary work of filtering out unqualified candidates for the position you are advertising, but would happily waste the time of people lower than him on the career ladder.
If you only want to recruit people who have low enough levels of self esteem to consider working for such a boss, then sure, your strategy sounds great…
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: **If** you have a lot of applicants, **you could make it a game**.
This is something that is sometimes done by cybersecurity national organizations - they create a treasure hunt-like set of chained questions that end up with the Graal: the application page.
Of course, this is very much aligned with the mindset of these people: they love to investigate. If your area of work is similar it could work.
---
**Otherwise please don't**, you will lose possibly good candidates. Just make sure that in the job ad you have a set of points such as
>
> If you
>
>
> * know what a zigrob is, and you built at least a type A or B ...
> * ... speak Blazarith fluently ...
> * ... used a gripth measuring device in a zufl context ...
>
>
> then we need you! We offer ...
>
>
>
You could ask in the application form for some information about these points (though it is highly unusual) and in any case during the interview you know where to start and cut short if it does not go well.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: **TL;DR:** You have to deal with both, the imposters and those suffering from the imposter syndrome. If your quiz shall weed out the former, it will likely deter the latter.
Just as there are many applicants who are overly optimistic regarding their suitability for a job (i.e., the ones you wish to filter out), there are also many applicants who are overly pessimistic.
(These pessimists are over-proportionally from disadvantaged groups who have been subtly indoctrinated that they are less capable all their life, e.g., women.)
In particular in academia, where jobs are highly specialised and no candidate checks all the boxes, it is a challenge to make pessimists apply even if they are not a perfect match, lest you have to pick a far worse optimist.
If your quiz shall be any effective in weeding out the overly optimistic, it will likely also deter pessimists. For example, a pessimist may have the following thoughts triggered by your quiz:
* “Why waste time and effort on a decent application if it may be filtered out automatically due to some mistake?”
* “I don’t know this from the top of my head; I am certainly not qualified.” (In particular with respect to your remark that may “require a minimal Google search”.)
* “There are almost certainly some questions in here that shall trick the candidate in choosing a naïve but wrong answer. I found all the answers straightforward so I almost certainly did it wrong.”
* “I am not sure about the answer to that one question; I will certainly fail the quiz and I am not qualified anyway.”
Mind that these won’t be false negatives in the sense that they fail the quiz; these will be people who don’t apply at all.
(I here assume that applicants know about the quiz before they write the application, which seems unavoidable to me; otherwise you have people failing because of a lack of time, etc.)
Of course, by making your quiz relatively easy, you can ameliorate the aforementioned problems, but this comes at the expense of being worse at weeding out the overly optimistic or a lot of effort to design the quiz – which I don’t expect to be worth it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: To me, both the question and the other answers seem to be addressing the wrong problem. I think the real problem is here:
>
> I end up spending lots of time sorting through applications with approximately zero chance of success. If I spend 10-15 minutes per bad application, going through it plus sending a rejection email to the applicant, it's still a significant amount of time (let's say I have to go through 20-30 of these, that means between half and a full day of work wasted on this...
>
>
>
I would suggest that two minutes is enough to spot most obviously bad applications (i.e., the ones you propose filtering out via technical means). Two minutes of concentrated effort is actually a lot -- even if an application has some subtleties, you should be able to understand the situation within two minutes. And remember, competitive applicants will go out of their way to make it clear why they want to work with you -- if you spend two full minutes reviewing an application and it still seems like the application is not even close to competitive, then it's very unlikely that further review would lead to a good hire.
You also mention sending a rejection email to the applicant. While this is a nice courtesy, I would argue that it is not necessary for applicants who manifestly do not meet the basic requirements of the job. People in a different field, for example, are basically spamming you by sending out applications scattershot; there is no need to further waste your time with a rejection e-mail. If rejection emails are required in your part of the world, I would send them as a batch -- one e-mail bcc'd to all these applicants. Of course, I encourage you to continue sending personalized rejections to candidates who made a real effort.
Now your actual question was about implementing a quiz on the application form. I would argue that you've already done that with your requirement that applicants answer individualized questions. Whether this is a good idea is debatable (if a qualified applicant leaves these questions blank, what do you do? If you interview them anyway, the questions are a waste of everyone's time; if you reject them flat out, you risk losing a good hire). But setting this aside, it seems like you've already defined a filter. All that's left to do is to actually use this filter on your side, spending little or no time on applicants that do not provide satisfactory answers to these questions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/03
| 696
| 3,184
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am going to teach a course in the Winter term and I have access to the solution manual provided by the publisher. Is it legal to share some questions (not the whole questions) with their answers with students?<issue_comment>username_1: You want to check with the publisher. To make this public or open access may violate the conditions under which you were supplied with the solution manual: it is certainly not recommended. I doubt you’d be fined or sued but the publisher could simply refuse to grant you access to current or future material if you violate their condition of use.
IANAL but to post this material behind a firewall where only students registered in the class have access is probably legal.
A workaround occasionally tolerated is to make the document “non-searchable” so that Google etc can’t index the contents of the document: this can be achieved in various ways (including rewriting by hand). The overarching concern is that if what you post is in the public domain then the textbook looses much of its appeal.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The legality is questionable, but note that copyright violations are usually a matter of civil law, not criminal. But what you suggest in a comment (electronic PDF) could be considered a form of re-publishing.
Some answer manuals (mine, for instance) ask that the answers not be given to students in any form. They are provided just as a guide to the teacher to ease course preparation. You should probably follow that advice even if it is somewhat stricter than the law requires (see below).
While you can quote short segments of a copyrighted work for certain purposes, the law is often designed to forbid copying that lessens the value of the original. Maintaining creator value is actually the purpose of copyright. And, letting solutions provided by the authors into the public arena will certainly lessen the value of the book in the future. (The book itself, not just the answer booklet).
The other issue with copyright is that you can't normally copy/republish a "complete work". But that doesn't necessarily mean a complete book. A diagram within a book might be construed as complete in itself and so can't be copied. I don't know whether a "complete" question with its answer would be construed that way, but an aggressive lawyer might make such a claim.
But there is a further reason for not doing what you suggest. Not only is it possible that your electronic version will spread further, but *pedagogically* your students are better off developing solutions themselves than reading the solutions of others. There is much less learning value in reading solutions than in producing them. And even if the students memorize the solutions of others, there is much less learning value and much less chance that they will develop any *insight* into their field.
Much better is to assign the exercises and give minimal hints when people get stuck. Not "do it like this...", but "have you considered...?" or even "*This* is where you went astray".
Students can be misled into thinking they know more than they really do if you make it easier than it needs to be.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/04
| 1,950
| 8,150
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD candidate who applied to a mix of postdocs and tenure track assistant professor positions. I've received an offer for a postdoc fellowship (2-3 year institutional training fellowship) that won't begin until summer 2022, and they've given me a 3 week deadline to respond. However, I have an final round interview for my top tenure track choice a bit beyond their 3-week deadline.
How should I go about negotiating an extension on the postdoc offer, given I don't know when my last tenure track interview option will be making their decision/extending an offer. Also, at this point, would you suggest being open with them and disclosing that you're interviewing for tenure track positions?<issue_comment>username_1: These are delicate situations, and there is no definitive answer for how to deal with them. On the one hand it is reasonable to want to progress your career, but it is also costly/annoying to institutions when you accept a position there and then leave shortly afterwards for another position. Ultimately, this will come down to whether or not you are comfortable accepting a position with the intention that you are going to keep looking for other positions while you work there (and possibly leave early). I've never felt comfortable doing that, but I know others who have no qualms about it.
As specific advice on your situation, the first thing to note is that it will probably be a while before you hear back about the tenure-track position. (It is not unusual for universities to take many months post-interviews to make decisions on these hires.) So if you accept a postdoc position it will probably be a reasonably long while before you have any other offer. Contrarily, if you reject it, you probably won't have a position at all for quite a while. This militates in favour of accepting the postdoc offer, safe in the knowledge that you will get a substantial amount of time there before you have to make a decision with a competing offer.
If you *do* get an offer of a tenure-track position you could also ask your present institution to match it if they want to keep you (i.e., giving them first option to keep you if they can match the offer). It is costly and inconvenient to replace staff, so your postdoc institution are not going to be thrilled at the fact you've applied elsewhere, but if they have first option to keep you then this might soften the blow.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> How should I go about negotiating an extension on the postdoc offer
>
>
>
You should not. There are two possible outcomes. If you don't get the tenure track job, the extension does you no good. If you do get the tenure track job, the sequence of events will be:
* You wait four weeks for an interview
* You wait six more weeks to get an offer
* You negotiate for a week, and an agreement is reached after about 11 weeks
* You wait 4 to 50 weeks for the tenure-track job to actually start
If you can start the postdoc job immediately, just start it. At a minimum, you will get two months pay and experience.
This advice may not apply if you are already postponing the postdoc start date for some other reason; but in any case, most postdoc supervisors will not wait ten weeks to see if you get that offer. Four weeks is really the longest reasonable time for them to wait.
This all assumes the tenure-track interview is a final interview, and not the first interview.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: When it comes to job searching, even in academia, there are no illusions that your position is permanent. (Not even if it's tenure-track!) At this point, your objective as a postdoc is to qualify for tenure-track offers.
So, in my mind, the question is really one of honesty. If you're worried about getting a job at all, then honesty will help you, but it can also hurt you short term. If you're going to be okay applying for more jobs for a few months, then you're probably in a position to let the institution that made the postdoc offer know that you're a finalist for a tenure-track position, and don't know your long term prospects as a postdoc.
They'll likely do one of three things:
1. Hire you anyway, because there will be several finalists but only one assistant professor, and if they like you they'll have a chance to show you that the postdoc with them might actually accelerate your career faster than the professorship.
2. Go with someone else, because they need the position filled and have (unrealistic) ideas about postdoc retention. (Postdocs are horribly underpaid experts with little to no governmental protection. It's not very hard to convince most postdocs to leave their position for a better-paying, higher-impact industry job)
3. Make you an offer for a much shorter period, with far less favorable benefits, since they need the help, and can keep looking for another replacement while you're with them.
If you're okay with all three options, I personally prefer honesty both as an employee as an employer. It's normal to have different goals in life, and the question is if your goals align well enough to work together for a while.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I was in a similar position a couple of years ago. I think departments are aware that they take an unreasonable amount of time to make these decisions and that candidates need to have backup plans. At my department at least, it is common for a successful tenure-track hire to delay their start by a year. In fact, I think most successful hires in our department do this. (I have no idea how common or acceptable this would be at more teaching-oriented departments who might need the tenure-track position filled immediately to cover teaching. Perhaps people can provide their thoughts on that in the comments.)
With this in mind, it might be possible to accept the postdoc with the open understanding with them that if you receive a tenure-track offer then you would leave the postdoc after one year (delaying the start of the tenure-track position by one year).
That is what I did. Before accepting the postdoc offer, I explained my situation openly and honestly with the postdoc PI, explained that I was interviewing for tenure-track positions, and suggested the above compromise. She was more than happy to have me come for one year of the postdoc rather than zero!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: The best answer may depend on your field of study. My answer may be
biased because I am most familiar with the mathematical sciences
(including applications and statistics). Also, I'm assuming you're a
US citizen and both positions are in the US.
Especially if 'PhD candidate' is a euphemism for 'still working on my thesis', then
take the post-doc job, finish your thesis, and try to use the post doc
environment to get ideas for good starts on a couple of publications.
That extra experience and record of accomplishments will put you in
a strong position to get hired for a tenure track position and to
get tenure (in amongst dealing with class preparations and advising
students). If you start the tenure track position with finishing part of your
thesis still hanging over you, your chances of getting tenure may seriously
reduced. (Almost no university departments will grant tenure to someone
who is still working on a thesis and with no publications.)
I made the mistake of taking a tenure track position when my Ph.D. thesis
was "not quite finished". The environment there was not quite as promised,
the teaching load way high, and after one year it was clear that the
thesis was just as far off as before. 'Wasted year' would be putting it gently.
Then, I was fortunate enough
to be able to transition to a post doc at a major university during
my second year. There I learned most of the applied skills I have used
in my 40-some years since. Also, I made contacts that turned out to
be of amazing benefit as my career progressed. After the post doc I
took a tenure track job I have enjoyed enormously until my recent retirement in my 80's
(interrupted only by a few years working for the Federal government on
leaves of absence).
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/04
| 3,445
| 14,262
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a postdoc in engineering who is interested in doing more "old school" mathematical theoretical research than computational research (i.e., running large simulations on a computer). Theory seems to get negligible funding in my area, but computational projects seem loaded with funding. I haven't seen any hard data on this, but my impression is that theory in engineering broadly seems to have been in decline since the 1970s or so.
The research project I'm working on right now is mostly computational, as were the vast majority of postdocs that I applied to. In the past few years I haven't seen any postdoc position in my area that was primarily theoretical.
How can one fund theoretical research these days? Am I wrong about getting funding for theory being difficult? It could be that few try to get funding for theoretical projects.
---
This is in my view irrelevant to the question but based on my experience talking to people, I know some will wonder. Why I'm interested in theory in short: Computational research in my area tends to produce very expensive pretty pictures of little value. Theory in contrast is cheap, and frequently of comparable accuracy to far more expensive computations. It also returns a lot of information that is uncommon (and often difficult to obtain) computationally like global trends and insight into the structure of the problem.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure how the situation is in your particular area, but the usual life cycle is of a particular research direction is: people get spectacular results - get famous - get funding for students, postdoc etc. - get even more results - get into funding panels, editorial boards etc. - even more funding flows - ... - ~~<NAME> and <NAME> write books about them~~ the direction is exhausted and people move elsewhere.
*Theory in contrast is cheap, and frequently of comparable accuracy to far more expensive computations* - if so, then there should be recent high-profile breakthroughs in your area with theoretical methods, recognized by the community. Someone who just made a breakthroughs would not be short on funding. Why not apply for postdocs with them?
If there are no such recognized breakthroughs, then it seems that the community sees the importance of theoretical methods in your area differently from you. Likely there is a reason for that. But it might also be that you are right and they are wrong; a way to convince them is to start publishing strong results obtained with theoretical methods by yourself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The cynical ---but probably correct--- answer is that you camouflage the research *you* want to do inside a grant application that focuses on the research *they* want you to do. So in the situation you describe, where computational projects get loads of funding and theory-work gets negligible funding, you could construct a theory-based project, add a computational element to it, but then write up the application in a way that makes it look like the computational element is the major part. In fact, given the situation you describe, you are probably lucky that your existing work is in the hot area, and it would be best not to squander that advantage.
When I worked in a school of physical sciences in Australia, there was a running joke among the academics there that if you wanted funding for your project in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, oceanography, etc., all you had to do was add something about climate-change into it. So if you gave a talk on your research, sometimes one of the academics in the audience would use the question period to (jokingly) ask if you could connect this to climate-change, even if your topic had nothing to do with it. This was because the funding preference at that time (and still now I think) gave high priority to research on climate change, but low priority to much other scientific research.
Now, this is just the cynical answer, and I'm not sure if the academics in my department actually acted on this kind of reasoning, or if it was just the running joke around the traps. Similarly, this is not something I've done myself. In any case, I've seen this attitude around and seen anecdotal evidence of it being applied to secure funding. It shows a recognition that it is much easier to get funding for some things than others, and the strategic response that this provokes.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Fund is a harder question than to be applicable to. Plenty of new mathematics has been invented in the process of helping undergird and understand the techniques of approximating simulation techniques first invented by engineers and physicists without a great understanding of the fundamentals first. Having the aide of mathematicians may speed up or make more trustworthy the results of new and experimental techniques in computing and simulation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: A lot hinges upon how correct you are about the greater accuracy of theoretical results. If theory is demonstrably more accurate/insightful, an idea would be to create a comparative investigation. Ask for computational resources in the grant, keep some money aside for theoretical work, and use the study to highlight the superiority of theory.
The problem could well be that many in engineering do not actually believe that theory can efficiently solve real-world problems faster than numerical simulations. Changing that perspective would be key to you being able to follow your chosen direction.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This is a technical answer for the US. As a research administrator, I have submitted more than 100 applications for Computer Scientists at a world-class university in the last 6 years. I have successfully justified tens of millions of dollars across various fields of CS-- data science, AI, HCI, CNS, theory, etc. I have applied for funding to about 15 federal sponsors and dozens of non-federal ones including Silicon Valley. I hope to draw some distinctions between the CS and more classical math tracks, but please know that some of what applies to CS applies to math too; however my direct experience is mostly with CS and not math (which does have less funding overall). Lessons that I impart among all new faculty (and even some senior folks):
1. Applications to federal sponsors are no longer based on one person's research. Teams and centers are the new normal. If you want to go solo, there are still some options, e.g., NSF has the [CISE Core Programs](https://beta.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/computer-and-information-science-and-engineering-core-programs) (our theory folks tend to fall under CCF, primarily under AF "Algorithmic Foundations"). However, NIH has nearly eliminated the solo R01 project--interdisciplinary teams are nearly always more compelling unless you are applying for a small project (R03), or a class like DP2 that focuses on a single PI's research. The average age of getting an R01 as the PI (the basic independent research grant) is famously old -- [mean 44 y.o., median 42 y.o](https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2021/11/18/long-term-trends-in-the-age-of-principal-investigators-supported-for-the-first-time-on-nih-r01-awards/). So this all being said, I find that my current CS folks (mostly AI and HCI at present) are always part of teams. They can cobble together millions of dollars over 5-10 funding sources as part of these teams. It's all about taking a small to middling chunk out a large project. It is possible that you have to contribute to a topic that you are less interested in, but often my folks work with hospitals who have may get 75% of the budget on the application. For us, 25% of a multi-million dollar application **is still a lot of money** for one project. My folks are almost always subcontracts or non-lead collaborators (i.e. "Co-PI" for NSF). I have someone who is a sub on DOD MURIs -- that is a lot of funding for the individual, but only a small percentage of a huge application. You have to figure out your niche; find people who will plug you into their projects. A junior PI can be very well-funded by playing a small role on other people's projects. In my institution, it is customary for senior faculty to give their name to a junior PI's project (i.e., senior PI is lead PI helping fund junior PI's work), and the senior PI prioritizes 1 month of supplemental salary for the junior PI as well as giving them a graduate student or postdoc.
2. Be sponsor independent. CS faculty tend to apply to NSF of course, but they also find ways to hook into various DOD sponsors, NIH, DOE, Census Bureau, really any agency with a solicitation, their skills are probably valued in some small way. Again, $50k here, $300k there, it all adds up. You have to figure out which agencies fund basic research and through what mechanisms. You can search for open solicitations across all of the US government on [grants.gov](https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/search-grants.html). If you are interested in US gov't contracts, you want [sam.gov](https://sam.gov/content/opportunities). I suggest finding PIs in your institution who can tell you what they submit to. You can also look them up online to see some of what they have been awarded (often on their own websites). Funding is a relationships game. I know folks who are friendly with the Program Officer/Program Manager, and this is how they get their funding. They know when to apply; they know what the agency wants to see in applications. They write for this relationship and they get the funding. This is very common with DOD, DOE, and NASA; somewhat with NSF.
3. Unlike in the wet labs, funding in CS is based on paying higher salaries and low to no "other direct costs". We generally don't put computers on grants because too many projects run on them to spend time allocating percentages. Some faculty get cloud computing resources donated. We instead write $500k grants to fund our very large indirect cost rate as well as postdocs starting in the $70-75k range plus about 25% in fringe. That doesn't go very far. We want to compete with Silicon Valley, but we can't. This is the best we can do. This is actually about $20k above the NIH minimum for postdocs.
4. When considering building a lab, I tell my faculty to consider two types of resources in particular: money and their time/patience. I have a PI (HCI is the focus) right now with over a million dollars (NSF funding split over about 5 grants, non-lead on 4 of them). I have to help them figure out how to spend in two years. This PI has less than 5 years as an assistant professor, with 2 years under COVID. Their postdoc just got a new job; they have two graduate students in their lab, one is 90% funded by a fellowship. What are we going to do? I have told them to hire at least 2 postdocs, but I won't let them hire just anyone. The reason is that CS labs tend to be small, especially ones bent on theory. At my institution, the theory labs like intimate groups and PIs do not expand them even when they are funded. So I ask my PI how they handle bad relationships -- if they are willing to part ways with a bad hire. If they hire someone who is just passable, they will have mediocre results for two years (possibly a third), and will end up feeling drained by having to support a postdoc who is supposed to be helping relieve the leadership role. So what can we do then if we don't hire a middling postdoc? I ask them if they have colleagues with students or postdocs who they can support on their project. Maybe a graduate student in a theory group, perhaps an ML person, etc. We chip away at that funding with small percentages on different projects, and this is the essence of successful resource sharing in CS and theory groups that I have found.
So what I would do is go to [NSF's award search](https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/) and look into what projects are funded for what you are interested in. Look up the PI's websites and see if their proposals are released on their site (not super common, but happens). If you really want to look at a successful application, you can [submit a FOIA request](https://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp) to read the proposal that was funded. [**ETA**: Some folks feel you should contact the PI first and ask if they will share the proposal. If they say no, then you can submit the FOIA. Many PIs will share when asked.] Pay attention to the directorate. Are your people applying to the traditional MPS ([Mathematical and Physical Sciences](https://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=MPS)) or are they getting their funding through CISE ([Computer and Information Science and Engineering](https://www.nsf.gov/dir/index.jsp?org=CISE))? If you are interested in total dollars each directorate and program awards, that information [is available as well](https://dellweb.bfa.nsf.gov/). Hint: DMS ([Division of Mathematical Sciences](https://www.nsf.gov/div/index.jsp?div=DMS)) is not where the money is at. I highly suggest finding a person whose work you admire, looking them up in the NSF award system and seeing if you can find someone on a big center (e.g., AI Institutes, STC) and do a FOIA request to see how that person was written into the application.
Try to strike a balance between doing what you love, which may come without a lot of funding, and being willing to do something you don't want to do for much more funding. Find a research administrator at your organization and ask for advice. To your point about theory being cheap; that's a lot of your problem. IHE's (institutions of higher education) fund 9-month appointments for the PIs; they do their thing during the year; maybe in time hire a grad or two with startup funds, and they don't need a lot more than that. A bio-engineering PI would fail within months with a setup like that. The CS/math world is a much lower-stakes game (no judgement there; it just is). You don't have to deal with buying consumables, user fees, animals, human subjects, capital equipment, etc. etc.
Best of luck. The funding road is hard for everyone; even the top PIs. They spend more time thinking about funding their lab than you can possibly imagine. You are never "set".
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/04
| 479
| 1,860
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am teaching an academic writing course for grad students and part of the course content involves peer review activities on one another's writings. These peer reviews will receive a letter grade.
Do you know of any tools/templates/techniques to facilitate this both from the students perspective (e.g. a form or even a Perusall-like tool) and the instructor's perspective (grading peer reviews will be very time consuming unless there's some standardization).
Tips or creative ideas are welcome!<issue_comment>username_1: For peer-review purposes, I've been content with the [Workshop activity in Moodle](https://docs.moodle.org/311/en/Workshop_activity).
You can set up peer review template forms, change the "blindness" (anonymity) of the process, modify the number of peer reviews per submission, and you have a single platform which allows the grading of both the paper submission and the peer review reports.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you want the students to learn to peer review like a professional scientist, they need to understand that article peer reviewing does not come with a template. Each paper is different and each peer review should be adjusted to match. That said, here's a
[checklist that students could use.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/148045/13240)
[Here is a similar resource for mathematics.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/131593/13240)
If you want students to learn to peer review grant applications, your funding agency probably does provide a template.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: We had very good experiences using Calibrated Peer Review (CPR) <http://cpr.molsci.ucla.edu/Home> for "writing across the curriculum" for undergraduates. I think it should fit your purposes as well.
Some discussion <https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1062843.pdf>
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/04
| 1,644
| 6,140
|
<issue_start>username_0: How to systematically become verified of the "textual quality" of submission on time of submission? How to know when quality is good?
Some older posts:
[How accurate are published papers?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41812/how-accurate-are-published-papers?noredirect=1&lq=1)
[Why are there many typos and errors in publications?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/67308/why-are-there-many-typos-and-errors-in-publications)
[Dealing with the inevitable presence of mistakes in paper submissions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/171556/dealing-with-the-inevitable-presence-of-mistakes-in-paper-submissions?rq=1)
More particularly, it has seemed to me that 100% error freeness could be technically challenging.
However, is there some general "test of goodness" for "ready for submission"? So given a text, what to do to know it's "good for submission"?
**When checking maths, citations, or grammar this is easier.** Just see if it matches the rules. But in writing, the particular problem does not seem to be about not knowing rules **but knowing where one has broken them by not being *systematic enough*. I.e. methods for managing error**.
Further, the errors usually exist in layers (citations, grammar, parts of grammar rules, cross-references, logical connections, ...). In fact, I think this should specifically ask for a "systematic method" for inferring and/or managing the accuracy. Do such exist?
This could be further confused by a myriad of subjective factors, such as seen in e.g.:
<https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-94-007-4168-3_1>
---
Note:
[Dealing with the inevitable presence of mistakes in paper submissions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/171556/dealing-with-the-inevitable-presence-of-mistakes-in-paper-submissions?rq=1)
Has some answers like:
<https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/171572/125350>
<https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/171578/125350>
However, I'm lost as to how would one do the verification **in practice** or in a **"checkbox" manner** and how to actually meet what's sufficient. **Given that submissions have errors even with proofreading could suggest that this is not trivial at all.**
Definitions such as:
* "they make the paper **unreadable**"
seem ambiguous if the submitter believed it's **readable**. So how to decide how readable is it?
Tips like
* "you learn to make papers "better" by writing papers"
seem unclear for actual verification or measurement of quality for submission.
There's one [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/171572/125350) saying:
>
> In summary, my recommendation is to try to point out the key areas in
> your paper that are likely to be read by Reviewers and focus on having
> those completely free of mistakes. Perfection is difficult to
> guarantee, so at least focus on the big picture.
>
>
>
But this is contradictory for the process of writing. If the paper would be read in "glimpses", then shouldn't this suggest that **one should aim to make short explanations in the first place?** And then checking would be easier since there's less of it? However, is this the only way? OTOH, short texts may fail by being "too dense". And then the question would be "well how'd one know it's too dense?".
Further, this is contradicted by:
<https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/171570/125350>
>
> More-narrative approaches can be more robust, and less sensitive to
> typos and other errors.
>
>
>
Confusing the notion on whether the quality can be managed in an independent way. **Making writing seem like a matter of taste, but which it cannot be if "quality" must be agreeable.** And introducing hard-to-systemize aspects(?)<issue_comment>username_1: When error free things appear in print it is, often enough, a combination of blind luck along with many eyes.
The luck part should be clear.
The many eyes means that several people have reviewed the work with an "eye" toward corrections. The different people have different concerns. Content reviewers are looking for errors of meaning. But copy editors are looking purely at the form. And that process of using several different people with different concerns is what publishers use to approach an error-free text even if it fails in some way. They also, often, publish errata, so that the reading public can help in the process of error correction with future printings taking account of the errors found and reported.
<NAME> has, in the past offered cash bounties for errors found in his CS works, though they are now symbolic "payments". So, the error free state is approached asymptotically in a sense.
An author is not the best person to find errors in their work because of the way the mind works. There are two aspects to this. One is that you, the author, often "see" on the page what you thought you wrote rather than what you did write. I've switched intersection and union in math formulae for example and it was only by accident that I noticed it.
The second aspect is that the mind uses a predictive process when you read (I don't have a reference handy) so that it predicts what is to follow immediately after what you have already read. This speeds up reading, but also lets you overlook errors. This second aspect applies to other readers than just the author of course, bringing us back to *many* eyes and luck.
And some copyeditors are just better at finding small errors than others, and some reviewers are better at finding big errors.
So, the process *works* even if imperfectly.
This is one of the big issues with self-publishing. You don't normally have many eyes, only (blind) luck.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Published texts are virtually never 100% error-free. If it happens, it's because all the people involved proofread it very, very carefully.
For illustration, I once edited a book where the author's wife said she'll proofread the manuscript again and again until she can't find any more errors. She (and me) carefully checked all the proofs at every stage, and yet after we published it, we found a typo ...
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/04
| 350
| 1,471
|
<issue_start>username_0: My two year postdoc contract is ending next week. I am looking for a job at a bank in my state now. My university's personnel office has contacted me asking me to resign; that is to say, they're asking me to bring the employment relationship to an end (a few days) before the automatic end date in the contract. What should I do?<issue_comment>username_1: * Read your employment contract and handbook very carefully. Particularly look for information about severance payments. Also check for information about notices that must be provided, and when they must be provided.
* If you are entitled to a severance payment, resigning will likely give up that payment. Do not do that.
* Do not agree to any document falsely claiming you have been provided with a notice. If you agree you received a notice, you may give up pay in lieu of notice.
* Find out about your local government's unemployment insurance/benefits. They may not apply if you resign.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no need to resign if you have a fixed-term contract. When your contract ends, your employment ends. That's it.
Unless administration gives you a good reason, you don't need to consider this request any further[1]. Since there is no possible advantage for you, you simply decline to do this.
[1] I'm assuming a normal western employment system. The answer might be different in places like, e.g., India, where employees have fewer rights.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/04
| 1,052
| 4,517
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to a computational biology job. I want to make it clear that I am extremely interested in the practical aspects of my work, wet-biology generally, and collaborating with / supporting bench researchers.
My concern is that "bench researcher" is a colloquial / derogatory / unprofessional term. Should I use it in formal writing or something else?
Additionally, I am not certain if this is the correct term to use in any case. I noticed that there is "clinical research" distinguished from "bench research". I can move this into a separate question if it doesn't resolve naturally from this one.
Update: I am not especially familiar with lab work (my background is computational from outside biology) so I am not precisely sure what kind of roles I am trying to describe. Ultimately, any 'real scientist' who my work could help. I may work on a range of projects including predicting various things about amino acid sequences, for example binding energies of the protein. Really I am looking for a word for "biologist who doesn't just sit at a computer all day".
In case you are worried, the job explicitly does not require biological experience.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't find it derogatory per se, but also don't think it's necessary to discuss "bench researchers". If anything, I think most people tend to have a bit of in-group bias, such that only a computational person would think "bench researcher" is derogatory, and only a bench person would think "computational researcher" is derogatory. The most plausible way you would offend would be if someone got the impression that you had a negative or patronizing view of bench science or bench scientists (see for example <https://xkcd.com/793/> for an example of how this attitude can be expressed).
However, there isn't any neat division between roles in a biological laboratory; saying you want to work with "bench researchers" could imply that you don't realize that people who do wet biology may *also* have computational skills, and that those skills may be comparable to yours (or, likely, far superior if you haven't had computational experience in their specific domain).
I think it would be sufficient to make clear that you are interested in working alongside bench *research* (rather than *researchers*). However, if you are writing a cover letter for a job application, I think you can be a lot more specific to the role you're applying for and express specific interest in the technologies used in that lab; you can read papers published by the members of the lab to get an idea of what they do. That may be more difficult if you haven't had any exposure to research methods in biology, but you're going to be a better candidate if you can learn what you can ahead of time. Otherwise, your application may seem out of place.
The categorization of research depends a lot on your perspective. "[Clinical](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_research)" research, though refers to work done in human subjects for medical purposes, such as trials of drugs or devices; for a clinician/physician, the antonym would be usually be "[basic research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_research)" referring to studying of the underlying processes or mechanisms; basic research can include both theoretical/computational approaches and wet biology/bench science. Clinical research can also involve primarily computational/statistical approaches, though, especially in fields such as epidemiology and public health.
Because these lines are not drawn neatly, I'd advise against using the terms without feeling comfortable with them. Instead, say what you really mean, plainly and specifically.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, the phrase that is used is "bench scientist." It means someone who does experiments themselves. The experiments may or may not be done at a "lab bench" which looks like a counter.
I would not expect the phrase "bench scientist" to be derogatory. The real pitfall would be that implying someone is no longer a bench scientist might be derogatory. Many former bench scientists in academia have managerial roles. They are deans, or they write grants, or they supervise the bench scientists. The traditional belief in academia is that bench scientists are better, or have better jobs, than their supervisors. In reality, both are necessary.
This might be a chemistry-specific tradition. Chemists are much less prone to field work than biologists.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/04
| 979
| 4,195
|
<issue_start>username_0: I collected data almost a decade ago with a bad collaborator. The collaborator contributed very little and I didn't want to continue the partnership. When data collection was complete, I ran basic analysis and wrote a short report for the funder. I then set the project aside and moved on to other work. I didn't want to work with that collaborator any more.
Recently, discussing a paper idea with a different collaborator, I realized that the old data would be of some use as part of a broader paper. The old data would probably be used for about 1/3 of the tests in a notional paper. **I believe that I am obligated to write to the old collaborator and ask if they want to be involved. I expect they'd accept co-authorship, and then the other co-authors and I will do most of the work. Is there an ethical way to avoid this situation?**<issue_comment>username_1: I don't find it derogatory per se, but also don't think it's necessary to discuss "bench researchers". If anything, I think most people tend to have a bit of in-group bias, such that only a computational person would think "bench researcher" is derogatory, and only a bench person would think "computational researcher" is derogatory. The most plausible way you would offend would be if someone got the impression that you had a negative or patronizing view of bench science or bench scientists (see for example <https://xkcd.com/793/> for an example of how this attitude can be expressed).
However, there isn't any neat division between roles in a biological laboratory; saying you want to work with "bench researchers" could imply that you don't realize that people who do wet biology may *also* have computational skills, and that those skills may be comparable to yours (or, likely, far superior if you haven't had computational experience in their specific domain).
I think it would be sufficient to make clear that you are interested in working alongside bench *research* (rather than *researchers*). However, if you are writing a cover letter for a job application, I think you can be a lot more specific to the role you're applying for and express specific interest in the technologies used in that lab; you can read papers published by the members of the lab to get an idea of what they do. That may be more difficult if you haven't had any exposure to research methods in biology, but you're going to be a better candidate if you can learn what you can ahead of time. Otherwise, your application may seem out of place.
The categorization of research depends a lot on your perspective. "[Clinical](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinical_research)" research, though refers to work done in human subjects for medical purposes, such as trials of drugs or devices; for a clinician/physician, the antonym would be usually be "[basic research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_research)" referring to studying of the underlying processes or mechanisms; basic research can include both theoretical/computational approaches and wet biology/bench science. Clinical research can also involve primarily computational/statistical approaches, though, especially in fields such as epidemiology and public health.
Because these lines are not drawn neatly, I'd advise against using the terms without feeling comfortable with them. Instead, say what you really mean, plainly and specifically.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, the phrase that is used is "bench scientist." It means someone who does experiments themselves. The experiments may or may not be done at a "lab bench" which looks like a counter.
I would not expect the phrase "bench scientist" to be derogatory. The real pitfall would be that implying someone is no longer a bench scientist might be derogatory. Many former bench scientists in academia have managerial roles. They are deans, or they write grants, or they supervise the bench scientists. The traditional belief in academia is that bench scientists are better, or have better jobs, than their supervisors. In reality, both are necessary.
This might be a chemistry-specific tradition. Chemists are much less prone to field work than biologists.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/04
| 242
| 983
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was notified via a backchannel that I'm on a shortlist for a competitive top tier postdoc in my STEM field, though some offers were already made. There's no interview process, but is there anything I can do to tip the odds in my favor?<issue_comment>username_1: No. You just have to wait and let the process take its course.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't ever tell anyone you have backchannel knowledge. If you seek advantage with it, it is unethical and may (or will) even count against you. Any backchannel is capable of two-way communication, making it a possible means of lobbying, influencing, negotiating and, at its worst, things such as bribery. In such ways the person could be suspected of seeking or obtaining advantage.
If you get the post and tell, you run the risk that you will be seen as having had unfair advantage. Forget about it; someone was just trying to make you feel good but it is not a key to any action
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/05
| 1,300
| 5,291
|
<issue_start>username_0: Being a PhD student, I just finished supervising my first masters thesis. Now I have to assess and grade it. While I have a grading template provided by the university (listing the different aspects of the thesis and points out of X for each aspects), I am finding it hard to estimate how good the single achievements are compared to, well, the general level of theses. If I give full marks now because everything has been done satisfactory and well, and the next thesis that I supervise is even better - I cannot give that one better marks, so it would feel like I misgraded the first thesis.
I imagine that once you have amassed a certain amount of supervised theses, you can estimate the general level of one thesis much better and probably feel more competent to grade fairly and correctly.
But in my situation, having no previous experience in grading, how can I make sure as best as possible that my grading is neither too lenient nor too harsh?<issue_comment>username_1: This is the problem that *grade descriptors* are designed to help with; you may be fortunate enough, by judicious Googling, to be able to find a set of grade descriptors issued by the relevant programme team/university/accrediting body. One example is [here](https://www.adelaide.edu.au/policies/700/?dsn=policy.document;field=data;id=5082;m=view).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [Grading should not be on a curve.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/167023/how-is-grading-by-curve-fair-at-all-are-there-any-arguments-in-favor-of-it)
>
> If I give full marks now because everything has been done satisfactory and well, and the next thesis that I supervise is even better - I cannot give that one better marks, so it would feel like I misgraded the first thesis.
>
>
>
This is incorrect. Full marks does not indicate that there is no room for improvement.
Use the grading template. If it's not detailed enough, unfortunately people unfamiliar with your degree program cannot help you. Ask a person who is familiar, such as the degree coordinator.
>
> how can you guarantee fair grading?
>
>
>
For small sample sizes, you cannot.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You seem to have the misconception that grading is, somehow, competitive and that there is some linear scale on which you need to place student work in relation to other work.
I suggest that you work to give that up.
Every piece of work is unique and they don't compete with one another. Treat each as such.
Note that grading scales in some (not all) places are intentionally quite broad. Letter grades in the US, for example are quite broad categories. Strict numeric grades are a bit different, but it is probably incorrect to think of them as having true precision. What, after all, is the *essential* difference between 87 and 88? You are making judgments after all, not measuring.
And, is is true that over the years there is some likely "drift" in the meaning of grades. It is often lamented, but things seem to generally work out in any case. IIRC, Einstein was denied a teaching certificate upon graduation from (the predecessor of) ETHZ.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Talk to an experienced supervisor in your department
----------------------------------------------------
I would assume you at least have a second marker to moderate your inexperience. They will balance out your lack of calibration to some extent, but you can - and arguably should - go to your more experienced colleagues and seek their opinion and guidance. They may not be willing, or able, to read the whole thing but they should be able to spare five or ten minutes to help you calibrate your marks if you put the effort into explaining why you chose the mark you did.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> there is a second supervisor (a professor) that definitely has more experience, but if I rely on her too much, **that would kind of make having two seperate supervisors futile**, wouldn't it?
>
>
>
For many aspects of the jobs of educator and supervisor, you learn by doing. So, an appropriate course of action here would be to
1. First, try to write an evaluation to the best of your ability following the guideline you were provided, and advice from people with more experience on the question.
2. Secondly, you submit your work for feedback to a more experienced coworker. Here, the second supervisor seems appropriate, but another senior faculty you trust could be also helpful (they may not know the details of the thesis you are supervising, but they know the classic "beginner's mistakes").
3. Finally, modify your evaluation according to their opinion. If you think you had to do a major revision of your evaluation, you can go back to point 2. for another round.
I was feeling uncomfortable at first when doing this kind of task, as things can be hard to evaluate but you get used to it through experience. For example, one rubric for the evaluation of student research projects in my institution is the quality of writing of their thesis out of 20 points. But the first thesis of even the best students is seldom a flawless work, so how harsh should I be? I could know the answer only by comparing my evaluation to other faculty members.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2022/01/05
| 680
| 2,939
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm doing a review of a paper (very well written, I think) for a journal with a fairly good reputation.
This is my first review, and I have a question regarding data availability which is, according to the journal policy, a necessary condition to publish:
>
> The data, code or other digital research materials must be publicly accessible and clearly indicated as such.
>
>
>
The problem is that the dataset used in the analysis can only be retrieved under the payment of a fee from a link provided by the authors.
How should I behave in this case?
The journal asked me if data was accessible and if it was adequate to allow replication. The honest answer is "no", but the authors could not have done otherwise, since the data has a license and is not free to share.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> The journal asked me if data are accessible and if are adequate to
> allow replication.
>
>
>
That is easy to answer:
"The data is only accessible if a fee is payed as mandated by the data's license. I am therefore not able to assess if it is adequate to allow replication."
If you can only select "yes/no", select "no" and put the explanation in a comment to the editor.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You asked, "How should I behave in this case?" Concerning completing the form, the answer is straightforward: No, the data is not freely available.
However, I suppose that your question is asking more than that. If your concern is that you, as a reviewer, do not have sufficient material to adequately review the article according to the journal's standards (that is, you do not have access to the data), **then you should email the editor who assigned the review to you and explain the situation**. Either they will tell you to proceed with the review taking the authors' analysis in good faith, or they may contact the authors to ask them to provide the data as a condition to continue the review. I suspect that the editor would most likely just ask you to proceed with the review, but I do not know the journal, so they might actually ask the authors to comply with their stated policy.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I doubt this is a problem. I suggest shooting an email to the editor of the journal with this question. It might be the case that the author(s) will be required to provide a local (downloadable) copy of the dataset that they worked with upon approval for publication (supplementary materials). Even if that's not the possible, I wouldn't necessarily interpret "publicly accessible" as "free."
It would also be helpful to know what type or journal / research project / data we're talking about here. When the authors conducted the analysis, did they do so on a local file or through something like an R server with restricted access? If they performed analysis offline, then they should have no problem providing an anonymized copy.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/05
| 3,398
| 14,503
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student in math (algebraic geometry) and a course I did was simply self studying a 600 pages textbook on algebraic geometry and discussing it with my advisor. As part of the assessment for this course, I need to give a 20 minutes talk. The audience are other graduate students and academics; the audience may not be algebraic geometers. My talk gets marked by academics and not students.
My problem is that I have no idea how I should give a talk about a 600 pages textbook full of technical details to a general math audience. What should I include or exclude? What is the usual practice? How do people usually give such talks? Please note that my audience may not be all algebraic geometers. I asked my supervisor and the only answer I got was, "Just give an interesting talk!"<issue_comment>username_1: You might consider reading some reviews of the book --- [MR](https://mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet), [Zbl](https://zbmath.org/), [AMS Notices](https://www.ams.org/notices), [Bull. AMS](https://www.ams.org/publications/journals/journalsframework/bull), [EMS book reviews](https://euro-math-soc.eu/book-reviews), various lesser known journals that publish reviews ([example](https://www.cs.ubbcluj.ro/%7Estudia-m/index.php/journal/issue/archive)), googling the title of the book, etc. --- and see if anything especially praise-worthy or critical catches you eye and suggests something that you could discuss.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, let's be clear about what the purpose of this part of the course is. It is not to demonstrate that you have understood the material in the book – I imagine that your advisor already knows how well you understand the subject matter if you have been discussing it with them throughout the semester. People will not be sitting there trying to catch you out on some technicality. It is to give you an opportunity to learn how to communicate math to other mathematicians, which is a crucial skill for any mathematician to learn and it cannot be acquired without trial and, inevitably, error. The most fruitful way of taking advantage of this assignment would be to put any worries about how the talk will be graded to the side and think of this as a learning opportunity.
Secondly, let me suggest that it is not terribly helpful to think too hard about what you *should* include or exclude or about what the *usual* practice is. Instead, you can mentally frame the task in this way: you are being afforded a very scarce resource, namely people's largely undivided attention for the duration of 20 minutes. In return, people would like to learn something of interest. (Although in this case they will hopefully understand that this is more about you learning how to communicate mathematics than about them.) Therefore, I propose that you focus on the *pay-off for the audience* instead of real or imagined ideas about what a talk should or should not include. This, perhaps, may be what your supervisor meant when they told you to "just give an interesting talk". In a nutshell, you should ask yourself: what will a mathematician who does not know a whole lot about algebraic geometry get out of my talk? (The answer should not be that they will learn that you, the speaker, understand some algebraic geometry.)
Now this might be a difficult thing to do if you don't have a very clear idea of what the audience might find interesting. In that case, it is perfectly legitimate to focus on pay-off *for the other grad students in the audience*. You can be assured that the general mathematician's knowledge of algebraic geometry is not substantially larger than the average advanced grad student's. Hopefully, you do have some idea about what your fellow grad students might find interesting. If not, *just ask them*.
Finally, everyone understands that 20 minutes is not a lot of time, so just pick some small subtopic that you can reasonably say something about in 20 minutes. *Less is more*. If it were me giving the talk, unless I had better ideas I would probably pick some theorem from the book that I thought the audience might find interesting, illustrate it with some examples, and say a few words about how in fits into a larger picture. That's just one possible template for the talk. The most important thing is to give honest and serious thought to making sure that the audience gets something out of your talk, and to reflect afterwards on whether you have succeeded in this.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: If you have sufficient insight for it, I'd suggest that you talk about (a) the essence of the field itself, not the book, (b) how it is related to other math fields, and (c) how it differs.
Applications of algebraic geometry to other fields is part of (b). One or two key theorems would be under (a), but insight is probably better than theorem statements.
End with some observations about why students of math might want to consider studying this field. Alternatively a few words about future directions as much as you can predict them.
The above is based on your statement that the audience will be general in nature, so you need to say things of wider interest than just the technicalities.
And, perhaps, developing an outline like this will aid your own insights into he field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I suggest that you give the talk you would like to hear if you hadn't yet read the book. You can even tell the audience that's how you decided what to say.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Rather than trying to summarize the book, or the general subject, in a ridiculously short time, (which would be pretty boring to essentially everyone), choose a specific topic/example that is understandable to any math grad student, and show how (perhaps fancier parts of) "alg geom" address that issue. That is, new, high-end things are not just self-referential, but do address pre-existing issue. :)
Leave out real proofs.
Don't give "definitions"... but, rather, give vague-but-generally-helpful descriptions. (Seriously, no one is interested in "definitions", unless there's an issue of higher precision, and definitions would kill an awfully large fraction of 20 minutes... and no one who didn't already know them would assimilate them, etc.)
Perhaps think of it as an extended "elevator pitch"... :)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: The answers posted so far have avoided suggesting a topic. I'll suggest one: explain what projective space is and why it's such a big deal in algebraic geometry.
The elementary definition of projective space (n-tuples up to nonzero scaling) does not suggest why the concept is so important. People who have not done anything with algebraic geometry might wonder what the big deal is about projective space when "affine space" looks to the novice like a more natural geometric thing to use. So after explaining the definition, discuss some nice properties of projective space at a level that they can understand.
Show them the real and complex projective lines are a circle and sphere, so they will understand when you say projective space is *compact* while affine space isn't. That is a big, big deal. All mathematicians understand that compact things are nicer. Anyone who has taken complex analysis knows that for *rational functions* it's really good to think about them as mappings on the Riemann sphere and not just on the complex plane. In algebraic geometry, projective space is a very useful compactification of affine space. Compare with something at the undergraduate level: closed bounded intervals in real analysis have far more useful properties than open (bounded) intervals, and that's due largely to their compactness.
For some concrete things to show about the projective plane (both geometrically and algebaically), see my answer to an old MO question on a similar topic [here](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/20112/interesting-results-in-algebraic-geometry-accessible-to-3rd-year-undergraduates). That has too many suggestions to fit in 20 minutes, so don't try to do all of that. I once gave a 50-minute undergraduate talk whose only goal was to illustrate how asymptotes to a curve are revealed in the projective plane to be tangent lines to a missing point on the curve "at infinity".
Don't forget to **give some practice talks** in advance in front of some actual students so that you know it can fit in 20 minutes and you get feedback. Give the first practice talk to yourself first since it will probably be a disaster (time management). And expect in the actual talk to lose the last 5 minutes of material, so give yourself several exit ramps in the talk. Do **not** leave the only payoff to minute 19. Have multiple payoffs sprinkled throughout your talk.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: For such talks I usually refer to myself: What are the main points I learnt through the entire book? Then I will consider whether they fit to the audience and also in time regarding broadness and deepness.
I also often thought like "Well, all others probably know at least half of the book so I should focus on the advanced stuff so I can also impress them" but, no. My feeling is, the older the people are, means the more experienced, the more they prefer the concepts and ideas instead of hard proofs and technical details. You can hardly impress them with your roughly gained knowledge but you can stick out the main and most interesting patterns, so everyone will learn something and might consider it for their own researches to dig deeper.
Despite that, the talk might also be much easier when you look at the content more from a higher level and the more fun the talk will be.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Contrary to popular belief, the only reason to give a talk is to make the audience feel better than when they walked in. That is it. The speaker wants the audience to feel better than when they walked in.
One surefire way to make your audience feel better is for them to learn something (i.e. **ONE THING**). A second surefire way is for the audience to 'catch' your contagious enthusiasm for the subject. Do one or both of these things and your talk will succeed.
You arent going to revolutionize algebraic geometry in your talk. Drop the notion of 'complexity equals interesting' *right now*. **The primary pitfall that you will fall into in this scenario is presenting at an advanced/expert level. DO NOT FALL INTO THIS TRAP.** If even one audience member checks out of your talk you have failed. **There is never any excuse for losing even a single audience member.** You are speaking to the dumbest person in the room, never the smartest. EVER.
*Take your draft of your current talk and waterdown the information content by about 95%... yes, really.* Eliminate all equations that are not *absolutely* necessary. There should not be more than one or two equations on the slides, max. You are here to give a good talk, period. Good talks do not have equations on slides. Anyone that argues that gives bad talks consistently and doesnt know it. Replace those equations with simple, pretty pictures and diagrams. People love and understand simple pictures and diagrams. If it is complex enough to require a three sentence explanation, eliminate it.
Each slide should contain one-and only one- point. Your talk is on one-and only one- topic. One simple topic, one simple slide. Do not be afraid to repeat yourself. Do not be afraid to repeat yourself. Repeat the same point with different language, leading to a crescendo.
Use the simplest possible language. This talk should make sense to anyone that listens, regardless of background. it is incumbant on the speaker for the audience to listen and understand. **Understanding is not the responsibility of the audience**.
Start slide 1 with something that you are enthusiastic about, and end with effectively the same message. Speakers tend to think of talks as continuous collections of slides, whereas audience members tend to consume slides individually (i.e. each slide is actually its own mini talk).
Try to emulate a circus, and not your daily lectures. Talks are show business, not research. **Do not sacrifice entertainment for factual accuracy, yes really**. Let the details or small print come out in questions. There will be time for questions because you are going to ...
**END EARLY!** anticipate filling half the allotted time, yes really! No one in real life will fault you for ending early. **It will never happen at this stage of your career.** this is not 8th grade speech class!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: 20 minutes is a good time to address **one interesting specific point**.
In such cases, I usually go the funnel way: a very wide overview in 2 minutes to place the topic of the book (how wide depends on the audience - if they are all mathematicians (but not algebraic geometers) then explaining what geometry is is not useful. Stating that the topic is in geometry is.
You then would quickly dive into one interesting topic.
The topic should be self-contained (["you have three doors ... should you change?"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem)), interesting on its own (maybe something counter-intuitive), or groundbreaking.
You are then left with 12 to 15 minutes to explain the exact problem and its solutions - and possibly the 2 interesting points of the proof.
20 minutes is very good timing to train people to choose wisely what they want to say. When you have no experience, you are either at the first paragraph after 20 minutes (and your audience is gone), or you have wrapped up everything in 7 minutes (and your audience is still digesting your second sentence).
Lastly:
* practice several times alone, in front of the computer and your presentation. This will give you a rough overview of the timing
* then record yourself two or three times and review the key points. You will find the "euuuuhhh..." parts where you forgot what to say, the "I need to pee" parts where you make a small dance because you are stressed and the "I was not aware of my arms" part where you need to do something with your hands.
* and finally have someone suffer though two or three presentations of yours, some good friends who will tell you what they understood or not
Also, speak louder. But do not shout either (except when you want to startle the audience, always a good thing). Do not hesitate to address the audience.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/05
| 225
| 955
|
<issue_start>username_0: Today I received the result of a PhD program, and they said, "I regret to inform you that the Committee is not able to recommend your admission to the program at this time. However, please note that your name is currently on a reserve list. If a place becomes available, we will let you know immediately".
All I can think right now is just waiting and hoping. However, any advice on what I should do now? Should I ask them how my rank on the reserved list is?<issue_comment>username_1: Thank them for letting you know.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't do anything besides perhaps a polite brief "thank you".
You can probably assume you will not be admitted off the waiting list and instead wait to hear back from your other options (or quickly make some other options, including options besides PhD programs, if you have none).
If they have a spot open up, they'll let you know (as their email said).
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/06
| 2,582
| 10,809
|
<issue_start>username_0: To give more context, I am in the US.
I am a first-year PhD student in CS, and I was admitted without an advisor. Over the first semester, I have talked to many professors to see if our research interests match. Finally I decided to work with Prof. X, and I told him that. He then followed with a plan for a study project related to his research, eg, playing around with his codebase, reading his lecture notes from his previous special-topic course. So far, we have had two weekly meetings, and he suggests we should meet every week and I should email him if I have problems in this study.
In this case, has he considered me as his PhD student, or someone on probation as a candidate? I think of him as my advisor, and I follow what he suggests me to do. But does he think the same way? He has never announced something to indicate our student-advisor relationship. In our meeting, we have only discussed problems on actual contents of the subject, never about something else such as whether to give me an office space, whether to fund me as RA so I do not have to TA.
* In my mind the answer I want is whether I am officially a PhD student of Prof.X. But how do I phrase it so it is not too awkward to confirm with him? Or should I just silently believe that it is already the case?
* I know right now the project is a non-research study, so should I ask him about office space or RA now or later when I actually start researching?
* The department continuously tracks me as "in search of advisor", so I think I am urged to give them an answer. But with my current situation, I do not know what to say to them.<issue_comment>username_1: There is no single definition of what being an advisor means and entails. The one common thing is, well, the advising part. Apart from that, advisors don't have to do anything (this might depend on the country, at least in Germany being an official PhD advisor means first and foremost just that, all the rest is optional).
So from what it sounds like your professor is your advisor (meeting regularly and giving you input etc.), but if that comes with an office and whatnot will probably depend on your individual situation and university.
If you have an otherwise good relationship with the professor, speak with him about your concerns, I suggest starting with something along the lines of: "As the department needs me to chose an official advisor soon, I wanted know if I can officially put you down as my advisor."
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US it is actually typical for a student to start without having a dissertation advisor. Often they have an academic advisor who can answer questions about coursework and general progress until they are replaced with a dissertation advisor.
Usually (maybe not universally) the advisor signs the dissertation when it is done and probably participates in the defense at the end. In some cases their role is to assure the other members of the dissertation committee that the work does, indeed, measure up. This is often needed if the committee comes from different sub-fields and may not be as familiar with the work as the advisor.
So, make it official by just asking them if it is appropriate to list them formally at this time.
My own case was similar in some ways (math, though). I asked a couple of people if they would take me on and the ones I asked said they had no ideas for a project that we might work on. But they pointed me to a more senior faculty member who did agree. I don't remember (50 or so years ago) anything about paperwork, but it would have been easy after he said yes.
There was also a weekly (or so) seminar attended by a few faculty (those I'd approached, for example) and their students in which research progress and ideas was discussed. So, there was some sharing beyond just that between the formal advisor and their students. This is more likely in large departments, of course.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There's no standard process for this. I strongly suggest you talk to your director of graduate studies first to get a sense of the approximate process, not just for the issue of declaration of PhD advisor, but the whole process of completing the PhD program.
Most PhD programs are not very formal when it comes to "declaration of PhD advisor", until it comes to a point in your PhD studies when a faculty member has to organizing a committee and sign some paperwork. In some PhD programs you have (1) the qualifying exam, (2) the preliminary exam and (3) dissertation defense. There are usually two types of qualifying exam: (1a) you take a series of written exams or (1b) you give a presentation on some topic based on your study of a collection of papers. (1a) does not require a PhD advisor. So if your program uses (1a),(2),(3), then formally declaring a PhD advisor during your first year is not necessary if you have not completed (1a).
And as for your questions:
>
> has he considered me as his PhD student, or someone on probation as a candidate? (etc.)
>
>
>
Most likely he's still trying to figure out if you are a possible candidate. You had only two meetings with this faculty member -- call him X. You are studying his notes from a special-topics course and so there's still some time before you can engage in the research work of X. However X is willing to guide/advise you once a week in person and also will answer your emails. **Honestly this is the most valuable thing for you right now.**
>
> In our meeting, we have only discussed problems on actual contents of the subject, never about something else such as whether to give me an office space, whether to fund me as RA so I do not have to TA.
>
>
>
>
> ... so should I ask him about office space or RA now or later when I actually start researching?
>
>
>
You'll have to wait for him to initiate discussion on the RA-ship and office space.
>
> The department continuously tracks me as "in search of advisor", so I think I am urged to give them an answer. But with my current situation, I do not know what to say to them.
>
>
>
Have an informal meeting with your graduate director, update him/her with your progress (your meetings with X, etc.), and ask the director when do you need to officially declare your PhD advisor. If the grad director tells you to do it right away, then **talk to X and ask him for his permission first**. There's a high chance that the grad director will tell you to wait till you have met X for at least one semester.
PS: It is **not** a disadvantage for you not to declare your PhD advisor early. It takes times for a faculty member to figure out your background, your work ethic, your interests, etc. It also gives you time to understand the expectation from this faculty member. It is not always a bad thing for the advisor and advisee to part ways.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Taking on a PhD student is a serious, multi year commitment that many professors would not make before getting to know the student and gaining an appreciation for their abilities and personality, for example by having them do a research project under the professor’s supervision for a semester.
By contrast, having a couple of meetings with a student, discussing some project ideas and allowing them to play around with your code base is *not* a serious commitment, or much of a commitment at all really.
The professor is your adviser, at least informally, only after you (or they) “pop the question” and the other party says yes. Not before. You should not assume anyone is your adviser until that’s said explicitly, just like you should not assume you are engaged to someone because you went on a couple of dates with them.
Even then, it’s best to have things documented in an email and inform the department of your change in status. Whether they will consider the transition a formal one that requires any paperwork will depend on your department’s policies. Doing things formally will imply a slightly higher level of seriousness and commitment on the part of both yourself and the professor. At the informal stage, even if there is a mutual understanding that someone is your adviser, it is not set in stone and not uncommon for one or another of the parties to decide it’s not working out and decide to back out of the relationship.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: You should not spend too much time with a professor that does not indicate a commitment, at least verbally. This was the mistake I made assuming the professor will take me as his student, but professors easily change their minds. This happened to me. After one year, my funding was discontinued and all the blame of not finding an advisor was put on me by the department, although numerous times I clearly told the graduate director that I suspect that professors have exploitative tendencies and asked him to put his weight on the process. He preferred not to get involved and let it slide. I dropped out due to lack of funding. I suspect this department was over admitting PhD students, as they need many teaching assistants for their growing undergraduate CS degree program. Because lots of students had issues with finding advisors and they were continuing to give more admits. This was a top 50 US CS PhD program.
Note that you are free labor for the professor. No one prevents him from taking advantage of you, except his ethical values. Department head and even the dean will turn a blind eye and will cover that up to save the brand name of the school.There are plenty of evil and cheap professors who take advantage of and suck the blood of poor PhD students.
For my case, most were new assistant professors who needed to exploit as many PhD students as possible to increase their chance for their future tenure review. If an established or a well-funded professor spends his time on you, this is a good indicator that he is serious. Usually, an established professor's time is more valuable than time spent for being cheap and taking advantage of a student.
This happened to me and I had to drop out of the PhD program after my first year. I was assigned to introductory CS courses with busy and crowded labs and office hours (10-15 hours of student interaction per week), not including the time for weekly meetings and grading solving exercises. Whereas some incoming PhD students served as TAs for easier courses spending no more than a couple of hours per week and they have easily found advisors who offered RA positions. I think the department had a tiering system and professors knew that we were there only for Taing and being exploited. Actually, a professor that I talked to subtly hinted to me about this. But at that time I could not understand that. Now looking back I can connect the dots.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/06
| 1,619
| 7,053
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying for a permanent lectureship at a UK university. The candidate brief has a list of essential and desirable criteria. I meet all of the essential criteria, but not the desirable criteria. The application form however, requires some sort of response to each of these criteria (the text boxes are mandatory and the form cannot be submitted without filling them in).
What should I write when asked for evidence I satisfy some criteria that I do not?
Example criteria:
Evidence of working with industrial partners
Evidence of conducting outreach activity<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds like bad user interface design, but I totally understand why it could be really stressful.
If I were personally faced with this hurdle, I would be honest if I didn't meet a particular experience or competency, and say "I haven't had the opportunity yet, but would relish the chance to apply my research to an industrial context such as saving energy by predicting faults using my algorithm".
Perhaps it might be possible to put a nice spin on it and maybe show why you COULD do that thing, e.g. "No official outreach activity from academia, but I gave a presentation to a school class about my research into xyz (or wrote a blog post, contributed to an open source project, ...), demonstrating the skills to carry out outreach."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Since they are desired I would explain a reason why something was not possible if there is any (i.e. outreach was not encouraged by my former employer) and then explain how you would approach such a point in the future: e.g. making sure the group webpage is up to date, starting a twitter account etc. Same for industry: no opportunity was up yet, but e.g. you plan to reach out to company X because they just published something similar to what you are doing or e.g. you plan to be part of a conference where industry is an essential part of to strengthen connections etc.
Of course, if you do this for 10 desired criteria this might not sound credible. For those points that you feel you do not want to address I would go with username_1's answer to demonstrate that you are capable to to this.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I've never done in academia, but it's a pretty common thing in the field I'm in. An advertised job description will list (say) 10 essential criteria and 5 nice-to-haves.
If I come close, it won't stop me from applying (hey, if you are a perfect match for their specs, there won't be much opportunity for personal growth).
If, for example, I meet 9 of the ten essential criteria, I'll point out how I'm such a great fit, never addressing the one I miss. I try not to make what I have and don't have very obvious (mixing up the order, or addressing the list in a non-uniform manner). I work on the assumption that the reader probably won't notice the one I'm missing.
When you get into the nice-to-haves, it's highly unlikely any of the candidates they are evaluating meet every criteria. If I do meet spec, I'll point that out.
Otherwise, I'll generally look at the list and try to figure out where I might come close, or where there might be an overlap between my skill set and something that they might want that's close to what they are talking about: "While I've never done puffin farming, I did work with penguins for two years".
What you want to do is get close enough to the specs to advance to the next step without resorting to any falsehoods.
That they have textboxes for each criteria seems a bit rude to me (ok, maybe not rude, but...). I'd leave the missing "desirable" ones blank or mostly blank (perhaps with a note: *"See my cover letter"*). If there's a note anywhere with something like "if you need more space, please include an attachment", I'd just put "See Attachment" in each space and then create a hand-wavy attachment.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If you don't meet these requirements, it is best just to be up-front about that. Those items then become an opportunity for you to demonstrate that you are candid, direct, and a straight-shooter. Just be clear and succinct --- e.g.: "I have not previously undertaken work with industrial partners".
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Speaking from a relatively "fresh" Lecturer position in the UK here, so have gone through a similar application process (numerous times) about 2.5-3 years ago.
It is almost *expected* that some (most?) of the applicants will not satisfy some of the *desirable* criteria (as opposed to the *essential* ones). After all, the positions are often advertised jointly at the Lecturer / Senior Lecturer level, and while it is quite possible that the applicants at the Senior Lecturer level will have some experience with obtaining external funding, this is less likely for straight-out-of-postdoc applicants for Lecturer posts.
However, scoring the questions asked on the application form is used by the interview panel to determine the shortlist. The scores are recorded by the HR (to be available in case of any future disputes or enquiries about the hiring process). Therefore **I would strongly suggest not leaving those questions blank**. The panel will try and make sure their scoring reflects their actual opinion of the applicants, but addressing every question in some way will make this much easier on them.
So, try and see how the question is relevant to the position you are applying for, and address this as well as you can.
* Experience in obtaining external funding.
A good answer for somebody with no experience would be to talk about UK funding bodies for your relevant discipline, to show that while you haven't obtained grant money yet, you know how to go about it.
* Evidence of working with industrial partners.
I would say the key here is the opposing goals and requirements of research vs industry. So describing a strongly application-oriented project could be a good fit. Lacking anything like that, maybe describing any interdisciplinary work might be a bit of a stretch but somewhat fitting if you focus specifically on how you addressed the contrary requirements / communication gap.
* Evidence of conducting outreach activity.
There is a strong push in the UK that researcher should be disseminated outside of individual "research bubbles". So anything related to presenting your work outside of your direct research community would fit here. It does not have to be as involved as "Robot programming workshops at the local school" - blog posts or open source projects could both work here if your answer focused on the aspects of those activities they are asking you about.
Of course, providing such answers to the questions about *desirable* criteria won't put you ahead if your answers about *essential* criteria do not clearly show you are a good fit. But if they are, investing some effort into thinking about what skills the *desirable* criteria are supposed to check for and evidencing those skills should only look good and help your application.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/06
| 560
| 2,210
|
<issue_start>username_0: Due to COVID, we have to convert a large number of hand written exams into PDF.
Does anybody have experience with this?
What could be a good strategy?<issue_comment>username_1: A few years ago I was using [Crowdmark](https://crowdmark.com/) for grading, which required scanning a lot. It's a bit of a pain, but using a fairly standard retail scanner with an automatic feeder (HP, I don't remember the model number) we were able to scan hundreds of exams/thousands of pages in an hour or so with two people working on collating, rescanning misfed sheets, etc etc etc. (Looking back at my notes, it took two people 90 minutes to scan 2400 pages when the scanner settings were suboptimal so that we had a lot of misfeeds; would have taken about an hour under better conditions). I think we stored the files on a network drive (we did the scanning in batches, don't remember exactly but I think there were about 200 pages per batch) for later retrieval.
Crowdmark has some [Crowdmark-specific scanning tips](https://crowdmark.com/help/scanning-assessments/), but generally scanning in grayscale with the lowest resolution that will work for you will speed things up.
The only possibly non-obvious tip is that our exams were stapled when they were administered; we took them to the university publishing office, which was able to chop off all the stapled corners at once with one of their machines to save us the trouble of removing staples (Crowdmark puts a unique QR code on every page, so we didn't have to worry about getting pages mixed up between tests).
(I am not affiliated with Crowdmark.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Gradescope is a good option. It requires quite a bit of preparation, though.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: DIY isn't always better.
Take the box of exams to a copy shop and tell them what you need. They'll take care of the rest.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: At ours, the students use their mobile phones to scan their papers right before submission. Then, they submit the PDF to some dedicated online LMS (e.g., Moodle).
There are some downsides here. One is the quality of the scans, which may vary.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/01/06
| 2,851
| 12,471
|
<issue_start>username_0: Every spring (including the spring about to start), I teach an honors course that normally has an enrollment of about 25, with 15 to 20 of those coming from the top few percent of our students and the rest coming from the top 20%. I give a series of quite challenging assignments that require both a lot of technical skill and a lot of creativity, and students are not permitted to work together. Usually about 2/3 of the students earn grades of A. Grades below B are rare but not unheard of.
I have always felt like the students are missing out on an excellent experience by not being allowed to work together, but I have also always worried that if they work in groups, then it will become impossible for me to tell the B and C students from the A students. This matters for a lot more than just their grades, because a large fraction of these students end up asking me for letters of recommendation and I like to single out particularly brilliant solutions they've come up with. With groups, I never know who had the ideas.
This term, for complicated reasons, I will have less TA support than usual, which creates an argument for dividing the class into say, groups of three, with each group submitting one paper --- thereby cutting the grading by 2/3.
Possible policies are:
**1.** Stick with individual submissions and figure out a way to get them graded (maybe by enlisting some star undergraduates from recent years).
**2.** Let students work in groups to swap ideas, but then submit their own individual papers crafted in their own words. This still means figuring out a way to get them graded.
**3.** Accept group submissions. This has advantages and disadvantages alluded to above.
What should I do?
**Edited to add:** Guided in part by the many thoughtful responses below, I've cobbled together a grading system I think will work. Of course I don't know whether it will work until I've tried it. I'm therefore not sure whether it's appropriate to post the relevant portion of my syllabus as a self-answer, or as an edit to the question, or to do nothing at all (at least until the semester is over). I'm sorry that I'm new to this site and not at all sure of the culture.
**Edited further to add:** In response to a comment below, I've posted my plans for the semester as an answer below. If this sort of thing is on-topic here, I'll come back at the end of the semester with a report on how it worked.<issue_comment>username_1: You could let the students work in groups. They submit a paper as a group and this is part of their grade. You can let the other part of the final grade be based on individual conversations with the students.
I understand that 25 individual conversations is also time consuming, but it could give you the opportunity to identify students who actually understand what they did from students who benefitted from the collaboration more, and with 10 minutes per student it should be doable in 25\*10 / 60 = just over 4 hours, plus some additional time for planning and admin so let's say 8 hours.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I had a lot of students work on small-team projects. Sometimes I would form the groups and sometimes I'd let them. More below on selection.
Usually there was more to the course than the project so there was an opportunity to get some additional ideas about performance. But not always. In the "senior capstone project course" one of the requirements was a presentation of their project at the end where everyone was required to participate. I graded that separately (preparation, presentation, etc).
But, I never assumed that all the students would contribute to the project in the same way and so it was impossible for me to decide who did "more". And they worked outside my view mostly. But there were two features that I generally included.
First was that everyone got the same grade for the project unless there were compelling reasons to do otherwise. And I'd tell them at the start that an individual taking on all the work and closing out their team mates wasn't a good way to get a good grade. Team work should be team work. If they haven't worked in teams before you may need to teach them how: meetings, discussions, small continuous improvements... I also kept an open forum where students could ask questions and get answers, either from me or from members of other teams.
The second feature was "peer evaluation", which is not the same as "peer grading". Each student was required at the end of the course to name two or three (depending on team size) team members who contributed the most and to say why. I didn't ask for slackers to be named. Additionally they were asked for their own primary contribution to the team.
I was once surprised when a team praised a teammate for their important contributions to making it all work when I'd thought that person was rather a poor performer. They actually got a boost in grade from peer evaluation.
I'd discourage teams of size greater than five unless there were special circumstances. You can permit individual projects or not, but in my field (CS) teamwork is valued so I didn't permit it, since they needed the experience.
You can also, perhaps, let everyone vote during the presentations on who had done the best job on the projects and boost that team a bit.
I never tried this, but my own doctoral advisor used to hold five or so minute "oral exams" with each student (in every course, actually). You can learn quite a lot in a few minutes if you ask the right questions.
---
More on selection.
One way to choose who is on a team that works in a small (~25) group of students who know one another is the "sandlot baseball" method. Choose a set of "captains" equal to the number of groups(randomly, by perceived skill, volunteers, voting...). Then in rotation the captain (perhaps in consultation with other members already chosen) chooses a person from those not yet on any team. Yes, somebody will be last, which is a disadvantage, but it seemed to work when I used it. This spreads the talent among the teams without being *too* cliquish.
Another way, was randomization. I once needed two teams, so I made up a set of index cards, half of them with the word "Fire" and half with "Ice". On one of each of those sets I also wrote "captain". Face down, I had each student draw a card. That told them their team and gave the team a name that they actually liked. I explained that the "captain" wasn't the manager, but only the one responsible to communicate team needs to me as required, including a list of the team member initially. This also worked. One of the "captains" was a bit isolated from the rest of the class but getting the "job" seemed to spark something in him that was positive for everyone.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I suggest first and foremost that you are missing out on the significance that you can bring to your honors students by giving them exercises that teach them how to work effectively in teams (I prefer the word teams rather than groups, as the former implies a greater or more formalized degree in collaboration and sharing). By example, what balance do you expect your students will have after they graduate to the real world between working entirely by themselves on a project versus working in teams on a project?
I might also challenge your statement that "students are **not permitted** to work together". We could enter entirely new threads on what the students believe this means in principle or practice versus what you intend it to mean as well as how effectively you can truly monitor or grade against this restriction even after all sides (you and your students) fully understand its meaning in precisely the same ways.
To your problem. In a nutshell, you have less manpower to grade your assignments. You can find replacement manpower or restructure how your assignments are to be graded. If I review your proposals individually, I would comment as below.
1. Employing undergraduates to grade their peers or peers from other classes is fraught with potentials for abuses. In the US, we would immediately recognize FERPA limitations have to be respected. You will probably have to clear this proposal through your department chair. My experience is that we employ senior undergraduate students as peer mentors to our lower level courses, but we never employ them as graders. The administrative overhead (and potential for abuse) is too high.
2. This approach promotes exactly the wrong ideas about what is involved to work effectively in and be evaluated entirely at the end as a team. Indeed, it is this example that I give to distinguish "groups" versus teams. The former is a collection of students who swap ideas about the questions, all come up with the best answer, each submit it, and then each get graded individually for having one (unified) "best" answer. Or, back to my challenge above ... How will you explain and police this proposal to meet what you believe are the standards for working in "groups" versus working in teams?
3. Are you building a false presumption ... allowing team work projects prevents you from having any ways to separate B and C students ... to avoid being creative in restructuring your assignments instead? Why not have both team-work and individual-based assignments? Examples for the latter (mentioned also in other responses) could include individual oral reviews on the team-work reports, quizzes or exams, and homework. Why not also restructure your grading in ways that will take less time for the TA's (and you) to grade. Examples include assigning ten problems on a homework but choosing randomly only three of the problems to grade (choosing *after* the assignment is submitted).
In summary, I have great respect for the hard work that is required of an instructor to administer a proper mix of individual-based and team-work-based assignments in a course. I propose that taking on this responsibility will be the best response to your immediate problem.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: In your question, you mentioned "a series of assignments". Is there something preventing you from doing both types, i.e. some of the assignments done in groups and some individually? That would give you the best of both worlds.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Here is what I (the OP) am going to do. It's more complicated than I would like, but I think it serves my purposes.
1. Students are warned that this is an experimental system and might have to be tweaked mid-semester, but I expect it to stay mostly in place.
2. Each student must choose (once, for the entire semester) among four options: A) The "loner" option --- you do all your homework yourself. B) The "partner" option --- you team up with a partner and the two of you do all your homework together. C) The "rover" option --- I will assign you a different one or two teammates for each assignment. D) The "roving partners" option --- you have a partner you work with all semester, and I will assign you an additional one or two teammates for each assignment. (Therefore team sizes will range from one to four.)
3. Teams work together, and cannot get any help from anyone not on the team.
4. Each team submits one paper, together with a small spreadsheet indicating which students believe they have completely understood which solutions.
5. Each student separately submits an individual assessment of his/her teammates' contributions.
6. Most of the time, the whole team gets the same grade, with three exceptions:
> Exception 1: If Carol claims (on the spreadsheet from point 4)) to understand considerably less than Alice and Bob, she might get a slightly lower grade than they do.
> Exception 2: I might randomly call on you to explain a solution you claimed to understand. If you can't explain it, you will get a **much** lower (and possibly failing) grade for the entire assignment. (This is explicitly presented to the students as a disincentive to exaggerate on the spreadsheet.)
>
> Exception 3: In cases where the applicability of Exceptions 1 and 2 is ambiguous, I will consult the evaluations submitted per point 4).
>
Classes have not yet started, so I will be very receptive to criticisms, issues I might not have thought of, suggested tweaks to make this a better grading system, suggested tweaks to make this seem less complicated, and anything else you think I should be thinking of.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/07
| 1,886
| 7,686
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in the cultural norms of my field (pure math, in US academia) though of course all answers are welcome.
I'm applying to graduate school, and noticed that the personal websites of several current students at top PhD programs include a small list of other top graduate schools they got into but did not attend. For instance, at the bottom of the student's website, it says "PhD student at X school; turned down offers from schools A, B, C (with prestigious fellowship Y), D, and E".
I'm curious whether this is standard and proper. I was personally somewhat taken aback upon seeing this, as it felt a bit cheap to use the prestige of a school you don't even attend to make yourself look better. However, I can see how this would look impressive on someone's resume (at least early in the student's career before they have more serious publications/awards to speak of).
One case where perhaps it would make sense for a student to do this is if the student chose a relatively lower-ranked program over some higher-ranked programs, for personal reasons or because of a specific professor.<issue_comment>username_1: A fellowship you have declined can be listed as an award on your academic CV, so long as you mark it as declined.
Listing degree programs you did not enroll in is not traditional. Do not do it. At best, it is a distraction from the information a hiring committee is looking for. The person hiring you wants to know if you have the required degree or not.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't do it. Declining fellowships is one thing, maybe still don't do that either. But telling grad school admissions you rejected, or job offers you rejected, or invitations to the prom you rejected (!?!) is considerably off-putting, and probably does more to make people think they'd be happier not having you around, no matter your other purported virtues.
EDIT: as suggested by @JochenGlueck, yes, it is surely worth making clear that this viewpoint is that of current (2020's) U.S. practice, in math, and probably in most STEM fields...
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: It is not really "improper" to tell the truth about any aspect of your education/work history, so if you really want to, you can mention that you were given offers at schools that you did not attend. But it raises the question --- what kind of inference do you think an admissions committee will draw from this, and do you think those inferences will be positive or negative?
On the one hand, I can see that your goal here is to show that you are such hot property that you receive many good offers from institutions --- i.e., that these are "markers of esteem". So I get why you want to do this, and there is at least one possible positive inference that could be drawn from this information. However, I suspect that the primary inferences an admissions committee will draw from this will be *negative* ones: (1) you claim credit for institutions you did not actually attend; (2) your actual achievements are so thin that you refer to offers you did not accept as achievements (where others generally omit them); (3) you lack modesty and a sense of privacy in dealing with work/program offers; and (4) if we offer you a position, there is a good chance you will turn it down and then list our offer as more fodder for your resume. (Note: I'm not saying that these things are true of you, but they are the types of negative inferences that might potentially be drawn.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Short answer is NO as others have stated. However, I would like to point out that during interview some professors may want to know which other universities have you applied to and only when asked would you mention the universities you've declined. One thing to note is that it's better to mention universities that are almost ranked at the same level or above the one that you are applying. Besides, all this depends on how you sell yourself especially during interview. You could use the information when answering general questions about yourself and emphasising that you applied to several schools to make make sure you realise your dream of pursuing research is not entirely a bad idea, but obviously not to be stated on a CV. Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with most of [Paul's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/180945/33210).
>
> Don't do it. Declining fellowships is one thing, maybe still don't do that either. But telling grad school admissions you rejected, or job offers you rejected, or invitations to the prom you rejected (!?!) is considerably off-putting, and probably does more to make people think they'd be happier not having you around, no matter your other purported virtues.
>
>
>
**BUT**, a another reason for not including is that it is a waste of space and looks like a filler (i.e., you have nothing better to write or if you have do have better things to write, this dilutes them).
Although academic CV's are notoriously long (and defined as *Latin for “course of (one’s) life*" in a [dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/curriculum%20vitae), including trivial things gives the appearance you either have nothing better to say (e.g., you are an early-career persons) or are padding your CV with details that do not matter. Thus, you're taking the *course of one's life* too literally or in too fine of detail.
However, I have seen people tactfully list declining fellowship and as an honor or award similar to [*NSF's Honorable Mentions*](https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2012/nsf12599/nsf12599.htm) (e.g., offered NSF fellowship X and DOE fellowship Y and selected the DOE fellowship Y because... or NSF GRFP Honorable Mention).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> One case where perhaps it would make sense for a student to do this is if the student chose a relatively lower-ranked program over some higher-ranked programs, for personal reasons or because of a specific professor.
>
>
>
I think there is a fallacy in your thinking here, wherein you are conflating the prestige associated with *graduating* from a high ranked institution with the much lesser (essentially nonexistent, I would argue, in the context we’re discussing) prestige associated with getting *admitted* to a high ranked institution.
If you got in to a high ranked institution, good for you obviously; but you can’t really “cash out” on the prestige of the institution (at least not in a meaningful, significant way, other than extracting some social capital out of it when you’re on a date, say, and even that is pretty uncertain and could easily backfire) until you’ve actually graduated or at least started attending and getting good grades.
Your hypothetical student who chooses a lower ranked institution/program over a higher ranked one should be aware that in doing so they are necessarily giving up some prestige. Whether that will affect their decision is another matter, but the point is that there isn’t anything they could write in their CV that could “correct” for this effect. Because the prestige comes from *actually realizing* the potential that the higher ranked institution saw in them when it made the decision to admit them. And the only way to realize the potential is to actually go to that institution.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Of course it is highly improper. It would give similar vibe as writing in your resume that you were elected the leader of the class in second year of your primary school education, or that you always used to remind your teacher about collecting students' homework in case the teacher forgot. Don't do it.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/07
| 815
| 3,531
|
<issue_start>username_0: About a year ago, I quit my PhD in mathematics. At the time, I was working on a project given to me by my former advisor. His contributions were as follows:
1. Explaining the basic idea of the project, along with a few aspects of the problem that might cause difficulty
2. Providing some papers on the subject that explain the background in more detail
3. A few short (~10 minute) conversations regarding one or two details in those papers
4. One half-hour conversation about a detail that neither of us could understand
Aside from these, I didn't receive any help on the parts of the proof that I finished before quitting. As far as I can tell, none of my former advisor, any of his students, or anyone else in the field has done any work towards completing the proof I was given.
Would it be inappropriate for me to finish the proof on my own, and submit it as a single-author paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it would be inappropriate to finish and publish this on your own. You should contact your former advisor: they should probably be offered authorship of a resulting paper. If they decline (a realistic possibility) you are free to continue on your own.
Also, their help may prove valuable. Having somone experienced to check and improve the paper before submitting it to a journal may help getting it published.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you are asking the wrong question. Without an academic affiliatuon getting accepted for publication will not be easy.
You may want to contact your professor for this reason.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: The stuff that you list all falls into "advising research students", and in mathematics mere advising tasks are generally not considered to merit co-authorship. As such, a single-author paper is a reasonable outcome.
On the other hand, just running with the idea communicated to you in person by your advisor on your own might be a bit rude. Checking in with them whether there is anyone else working on this, and whether they mind you completing the project on your own would be the nicer alternative. If the details of you quitting your PhD are such that you don't want to be nice to them that much, still considering informing them of your intentions. If they eg intend to challenge your right to single-authorship, it will be better for you if that happens prior to submission.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I will contribute an answer for the worst case scenario, in which you quit your PhD with a bit of bad blood with your former PhD advisor. I presume that otherwise you wouldn't even be asking that question.
The contributions by your PhD advisor would not suffice for their co-authorship if you were senior academics on equal level. If you are a PhD student in mathematics or physics, your advisor gets authorship as means of payment for not sabotaging your PhD and writing letters of recommendation for you.
I also doubt that your PhD advisor would be motivated to contribute any proofreading or original ideas, since PhD advisors rarely do that even with their students.
If they don't have any leverage on you any further, you don't need to bother about them. You also don't need to care whether anyone in their group is working on the topic, since that's just ordinary competition; sometimes researchers get scooped.
That being said, you should invest some rereading and rewriting to match the writing style of your scientific community, if you happen to be "out of the flow".
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/01/08
| 419
| 1,885
|
<issue_start>username_0: What if the company behind a reference manager or the people behind it decided to stop the application development and just delete it from the internet. In this case I may lose all my data. So, what is the options that prevent this from happening?<issue_comment>username_1: You could make sure to use one that allows exporting the data into an open format (which I think most do?) and use that functionality to make backups every now and then (ideally regularly). You probably want to backup that data anyway! (By the way, that piece of advice is applicable to much more than just reference managers.) If you want more control, you could also use an open-source reference manager and decide where the data is stored. Personally I use JabRef, but there are a [number to choose from](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_software) depending on your needs and preferences.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually any electronic resource is at risk. The solution is regular backups that you control yourself.
You don't lose money (generally) from banks because banks are regulated, forcing them to keep redundancy in their records and regularizing their client relationships. None of that is true with any unregulated cloud-like resource. The news has stories fairly regularly of lost data through both error and hacking.
To protect yourself, you can make copies of things you enter when you enter them, and manage your own backups of those copies. Use formats least likely to be abandoned over time - plain text, for example. Use media for backups that will last and continue to be readable. When standards change, update to new media. (I have about a thousand unreadable 3 inch floppy disks, sadly.)
Use the manager as a convenience but not as a bank vault.
You can hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/08
| 3,790
| 15,746
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a second-year math Ph.D. student without a master's degree who likes taking math classes and loves [TAing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teaching_assistant) and tutoring, but dislikes research. During the first semester of my second year, I spent about 3-4 hours a week on research while taking three classes and got very little done research-wise.
I usually have about 8 hours of office hours a week for TA (some of which are for review or practice sessions) and I also type [LaTeX](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaTeX) notes for students which I improve each semester.
I want to be a lecturer or community college math instructor (I am aware that their pay/ job security is not ideal, but I would rather have a job that I enjoy than being a professor, because I definitely do not want to continue research after I graduate with my Ph.D.) It seems like for those positions completing a Ph.D. is needed to be a competitive job candidate, but the quality of the research doesn't really matter. Being more likely to get a job is the only reason I am doing my Ph.D.
I have gotten 6 A's and 3 A+'s in the 9 classes I have taken for my Ph.D. so far, because I spend enough on them and also tutor other graduate students in some of the classes I am taking with makes me spend even more time. I like how for classes I learn everything by going to lectures instead of having to read references, have a large number of small homework problems instead of a small number of difficult research problems, and taking tests instead of working on long-term projects.
During my second year the main reason I don't do much research-wise is that I spend too much time TAing and tutoring, but starting in my third year it will be more so motivation than time, because I won't be taking classes. I was supposed to read a lot over winter break and also complete a proof and didn't have any other responsibilities. I read what I was supposed to and typed about 40 pages of LaTeX notes, but I skipped all of the proofs in the book and I found that after I finished reading I did not remember most of the notes I had typed, because I typed them quickly and didn't read the text deeply. I also didn't do the proof. I had a lot of time during break, but I chose not to do a good job because I wasn't motivated.
How can I determine whether I am doing enough each week to complete my Ph.D. and not be kicked out for not doing enough research? I usually don't finish the weekly assignments I get, but my advisor hasn't mentioned that I am not doing enough. I know that one way to find out is to ask my advisor, but I don't want them to know that I just want to complete the Ph.D. And I don't want to spend time on research, because then they might decide that they don't want to work with me anymore and I wouldn't be able to finish my Ph.D.
I think that I probably wouldn't spend more than 12 hours weekly during my last three years on research, but I would spend at least 8 hours weekly even if less than that was enough. I know that this would leave me with a significant amount of free time which I would probably spend tutoring undergraduate and graduate students, because I am motivated to do that and it would help improve my teaching skills.
In summary
1. Is 12 hours spent weekly on research for the final 3 years enough to complete a minimal Ph.D. for a slightly above average Ph.D. student?
2. Is there a way that I can continually check whether I am on track to complete my Ph.D. and not be kicked out for making unsatisfactory progress?<issue_comment>username_1: Your advisor is the best person to answer this, but it doesn't sound like you are headed for success. A PhD is normally all about research, though in the US (assumed), in the second year, there is a lot of coursework normally. Only after passing comprehensive exams does the research get serious and dominates your time (and maybe your life).
At the point you are, if the program is 6-7 years in total, you are probably ok, but eventually research will be closer to 20-30 hours per week for someone who is also also a TA.
Talk to your advisor about your progress and maybe look around at what your peers are doing as well.
However, research, by its nature, can't be predicted. Some projects take much more time (per week and overall) than others. It is because the unknown is unknown and you are trying to make it known. There are no guarantees.
And, if you hate research, you should reexamine your path. Even the coursework you are proud of now won't be terribly valuable as community college faculty. It is meant to prepare you for serious research (and for passing qualifiers).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, the bare minimum required to have a good chance to complete a PhD in math is to *actually want one*. By that I mean, not just to want a diploma, or a practical means towards having some specific type of career, but to actually have a decent level of passion and enthusiasm about the idea of doing research in math, which is what doing a PhD is all about.
A person who lacks this level of passion and enthusiasm will most likely fail. Even many who do have it will not succeed. A math PhD is already a hard enough thing to do for those who find the idea of math research appealing, so that I really wouldn’t recommend it to anyone who *doesn’t* find it appealing.
Basically, it’s a bad idea to think in terms of the number of hours per week. If you are thinking in those terms it strongly signals that you lack intrinsic motivation for doing what it takes to get a PhD. And without intrinsic motivation, your chances simply don’t look very good. Keep in mind that I don’t know you and what you’re capable of, but that’s at least the generic answer I would give for someone in your situation.
See also [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/160894/40589) with some related thoughts. And best of luck with your studies going forward.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: #### The "publish or perish" injunction reflects a professional reality in most of academia
Since different PhD candidates differ enormously in their skills and the quality of their work, there is no magic formula to convert hours of work to success or lack thereof. Your advisor and your broader supervisory panel should be able to give you feedback on whether you are on-track in your program. Normally, by this stage of your candidature you would have set some research milestones that progress towards completion of your dissertation. If your panel are doing their job well then you should not be substantially behind schedule without knowing about it, but it never hurts to ask if you're unsure. As to being kicked out for lack of progress, PhD programs have milestones and (at least) annual reviews where you are rated on your progress. Students who have not made sufficient progress to pass their review are generally given at least a semester to catch up, but there are mechanisms to remove them from the program if they are persistently behind and not making research progress. You should read the program rules at your institution to see the review system that is in place in your PhD program.
As to your broader career goal and strategy, there are a few aspects of this that are a bit naive and are perhaps cause for concern. Firstly, even for teaching-heavy positions, universities/colleges have generally adopted the view that research scholarship is an important marker of knowledge in a field, and they will prefer their students to be taught by scholars with a substantial research record. For this reason, many academics who focus on teaching undertake research relating to *pedagogical* aspects of their discipline, as a means to demonstrate high levels of knowledge in the field. (You will find that many acadmics who are heavily focused on teaching will publish papers in teaching journals.) Secondly, there are a number of scholars who believe that universities are entering a period of slow decline (see e.g., [Reynolds 2012](https://www.amazon.com.au/Higher-Education-Bubble-Harlan-Reynolds/dp/1594036659)), which may portend a highly competitive market for academic positions in the future. As shown in the figure below, the rate of produced PhD graduates is substantially above the number of new academic positions, and the gap is getting larger over time. (This figure is only for science and engineering but other fields have been similar.)
As a result of these various norms and trends, academics who do not publish research generally have a hard time in academia, even in teaching-heavy positions. Moreover, this is only likely to intensify as more qualified PhD graduates compete for relatively fewer (or perhaps even absolutely fewer) academic positions. You say that you are okay with the low pay and job insecurity of teaching positions at a community college, but on present labour market trends this might become quite extreme.
##### New faculty position vs new PhDs in science and engineering (Figure 1, [Shillebeeckx, Maricque and Lewis 2013](https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt.2706))
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pHKdu.jpg)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I applaud your love of learning mathematics and your interest in teaching. That said, you will have to be both thoughtful and lucky to reach your career goal: teaching relatively advanced mathematics in a relatively stable job. Many of the other answers here point to the difficult job market now and in years to come.
You do need that PhD. If your advisor is sympathetic to your goals and you are good enough to do some research they may be able to help you choose a problem in your Goldilocks zone: one you're genuinely interested in answering, hard enough to be worth solving but not so hard that it's beyond your abilities.
I don't think you can succeed as long as you are counting and regretting the research hours. You really do have to care about the problem. Look for one in an area that does not call for lots of technical machinery before you can even state and understand open questions. If there's something touching the things you like to teach, go for that.
In your eventual job search consider secondary schools. You will find some advanced topics and some good students to mentor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Other answers gave some good advices on the matter. First, if you really don't like research then the psychological load will get intensified every day, to the point that it might become unbearable. So please be careful about what you really like and dislike before it gets too late.
The other point is, I think not liking research and being in academia are two paradoxical features. Maybe you haven't found your passion yet, and the courses you have dealt with so far weren't your taste. So at this point, the 2nd year of PhD, you should keep trying to find what you really like. There's still plenty of time for that IMO.
At the end, if you still think that research is not your thing, then maybe you could try some part-time teaching to, for example, high school students. That is a good starting point to check whether your passion and future is in teaching. I think having a PhD is not a necessity for teachers in most places of the world. And I doubt that teaching at high school is less fun than being a college tutor.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: My two cents as someone who switched from pure math to applied math and actually found it interesting and motivating enough to complete my PhD:
It's not ideal that you don't have that passion obviously. But a change of scenery can help. I was always a pure math person and was trying to do PDE in my early years of PhD (things like Vlassov-Poisson-Boltzmann, proving existence etc) but found it very hard to stay motivated. I came clean to my advisor and we parted ways and I had decided that I would leave the program with a Master's. But a new hire at my university was said to be hiring her first PhD students and wants to do research in computational neuroscience, so I figured it would not hurt to meet her.
Now after two papers and two years, I am about to defend this May and have found it very interesting to do Machine Learning/Data Science stuff so I will get hired for that kind of role for a company. This is because the math/simulation part of the research involves a fair bit of Reinforcement Learning algorithms.
Our department is huge and I heard similar stories of students completing their math PhD's in applied/computational/inter-disciplinary area and do a lot of simulation/coding as opposed to the old-fashioned 8hrs a day pure math stuff. I also enjoy teaching and my research workload has never exceeded more than 20 hrs a week (on average about 15 - the math is really not that hard in this field). If I did more, then I probably would have published at premium journals and get a strong chance at a nice postdoc, but I am okay with that.
But all of this depends on your advisor and in my case she is the nicest and most supportive teacher I have ever had.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: **Consider your backup plan**
In addition to the other answers, assuming you succeed in getting the Ph.D. with minimal effort put in on the research (I have trouble seeing how this is possible), consider what might happen if you tried for a lecturer position but didn't get one, or you tried community college teaching and it didn't work out. Many people in this scenario would then look toward a job in industry, and here I'm afraid having a Ph.D. may hurt you significantly given your specific situation. It's my understanding that having a Ph.D. usually communicates to hiring managers that you're skilled at self-directed research (and of course implies then that you actually *like* it or at least don't hate it). So if you manage to get a Ph.D. without either of these being true, it may hurt your chances of getting a job in industry that matches your interests should your current plan of being a non-research lecturer or community college instructor not work out. Something to consider.
**Are you sure you hate research?**
Alternatively, are you sure you that really hate research? Is it possible that you simply haven't found the right research area or problem? Maybe a different area in math, or maybe something altogether different? One test that may be helpful in answering this question is this: are you happiest doing the same thing day in and day out and doing it well (year after year after year), or do you need variety, to learn and do something new every few months or years? Are you a naturally creative person or do you find it difficult? For example, if you like to cook, do you enjoy inventing your own recipes or do you enjoy cooking from established recipes without deviating from them? Basically I'm trying to get at whether you have a personality that is creative, likes to invent and discover, and that craves novelty, or one that seeks to excel at doing one thing and doing it well in a highly stable environment. If the former, I suggest that maybe you've either not truly given research a chance (or may not even have a full picture of what research is), or may not have found a topic you're passionate enough about yet that you want to help push the envelope in that area. If the latter (you crave stability over novelty), then research probably truly isn't for you and that's fine. It's important to learn what type of job best fits you. In this case my gut feeling is a Ph.D. is probably not going to work out, and even if it does it may cause you problems down the road.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/09
| 655
| 2,754
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am supposed to choose between mathematics and biology for the next stage of my academic career, i.e. college at undergraduate level. This will broadly classify my local career options into engineering (if I pursue math) or medicine/related fields (if I pursue biology). This bifurcation is the prevalent reality in my country, where 'professional courses', I.e. engineering and medicine are the most sought after college courses. Entrance to either course is through competitive exams with a low selection rate.
My interest is in maths, whereas I am confident (after analysing myself and taking many reputed aptitude exams) that my aptitude lies in biology. What should a student do in such a situation...choose their interest or their skill?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a disturbing question based on a false premise that early stereotyping is inevitable, and that it determines your career. I cannot tell you which is better right now but I encourage you to take the long view: **gain the skills you need to pursue your interests.**
I cannot believe that doing a session or two of maths will stop you doing biological work in future. Indeed, most (I emphasise *not all*) of the biologists I have encountered, interviewed, employed or worked with have been weak in maths (even to High School standards) and their biological work would have benefitted from a better grasp of mathematics.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I was facing a similar question when deciding what to study. I went for maths ("aptitude" in my case) and I'm happy with that decision with hindsight, however I wouldn't recommend generally to go for "aptitude" (or "maths" - in fact obviously my choice is aligned in some sense with both of your alternatives).
I think it depends on finding out more precisely what you want and what you can do. If you go for "aptitude", how much interest do you actually have? Can you find a direction in that choice that would also interest you and motivate you? For me it was very central to develop (or partly already have) a passion for math or parts of it, even though "interest" as criterion in isolation would probably have drawn me to history. If you go for "interest", how much less do you think your aptitude is? Ultimately I think it makes sense to make a decision that unifies them both, and I agree with the other answer that you shouldn't think that either decision, made early in the process, determines your future. People change from one field to another or find their niches to bring the two together.
Also generally maths is required almost everywhere, so focusing on that, at least for some time, will hardly ever be a mistake (or course requiring at least a basic aptitude).
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/09
| 559
| 2,379
|
<issue_start>username_0: I emailed a Prof. in Germany my CV and my research interests and that I want to discuss PhD research opportunities with him.
His reply was the following:
>
> Thank you very much for your message and your interest. I do not know
> yet whether or nor I will have the capacity to take on new students in
> the fall, but you are welcome to apply at our graduate school:
> .
>
>
>
Should I follow up with him? I saw the website and the admissions are centralized with deadline in April.
He is the only Prof. in the institute whose interests align with me.<issue_comment>username_1: You should follow up with the institute, not the professor, assuming that there are reasonable costs of doing so. This will buy you time and the opportunity after you apply for a further conversation when they may know more. You don't need to make a commitment to attend if they are unwilling to take you on, but not applying closes the opportunity.
But it would probably be fruitless to follow up with the professor at the moment. They haven't said NO, but have made it clear that, at this time, they can't say YES.
A short note of thanks would be appropriate, saying that you will follow their advice.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In Germany, getting funding for PhD studies is the difficult part. Once funding is secured, being admitted as a PhD student is normally the easy part.
When the professor wrote "capacity to take on new students", she/he most likely meant *financial* capacity. So she/he doesn't currently have *own* funding sitting around that could be used to pay you when you start in the fall. And while that is the case, it makes little sense to have a closer look if you are a suitable PhD candidate until some grant proposal got accepted or so.
Apart from funding via a professor (grant funding or institute-based funds they have control over), there are however sometimes also coordinated programs as it seems to be the case. In these, your application will need to compete against other applications (of potential PhD students who would be working with other professors).
Because the answer was so short, it looks like the professor did not have a detailed look at whether you would be suitable PhD candidate in his/her eyes. This step would probably come later if you decide to submit your application.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/09
| 3,536
| 14,299
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a math question and I went to my professor's (now a professor at Harvard) office hours (this was a really long time ago). I asked him and he said, "It's obvious!" I sort of said, "OK." I never did figure out the answer to the question...<issue_comment>username_1: It probably means: "You should be able to figure that out by yourself". Whether the professor is right about that or not, we cannot know. In any case it looks like they do not wish to answer, so your best bet is to ask your question elsewhere.
Of course, instead of responding with "OK" you could have tried to get an answer by responding with:
* "It is not obvious to me, could you put me on the right track?" (indicating that you really need a hint), or something like:
* "I read X, Y and Z, but could not understand the part where they derived A from B." (demonstrating that you did your best and have a very specific question)
But, obviously (pun intendend), it is impossible to tell from here how they would respond.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Deep knowledge in mathematics (and I suppose other fields) depends on insight, not just facts. What is "obvious" to someone with insight may not be to someone else who hasn't yet gained that insight. This was always my experience studying math. And it takes a lot of hard work to gain that insight. Some of it frustrating until you can say "A Ha".
Perhaps he is suggesting that you think deeper about the issue and come up with your own solution.
You can also, perhaps, tell him that it isn't obvious to you and would he give you a hint. A hint is better than an answer since it might lead you to the insight you lack.
Of course, he might also be wrong.
---
See [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/175544/75368) for an apocryphal story about what is obvious/trivial and what is not in math.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You can act in two alternative ways:
1. Tell the professor: "Sorry, maybe it's obvious, but I cannot really get it: could you please explain it to me anyway?"
2. Accept that the professor might want you to understand this independently, and go home and bang your head over it until you understand it, whatever time it takes.
About the second point, sometimes students think that if they cannot understand a concept in a few minutes, they have to ask. I sometimes ask my students when they come with a question: "How long did you think about it?". When I was a student, I'd chew over certain concepts for weeks before grasping them, but the reward was a better understanding of those concepts, something that I wouldn't have achieved if I had gone to the professor as soon as I couldn't understand.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: Your professor was a jerk.
When someone comes to me with a question they seek an answer to - I do my best to answer it. I may skip some parts and highlight the need to review them (*from this we get X, you can check by yourself with the Mologof conjecture, but let's assume that we do have it now. From there ...*) but I always guided the student, "bootstrapping" his journey to the solution so to speak.
Now to your question about how to answer that: there is no good way. The bad way is what I did once in a very similar situation (*It is obvious for very intelligent people like you, but for the more stupid ones it is not. I am not sure, though, that they are intelligent enough to be able to explain it* - or something like that). We had a complicated interaction afterward.
If you really want an answer I would go to someone else because at this point the conversation won't go well.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I am late to this question and the other asnwers are great. However, I had a friend who shared with me a realization he had that I think might be helpful to you. If a mathematician thinks something is *truly* obvious or trivial, they will state it as fact. When they say something is "obvious" or "trivial" what they really mean, is that it is obvious and trivial, now that you know it is obvious. That is, you can show it by doing something naive. So it is okay that you don't find it immediately obvious. Your professor just thinks that if you attack the problem with the fundamentals, you can figure it out. So go back to definitions, basic properties, and/or key theorems, and you'll be able to figure it out!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Answers to questions addressed to a professor are in general only "obvious" to people who have the relevant background. The professor is being rude and unprofessional and a terrible teacher with that response, but a diplomatic follow up would be something like
>
> It's not obvious to me, so it seems like I am missing some of the prerequisite perspective needed to see the obvious answer. Could you help me identify and fill in that gap in my understanding?
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: First of all, the professor should not have said that. It can sometimes be helpful to indicate in a paper or lecture that something follows directly rather than following in less clear way (there's still probably better words for this than "obvious"), but it's never appropriate to answer a question by saying "it's obvious."
That said, I think the best follow-up question to ask here that's most likely to get a good answer is to simply ask:
>
> Why is it obvious?
>
>
>
Hopefully this will not only get you an answer to your original question, but will also get an explanation of what bit of meta knowledge you're missing that's supposed to make it straightforward to work out. It's good to learn why it's true, but it's even better to learn why it's supposed to be obvious.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: My bet is the answer was obvious to any student who should proceed with a mathematics curriculum and you were being evaluated. The fact that you never figured out the answer speaks volumes about whether you should be hired. You might not like that and I'll probably get downvoted, but employers want people who can solve problems even if they can't ask somebody. I was just on a job during which I solved a problem in a day that the rest of the existing team could not over the prior few months. The team had actually solved it, they just didn't know it and did not execute on it - the answer was "obvious".
Anyway, if you want answers from somebody smarter than you, you need to ask the question in such a manner that they feel its worth their time answering.
And lastly, just read through a lot of SO Q&A and enjoy the answers that are like "google is your friend" and "already answered here" and "vote to close as a duplicate" and ... and ... The more you think and that thought is evident in your question (which can be more than one sentence), the more likely you'll get an answer.
[Edit]
The subject matter here is mathematics, I didn't see anywhere stated that it was Calculus, trig, or whatever, but math (it is singular) is a "head game", its thinking, its learning how to think. The best way to learn anything is by doing, so the best way to learn how to think mathematically is to think mathematically. The instructor knows this and wants to see it in his students.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: "Exactly because it is obvious, would you mind it to show me that?" or, at the meta level, "Would you explain what obvious means in this context?".
Explaining [obvious](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obvious) things should entail an easy explanation, otherwise it is not obvious.
Consider also the meaning 1 of the entry <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/professor>.
My two cents.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: Grow a Thicker Skin
-------------------
I know how that answer sounds, but hear me out: I've been in that same situation.
Early in my undergrad, I struggled with basic chemistry. The large-lecture freshman chem was taught by a kind, energetic, and engaging man who consistently won awards for "best professor" from students. For mostly-extracurricular reasons, I flunked.
The off-cycle class was instead taught by a professor who was, shall we say, significantly less well regarded. He clearly spent more time doing research than teaching, and his lecture skills had atrophied. In retrospect, I think he didn't look at any examples ahead of time either. Instead, he would show up to class, talk (briefly) about something current that he found interesting, explain the theory of what he was covering, then spend a large portion of class solving the first half of each of a series of example problems diligently and with careful detail. Often he made some remark like "...and from there the answer is obvious" when he stopped.
In a subject which I had previously found difficult, this approach was somewhat distressing.
What I did after a few weeks was, essentially, what the title says: grow a thick skin. When he stopped solving a problem halfway through, I would (politely) ask him to show us how to solve from there. He would give this look, like I had asked "But Professor, how do you solve '2x=4'?", but he would also solve each one out, with the same diligence and detail as the first half.
It felt **terrible** to be asking those questions, and to be subject to those looks. But I couldn't afford to repeat the class again, so I had to keep asking. After doing that for a while though, a few things became clear. One, everyone else was struggling just as much with his style, and were very glad to have me (or anyone!) asking for more details. Two, he simply *didn't know* what parts were hard. I assume that basic chemistry had just been part of his professional life so long that it was all trivial. Either way though, I think he was struggling with what to emphasize as much as the class was struggling to learn.
Ironically, that ended up one of my favorite classes. The initial hump of asking those questions was very difficult (at least for me). But ultimately, it was also empowering to participate much more actively. And once I was already demanding explanations for the examples I didn't understand, asking for explanations of the material was no harder. So, because I was forced to constantly ask for clarifications, the second half of that class ended up being among the clearest and easiest to understand classes I have taken. Learning how and when to push for more details also helped immensely in future classes and in my professional life.
Assume your professor is operating in good faith, and that he wants to teach, and be polite and persistent until you get a satisfactory answer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: One explanation that other answers here have not raised I believe, is very common:
**Intimidation as a defensive mechanism**. People who *do not know* why something holds, or have a *difficulty articulating* a clear argument, usually defend themselves by saying things like: "it's obvious", so to intimidate others from questioning them or demanding an explanation.
The professor might be well accomplished in his area, but this doesn't mean he knew the answer or how to explain the argument. Some scholars are good and quick intuitive and effective thinkers, but completely lack the ability to rigorously understand some arguments from first-principles.
In this case, you should simply insist on an explanation, but not too much, as this may offend the professor who is probably trying to conceal their deficiencies. A slightly provocative answer may be: "*Yes, this is probably obvious, so I bet it should be very easy to explain!*".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: I would reword what [username_9](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/181114/145124) has already said more strongly.
**Obvious means easy to explain.**
To expand on this... Landau and Lifshitz' Course of Theoretical Physics is INFAMOUS for the overuse of "obvious" to the degree of spawning an entire barrage of meta-jokes. I could offer several takes on it:
* (Professor teaching us QED, rather strong scientist in their own regard): What was obvious to Landau is not obvious to us mere mortals. If you can not explain it in simple and accessible terms, it is not obvious.
* (An amazing professor of analytical mechanics, answering my inquiry about whether I should use Landau's book on the subject as the main course material): Those are books which are good when you already know the subject to gain deeper insight. Do not use it for your first exposure.
* (My own experience studying QM using their books): Feels like attacking a brick wall, you sit there perplexed staring at a single page for quite literally several hours until it indeed becomes obvious to you as well. It feels like a major victory; in hindsight, though, you are not quite sure if it is just your brain tricking you into being convinced just to end the torture. I do believe it actually worked for me, but for me, intuition beats rigor so it is definitely not everyone's cup of tea. But at least at the end of the day I could explain it to others without resorting to "this is obvious".
So this is a judgement call, after all: if your professor thinks that sitting in front of the textbook meditating and becoming one with the subject is THE way to master it, you are out of luck here and would be better off seeking help elsewhere (your peers taking the same course, other professors or even the Internet). Looking it up before bothering other people is a habit you start developing by the end of the university, so if this exchange happened on your 4th year or some such, it might be they are just expecting you to work it out on your own (and that "obvious" is a politesse for "not worth spending my time explaining it to you").
If this is not their general demeanor, well, just ask to elaborate; there are many ways to do so such as "In this case, I am *obviously* missing something trivial" or "I don't see it" or "Could you outline the actual proof, please?".
I know I parrot [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/181017/145124) and [Massimo](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/181019/145124) quite a bit in this answer as well but uh, your question just so happened to attract personal experience-style answers not fitting into comments :)
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/09
| 705
| 3,122
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have opened dialogue with him before and he said he would tell the admission committee about our contact. I have not been rejected yet, but I would really like to work with him (payment does not matter). I am already enrolled in another grad program without many resources, so being able to contribute to his project would be a blessing to my resume.<issue_comment>username_1: No, it isn't inappropriate to ask, but don't expect that much can be done. In the US, grad admissions are normally up to a committee that evaluates your entire application. The professor may have something to say in your favor, but, unlike other places, it may not carry much weight.
But, if you mean whether you can ask the committee (rather than the professor), then it probably won't be considered at all (most places) as it is beyond the application materials. Rules may prevent such additional "information" from being considered. There are exceptions, as every department is different from every other in the US.
But, even if you are rejected, you can still work with him externally if your own advisor agrees. That is a matter of personality and such. So, you also need to ask the advisor of the program you are enrolled in if you need to continue to work with them. And note that there is little advantage to the professor for working with an external student unless your research ideas are especially interesting. There wouldn't be any pay increase or load reductions for such things.
But, you can ask.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can ask but only after you get rejection.
You must have some solid grounds like some work in that field (lab work, research work, training, internship or something that will really impress them).
My son applied for MS in a University and was rejected. Then he asked the professor or committee. He told about his achievements and other work. They agreed to take an interview and finally he got admission.
But all should be done very **politely**.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: You're perfectly allowed to work for anybody you want who is willing to employ you, under any conditions that don't fall outside of applicable labor laws. This has nothing to do with any acceptance or rejection from an academic program of study.
If you see some advantage of taking such a position, there is no reason not to. It is completely "appropriate". There may be fewer options for pools of money the PI can pay you from, but your question states that being paid is not an issue. If you are not an "official" employee of the university, you have no formal protection that traditional workers do, such as workman's comp if you get hurt while working, unemployment insurance, health care policies, ...
Beyond that, only you're in the position to know whether such a role will serve to advance your career. If you plan to use the experience to strengthen future applications to this program or others, so you get accepted, it is possible that it is advantageous. Beyond that, though, my own opinion is that there may well be better ways to spend your time.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/09
| 989
| 4,464
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am considering applying for a PhD in Design and my idea for a Phd project is creating an innovative app. What concerns me is that I do not know how to develop apps, I am not a developer but a UX/UI designer.
So my role would be to research, build the structure and architecture of the app, design the features, the visual appearance, etc., but I do need it developed for the purposes of the research and user testing (to see if my seemingly innovative idea even works) and that's not something I can do on my own.
What should I do in this situation? Is it a bad idea for a project since I cannot do it on my own? Or do I just go and hire a developer to help me with creating it? Do I then fund it from my own pocket or is it something that the university can potentially help me with?
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know how graduate admissions work in Portugal, but you would probably need an advisor's permission for the following, which I think might be feasible.
The professors at the university teach undergraduates in CS and they often give large projects to their students (US experience). If that is the same, then, with your advisor's permission, you might approach the instructor of some programming projects course and give them your ideas for an app as a possible project. You would probably have to stay involved, of course. But that seems natural for a UI/UX designer.
Alternatively, if there is grant money available through the university or the professor, a programmer might be hired for this task.
But, independent of any app, your research idea has to be interesting to an advisor. If you need to work with a potential advisor as part of the application process then you might bring up this need then.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Usually a PhD program requires you to do some novel and substantive *research* that will advance scholarly knowledge. Often there is an expectation that this will manifest in publication of work in scholarly journals, but in design programs they may allow your main output to be a novel object or system. Even in this latter case, your output from the program should contribute something novel and substantive in the discipline. Producing an app could potentially meet this requirement if it is sufficiently innovative from a design perspective, but you should seek advice on this from some academics in your field.
In principle, there is no bar to you having your app programmed by someone else, so long as your own contribution (in terms of design, etc.) is sufficient to meet the requirements of a PhD --- i.e., some aspect of your proposed design *advances knowledge* in your field of design. Everyone doing a PhD uses resources and facilities created by others --- e.g., I did not design the word processor I used to write my dissertation or the printer I used to print it. Your PhD proposal should set out clearly what is your own role and what part you intend to give to a programmer. Since the focus of the program is on design, it is not unreasonable that your own contribution would be in that area, and the programming work need not necessarily be part of your role in the project. This should be clear in your proposal in order to allow the university to assess whether your work will be sufficient for a PhD program.
As to the mechanics and costs of having it programmed for you, it would be worthwhile to undertake some preliminary enquiries about the costs for this, and include this information in your PhD proposal. PhD programs usually have some budget for students for research related costs, though there is a modest limit to this. If the cost of programming is above what the Department will fund then you could seek alternative sources of money/labour. It might be worth seeing if there are researchers in computer science who would provide programming work in exchange for partial authorship credit on the app, co-authorship of publications relating to the app, etc. Alternatively, you could seek outside funding (e.g., from investors), or you could self-fund the difference. If your app can be monetised then you might be willing to find investors willing to contribute money or programming work in exchange for partial ownership. You will need to check that this is compatible with the university policy on ownership of products coming out of PhD programs to ensure all proposed ownership stakes are non-contradictory.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/10
| 1,500
| 6,411
|
<issue_start>username_0: Trying to decide between PhD offers got me thinking about the goal of a PhD. I don't mean in a general sense (see [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108792/what-is-the-goal-of-the-phd) for an example), I mean about which area of research to prioritize. Of course, ideally, in a PhD you'd have an interesting topic AND you'd be using techniques you're interested in. However, if given the choice, I would choose to focus on mastering a technique I'm interested in (which can later be applied to other topics), rather than focus on a topic I'm interested in (where different techniques can be used later).
My thinking may be naive, but I believe if you gain the necessary experience with the techniques you're interested in, it will be more useful in the future than to specialize in a niche topic because changing topics after the PhD is easier/more common than finding a job using a technique you may be interested in but have limited experience with.
So I was wondering which made more of a difference in your experience: the techniques (lab skills, programming skills) you learned during the PhD or the (sub)topic you specialized in?<issue_comment>username_1: You should be looking for the thing that glimmers. I know that may seem a bit weird. But you should be looking for the thing that sparkles and engages you. Whether it's a topic or a method or a question, it should hold you rapt when you think about it. It should be something you would be working on in your spare time even if you were not able to do a PhD in it.
You are going to be spending some years on this. Usually at least three years, often more. And usually it means your future will at least to some extent be influenced by the thesis.
So the thing you do in your thesis should hold your attention without you having to do anything about it. Don't be especially concerned about whether you are concentrating on topic or technique. Look for the glimmering, the glistening, the things that fascinate you. If you can find those then you will not have to force yourself to work. You will just want to work because the harder you work the more fun it will be.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: #### Most people learn best (and retain knowledge best) by doing
It is certainly valuable to develop your base skills in your field during a PhD candidature, and so the more you can develop your "techniques" in a broad range of areas the better. Many people find that they are better able to develop their knowledge/skills/techniques (and retain this over the long-term) when this is done in the course of solving some applied problem of interest to them. You might be different to this, so develop your knowledge/skills/techniques in whatever way suits you best. In any case, you are certainly correct in your observation that developing your core skills is useful in the long-term, and possibly even more important than mastery of the particular topic on which you do your PhD dissertation.
In regard to what is required for a PhD program, one of the most important elements of research is that you are able to take a problem and then investigate that problem using *whatever skills/methods/techniques are necessary*. This may involve learning new things and it may require a great deal of tenacity in dealing with topics and methods that are unfamiliar to you at first. Consequently, there is a kind of "meta-learning" that occurs in a PhD candidature, where you *learn to learn*. Of course, this is something that people outside a PhD also do, but in a PhD candidature and other academic research activities it is particularly pointed, since you come into new topics where you have to go to a high level of mastery in a relatively short time.
It is worth noting that the output of your PhD candidature will ideally be some research that is *valuable in its own right* and not merely an exercise to strengthen your skills. The usual expectation in a PhD candidature is that you will produce some research that is sufficiently novel and valuable that it can be published in a scholarly journal, where it can contribute to the totality of scholarly knowledge of the world. So while you are correct that your skill development may be more useful to you in the longer term, you are generally still required to produce something in your topic area that is valuable in its own right. Most people learn and retain knowledge best when it is developed in the course of solving a problem of direct interest to them, so there is often a natural symbiosis between progression of a PhD dissertation in a topic area, and general development of knowledge/skills/techniques, and retention of that knowledge.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> However, if given the choice, I would choose to focus on mastering a technique I'm interested in (which can later be applied to other topics), rather than focus on a topic I'm interested in (where different techniques can be used later).
>
>
>
You haven't named a field (which is fine), but in mine, certainly both of these types of PhD students exist, those that become experts in technique *X* and those that become expert in sub-field *y*. The grad students in my department are perhaps one-third "technique experts," with the faculty somewhat less.
>
> My thinking may be naive, but I believe if you gain the necessary experience with the techniques you're interested in, it will be more useful in the future than to specialize in a niche topic because changing topics after the PhD is easier/more common than finding a job using a technique you may be interested in but have limited experience with.
>
>
>
I am not so sure - although this would of course differ by fields - and at any rate, I doubt the correlation is high enough to plan your PhD around (that is, the idea that the more of a technique-expert you are, the higher your chance of getting a job).
For me, when you say "technique," I think "statistical technique," and unless you are in a stats department, you aren't going to graduate without a substantial contribution to the field you're "in".
**In summary,** becoming an expert in applying technique *X* to field *Y* is just as valid and needed as becoming an expert in sub-field *y*, and I would echo [Dan's advice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/181036/37441) to follow what you like best.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/10
| 923
| 4,080
|
<issue_start>username_0: Every research job/position I've ever had, I have had some sort of "informal" (verbal, via email) offer, followed by me showing up the first day of work to sign the contract and start. This is in Europe, where salaries for such positions are regulated and public knowledge so there was nothing to negotiate.
However, in conversations with people outside of academia, they view this as highly irregular. So I was wondering at what point an offer becomes "official"? At what point would you start thanking your references, rejecting other offers, looking for a new apartment, ..? When you get the "informal" offer, when you get a "formal" offer letter, when you sign the contract?
For me, the moment there's an offer ("we would like to offer you the position") and an acceptance (regardless of the form), it's "official" and I will start the process of notifying everyone and making arrangements if a move is necessary. Is this naive?
PS: I'm posting here rather than over at the Workplace StackExchange because I think this is an area where academia might differ from other jobs. If working in industry, I would never consider anything official until a contract has been signed.<issue_comment>username_1: In universities, if you do not have a contract signed by yourself and the appropriate university official, you do not have a job.
This is more consistent in academia than it is in "industry" because "industry" includes the informal economy where contracts are not written.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: This is essentially a legal question, relating to when binding legal relations exist between an employer and a prospective employee. If you would like to understand this well, you should have a look into the basics of contract law, particularly in the context of workplace law. Contract law generally recognises a legally-binding contract to exist once there has been an *offer* and *acceptance*, even if this has not yet been formalised in a written "contract". So as a general rule, if they have verbally offered you a position and you have said yes, that is a legally binding contract.\*\* Often the communication of an offer/acceptance is done by email, in which case there is also documented evidence of offer/acceptance. The purpose of a formal document is to set out the relevant terms of employment, and to act as evidence of the agreement and its terms.
So, your general position that it is "official" once there is an offer and acceptance is correct. The only potentially naive part about this is to consider whether you have *evidence* of the offer/agreement, whether the other party will be honest about this in the event of a dispute, and whether the terms of the agreement are sufficiently specified to avoid too much wriggle-room on the other end. If there is a dispute over the agreement, and it was purely verbal, are they going to admit that an offer was made? Will they characterise it accurately? Will they assert that it was conditional on anything? Can you prove your asserted position? For that reason, when I am dealing with these things, I will generally ask them to send me an email with their offer and I will email back with acceptance; that is enough to ensure that there is a binding agreement *that I can prove*.
You should also bear in mind that some offer of employment come subject to various conditions (e.g., background checks, probationary period, etc.) and their verbal/email offer might refer generally to conditions that are not yet fully specified until you see the formal "contract". For this reason, it is generally a good idea to wait until you see this formal document, to ensure that you are in agreement with them about any required conditions, etc., for your employment. If you are unsure of the legal status of your agreement, contact an employment lawyer and they can assist you.
---
\*\* Even before this, if the employer has led you to believe you have a position with them, and then you don't get it, they can sometimes be liable for misleading or deceptive conduct.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/10
| 6,549
| 26,819
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm looking for a clear, definitive answer to the following question: Is taking someone else's writing, and changing some of the words, inherently plagiarism?
I find resources that describe plagiarism are usually a bit vague around this issue. For example, one commonly-quoted book says this (Pechenik, 2001, p. 10):
>
> Don’t plagiarize. Express your own thoughts in your own words...
> Note, too, that simply changing a few words here and there, or
> changing the order of a few words in a sentence or paragraph, is still
> plagiarism. Plagiarism is one of the most serious crimes in academia.
>
>
>
Or this likewise from the [IEEE Publications: Identifying Plagiarism](https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/plagiarism/id-plagiarism.html) page:
>
> ... we should be able to agree that changing only a few words or
> phrases or only rearranging the original sentence order of another
> author's work will be defined as plagiarism.
>
>
>
Now, the fact that these sources each refer to changing or moving "a few words" leaves open the question of whether changing or moving more words, or many words, would possibly be not-plagiarism. Is there any threshold at which changing words becomes not-plagiarism? Possibly all of them?
The practical concern I have is that recently I've gotten a high frequency of students I've caught for plagiarizing in my courses (around half) saying something like, "Ah yes, when I took that file I didn't change enough of the words because I was rushed for time. I'm sorry, next time I'll change more of the words."
Ultimately I'm wondering if the best response to that is, "That would still be plagiarism [even if you changed all of the words]!", or if the response needs to be something different and more complex. (I find that for such students with possible language problems, more complicated responses are likely to be disregarded, so I'm looking for a minimalist communication in these situations.)
The best answer will not go into discussions of practical issues of *detecting* plagiarism. A reference to some authoritative source on this issue would be a value-add.
It may be helpful to note that "plagiarism" is emphasized here because it's central to my institutions' (and others') academic integrity definitions and enforcement mechanisms. In our case, "Copying another person’s actual words or images..." is the primary (but not the only) example of what counts as plagiarism.<issue_comment>username_1: First, at the end of the day, in a course setting, plagiarism—or the acceptable level thereof—is what the professor decides it to be.
But I think that instead of concentrating on the amount of words changed, the key point that needs to be addressed with the students is another: *if you have to read and change the words to write your essay, it means that you didn't understand the concepts enough to make use of them and, consequently, to pass the exam.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not a question of proportion, or how many words: plagiarism is a qualitative assessment. It is largely a question is claiming as own the *idea* of someone else.
Clearly direct copying without attribution is plagiarism, but consider the following examples.
During a final exam, two students Charlie and Bob make the same sequence of conceptual errors on a question where they are asked to evaluate the ground state energy of a molecule (for instance). One or both of Charlie and Bob could be guilty of plagiarism even if the texts explaining the calculations are largely different.
As another example, suppose Bob somehow accesses the work in progress of Charlie, and decides to redo this work on his own without acknowledging the source of the work as Charlie’s. Even if Bob’s paper is significantly different in language and structure from Charlie’s, Bob can still be accused of plagiarism.
In the examples above, one can argue that the *ideas* were improperly claimed to be that of one person (say Bob) whereas in fact they are Charlie’s idea.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Looking at [this definition](https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism) of Oxford University, plagiarism is using other people's ideas without acknowledging them. Under this definition, even if you were to change all the words, or rewriting the whole thing in your own words, you would still commit plagiarism, as long as you don't give credit to the original source where you took the idea from.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Is taking someone else's writing, and changing some of the words, inherently plagiarism?
>
>
>
The most concise, clear answer I can think of is the following: **Disallowing plagiarism is about protecting ideas, not words; however, the way something is written is often a (protected) idea.** The writing's structure and organization, the details that are included or excluded, the transitions, the figures, the references -- all of this may be protected intellectual property, and none of this is addressed by simply substituting some words for others.
Hence, students are wrong when they believe that all they have to do is "change a few of the words" -- even if one does not steal the words, they are still stealing the *writing*, which is much more than just word choice. The most egregious form of this is when someone copies an entire document and then goes through line by line making trivial changes to the wording. This is absolutely plagiarism: using different words does not change the fact that they are still stealing the writing. (On the other hand, *detecting* plagiarism is much harder when these substitutions are made...and many students honestly believe that plagiarism is defined by what TurnItIn can detect).
So I'd love to say the answer to your question is an unambiguous "yes" -- but consider this sentence:
>
> Elementary particles comprise quarks, leptons, and bosons.
>
>
>
Many students mistakenly believe that they need to make some trivial modification to this sentence to avoid plagiarism. But this sentence contains no "novel ideas" -- certainly not in the content, but not really in the writing either; there are only so many reasonable ways in which one can state this fact. Indeed, it is likely others have published this exact sentence before. Hence, taking this sentence without attribution (with or without having changed some of the words) would probably *not* be inherently plagiarism. But this is a slippery and ill-defined slope: while this seven-word sentence is probably not complex enough for "plagiarism" to be possible, other sentences (particularly longer ones) certainly are.
Finally, we should note that schoolwork presents some unique challenges for avoiding plagiarism. In most nonfiction work, there are four types of information: (1) well-established facts, (2) primary sources, (3) secondary sources, and (4) our novel contribution. Usually, an essay will have most or all of these -- #4 is the reason for writing the essay at all, #1 and #2 are important because our work doesn't exist in a vacuum, and occasionally #3 is helpful. Many schoolwork assignments, however, only have #3 -- there is already some writing in a secondary source that single-handedly meets our requirements. And so the student's job is just to rewrite the existing essay but somehow to make major enough changes so that it becomes original work. This is a subtle distinction that doesn't have much in common with the real world -- no wonder students are confused.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: Students sometimes believe or claim to believe that plagiarism is some highly technical, perplexing concept. While it is important to clarify what plagiarism is and is not to the student, in an actual discussion with a student who believes that they should have "changed more words", I find it helpful to start from an ethical principle that the student will find it much more difficult to misunderstand or claim to misunderstand, namely to **give credit where credit is due**.
Here is a concrete suggestion. One can get the conversation going by asking whether the student found it helpful to have the relevant passage as a starting point. Make the distinction between using general ideas found in some text and using an actual passage in some book or article as a starting point for one's own writing. This way of putting it makes the number of words they changed irrelevant. Even if they change every single word, the point is whether or not the specific writing in the source passage was substantially used in the writing process, whatever the end result of this process.
If they answer negatively, you can express skepticism about their answer, since they did in fact actively choose to use it as a starting point for their own writing. If they did find the work that the author of the original passage helpful in composing their own writing, you can ask them whether they believe that the original author is due some credit for that. Whatever they answer, explain that owe some credit to the original author. Then you can get into a discussion of what plagiarism is or is not, but I believe that grounding it in a familiar ethical principle will help. (Confession: I myself find it useful to think in terms of fair vs. unfair use instead of plagiarism vs. not plagiarism, and to use the term "plagiarism" primarily when ill intent is clear.)
Another approach if they say that they will "change more words" next time is to paraphrase this back to them as: I will change more words so that I can avoid citing source X. Then ask them why they wish to avoid citing source X.
If you want to wax philosophical, you can then explain that science only works as a cumulative enterprise which encourages people to stand on the shoulders of giants and ordinary mortals alike. This cannot work unless it is a win–win situation for the people involved. Other people's work allows you to see further and write better, and conversely, they benefit from having their share in your work acknowledged.
(The point raised by username_1 is also important to get across to the student.)
Edit: the other answers focus on using other people's ideas, which is justified but potentially a bit nebulous. You can also choose to focus on using other people's *work* instead, which I find a bit more concrete in this case: they are building on the work that some other person has already put into composing the passage in question.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't think there can be a clear definition. The point is whether "changing a few words here and there" meets the learning objectives of the assignment. If not, then it is trying to pass off the the content of the passage that *does* meet the learning objectives as being their own work and ought to be viewed as plagiarism.
Using a thesaurus or grammar checker to paraphrase the passage probably does not demonstrate any understanding of the topic in addition to the choice of passage. So being able to choose a suitable passage is all that the student deserves marks for (which probably isn't very much). What value have they added by paraphrasing? What understanding have they demonstrated?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The easiest thing to tell your students is this:
>
> If you use someone else's work, cite them. If you don't, you're committing plagiarism.
>
>
>
When this issue comes up in undergraduate work, it almost inevitably comes down to intellectual laziness. The student in not focused on school; s'he wants to slide through to a passing grade with minimal thought and effort, because s'he has other concerns: social life and dating, activism, emotional issues or anxiety, etc. These other concerns are natural and important — we all go through a lot of crap in that age-range — but part of the job is encouraging students to learn focus and balance. You're not doing them any favors by being overly lenient.
If I were in your shoes, I'd look them in the eye and tell them that I understand (because I really do), but that the ***behavior*** isn't acceptable. They need to step up. I'd give them a choice between a zero on the assignment, or a chance to rewrite the paper in a way that convinces me they understand the material. And I'd let them know I'd be reading the revised paper extra carefully. If you can find a way to break the myopic fixation on grades and get them to focus on acquiring knowledge, this problem should solve itself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Changing a few words is the worst form of plagiarism. It's basically proof the student knew it was wrong and is trying to hide it (I saw it most often with students copying from a friend's assignment, but same idea). "I'm sorry I didn't change more words" is really shorthand for "I know this class doesn't matter and you don't care. Let me go and I'll cheat better next time so you can pretend everything is fine".
There are two reasons we care about plagiarism. One is so our graduates don't do it. A few years ago an influencer (<NAME>) posted "still...I RISE" without saying it was from Maya Angelou's "And still I rise". She got ripped a new one and never recovered. And she changed almost half of it! If you have to write an original article and start by rewriting someone else's, people go nuts. Here's one about a [fired student reporter](https://www.iowastatedaily.com/news/iowa-state-daily-news-academics-editorial-board-member-fired-for-plagiarism-mckenzie-mccray/article_0892c812-7636-11eb-97f2-47b4afd68bcf.html) from my Alma Mater "*Tibbs ran an editorial that was about to be published through a plagiarism checker: 71 percent.*" Strangely, the article doesn't mention whether 29% changes were enough -- apparently copying with any number of changes is fireable plagiarism. Huh.
The other reason we care about plagiarism is that the assignments are meant to show what you know. Being able to turn it into your own words is the proof you understood something. If you just use an internet search and a thesaurus (also on the internet), that proves nothing, so is worth 0 points, and is also lying. "I wrote this" means you thought of all the words.
For dealing with it, one fun thing is to talk to other students. I've found that most fully understand doing your own work vs. copying. And they get seriously angry if they think someone is getting away with messing up the curve and the school's reputation by cheating. Getting a faceful of "tell me you're not going to fall for their bullsh\*t and let them pass" may be helpful. For a real earful, also tell the student "but they changed a lot of the words".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: The clear, definitive answer to your question
>
> Is taking someone else's writing, and changing some of the words,
> inherently plagiarism?
>
>
>
Is **YES**, and you need to go no further than a dictionary.
>
> the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them
> off as one's own.
>
>
>
The moment your students (or anyone, for that matter) tries to solve a writing task by looking for what someone else has written and then trying to include it in their work as their own, it becomes plagiarism no matter how many words they can change; it's the action of putting/trying to put someone else's work into theirs what constitutes it.
The thing is, the rest of the body of your question shifts it to both "how can I tell my students/make them understand that what they do is plagiarism?" and "am I wrong by assuming that what my students are doing is plagiarism?".
The latter is easier to answer: no, you're not wrong. The former, though, is a bit trickier.
Your students already believe that plagiarism is about what can be detected as such, and not what they're intending to do. This probably isn't on purpose - they might not be "evil" students, merely misled. You need to make them understand that their offense is not "not changing enough words", it is "thinking of taking the writing of someone else without proper acknowledgment".
Maybe you can make it clear by establishing it with a simple "do/don't" rule:
>
> **DO**: write your own thoughts and conclusions, and use citations from other authors or written material to support them.
>
>
> **DON'T**: take the writing of other authors/material and put it in your work as yours, neither by copying it as is nor by changing or paraphrasing it.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_10: Types of Plagiarism
-------------------
It often helps to break down plagiarism into different types. That's what [Harvard](https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/what-constitutes-plagiarism) does, for example, breaking it down into six kinds. A lot of other universities use the same or similar categories. The beginning of the course is the best time to (re-)explain what plagiarism is (ideally quoting your school's own policies) to hopefully prevent it before it happens.
If a student points out they didn't use the exact same words as the original author, you can point out that they are referring to only a single type of plagiarism (usually called **verbatim plagiarism**). The type of plagiarism you're seeing where they "didn't change enough words" is called either **inadequate paraphrase** (the wording is too similar) or **uncited paraphrase** (paraphrased without citation), or both.
The key is that it's not plagiarism if they paraphrased completely (changing enough of the words and wording) *and* cited their source. And if they did both but they weren't allowed to consult with sources, that's a violation of academic integrity (but not plagiarism).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: The key concept of plagiarism is presenting someone else's work as your own. Deception is central to it. If you copy a passage verbatim, that's not plagiarism if you openly declare it to be a quote. It might be copyright violation, and handing in a paper that consists of nothing but direct quotes is unlikely to receive much credit, but it's not plagiarism.
Where it gets confusing is that if you're a student, obviously you're not doing your own primary research. If you write that most of Napoleon's troops in the Russian invasion died, then (unless you're in a really advance program, maybe) nobody's going to come away thinking that you pored through historical record calculating how many the initial and final troop numbers were. *Obviously*, you looked up someone else's work. So using general facts from other people isn't deceptive (but that doesn't mean you shouldn't cite them!).
Using other people's wording, on the other hand, is deceptive. And "using" doesn't mean just copying verbatim, it also means taking that wording as a basis. Changing someone's words around is different from writing something *de novo*, and presenting the former as the latter is deceptive. Taking the dailies from a movie and editing them into a new cut doesn't make you a director. That's not a perfect analogy, though, because there's a clear line between actually shooting scenes versus using someone else's scenes (and, actually, re-editing a movie *is* a creative act, it just doesn't constitute "making a movie"), but there isn't such a bright line between "moving someone's words around" and "writing something new".
As to the language issue, while you should make accommodations for language difficulties, ultimately this is your student's responsibility. It's your student's responsibility to learn what plagiarism is, failing that it's their responsibility to learn enough English to understand an explanation of what plagiarism is, and failing that it's their responsibility to find someone who can translate the explanation. It's not acceptable that "more complicated responses are likely to be disregarded", and if they have such a cavalier attitude towards core academic concepts such as plagiarism, they have to live with the consequences. They don't get to dodge disciplinary repercussions just because "this is hard to read".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: From my experience, this is taught by high school teachers because they, themselves, do not understand plagiarism; at least, in the US. I wouldn't blame the students as they were never taught what any of this means: they were taught they have to produce the work required, and if they don't produce the work required, they cannot continue and will fail the class and are not given any sort of out or alternative path.
This is a version of Goodhart's Law ("When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure") in effect; so many words are required in that assignment, where they come from doesn't really matter. On top of this, they are taught that referencing *anybody's* work (while simultaneously teaching them how to cite work and what citing means) is wrong: if you cite too many works, teachers will happily shave points off your grade as if you had done something wrong.
Sometimes an argument is complex and requires citing a lot of previous work, and all your core contribution is providing the glue for a bunch of cites. In science, this could be the form of a meta-study and all you did was pull your conclusions out of a wider body of work that no single cited paper represents, and it's entirely possible your paper just concludes that multiple papers agree and reinforce each other and finding that out was your contribution to science because no one else ever wrote this.
Citing other people's work is not plagiarism, citing other people's work and paraphrasing it (without changing the meaning) is not plagiarism. Copying it verbatim without cite is plagiarism, paraphrasing without citing and without adding anything meaningful to the new version is plagiarism. This is commonly not taught to students, so don't blame them, just try to teach them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: Regardless of whether it is plagiarism, think about the context: if a student does this in an assessment then all they are demonstrating is the ability to use a thesaurus. Assuming the goal is not to assess the student's ability to use a thesaurus, any coursework demonstrating only that ability deserves a very low mark.
This follows regardless of whether you call it "plagiarism". That matters if you are deciding whether to put the student through the institution's procedure for academic misconduct. I would do this if the student failed to cite the source they had mangled, and not if they had cited it properly. But either way, "work" done this way gets a very low mark because it deserves one.
What I tell students is this:
>
> The ideas are supposed to go from the textbook (or whatever other source) into your head, and from your head into your coursework. If the ideas are going straight from the textbook into your coursework, without going via your head, then you are missing the point.
>
>
>
The problem is not that the work they submitted is "too similar" to the source material, it's that the process by which they are working does not and cannot lead to useful, meaningful learning. That is true whether or not the process is called "plagiarism", so [I'll leave that question to the philosophers](https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-09-22).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Yes.
As a student, many institutions provide access to plagiarism checkers, which highlight text that may be dubious.
I used a small paperback version called APA: the Easy Way, my father had once shown me a similar compact Chicago Style Manual.
Here is a link to Worldcat's list of libraries around Washington DC that have a copy of the first one:
<https://www.worldcat.org/title/apa-the-easy-way/oclc/1183823482&referer=brief_results>
These work, but you need to read and refer to them.
As a teacher, see if your institution offers a plagiarism checker (turnitin, for example <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG9mtsMkQaDDq3PSxa5zMEA>). These allow you to show students exactly how to check themselves and are worth some class time to teach them what's expected, what's accepted, and what isn't.
They also lighten the load for submissions, grading and (in the case of the one I mentioned above) designing assessments.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: Yes, this is a form of plagiarism called *close copying*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_16: To answer the titular question: absolutely yes.
Now when it is dealt with, the bigger issue at hand is that students don't understand your expectations and the reasoning behind them.
Make sure they understand what materials they are supposed to use for their assignments, how and *why*. Similar to how students doubted the need to not use the calculator for arithmetic in school, they now might be doubting the need to calculate something else by hand when Wolfram or Maple exist. To the similar tune, if they looked it up online and there is the exact solution to their problem, why not just use it? Are they to pretend they never saw it?
To me, the perfect approach is when they either already know from your material or find in someone else's work the approximation to an answer and have to fill in the gaps, and if the problem is purely technical, doing calculations by hand is helpful but only if they are your focus as a teacher, and some people struggle more than others with those; you might need to consider accommodating them as well. If taking prior work is fine by you long as the proper attribution is given (after all, someone has to teach students to work with literature!), state that explicitly. Unfortunately, school focuses on "no cheating/copying" in a way that leads students to the "just don't get caught" mentality you seek to get rid of.
So meet the students where they are, consider what skills you deem important for them to develop, and sit down with them so that they explain their solutions to you.
As an exercise, you might even ask them to explain some relatively trivial fact so that they know the difference between common knowledge, where the attribution is not needed, and deriving works.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_17: Let's look at from a different perspective. What would it look like to not plagiarise a source. You would discuss how the ideas and information from the source applies to your specific problem (or topic). So at the very least you synthesise the source with your own essay topic. This might involve a bit of paraphrasing (or quotation in even less cases) but only in so far as you explain the ideas in order to then relate them to your own.
Of course there are cases where you need factual information, in which case a simple quotation may be best. At university level that should not earn many marks though (only demonstrating the skill to summarise)
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/10
| 6,017
| 24,819
|
<issue_start>username_0: I came out on the diversity portion and I am having deep regrets and fears that anybody outside the admissions committee sees it. I doubt anybody on admissions even cares but I need to know that such information will not spread.
I shared this information on a portal that asked for a diversity statement and character traits about me as part of "holistic review", not on the statement of purpose which I assume is for professional goals.<issue_comment>username_1: First, at the end of the day, in a course setting, plagiarism—or the acceptable level thereof—is what the professor decides it to be.
But I think that instead of concentrating on the amount of words changed, the key point that needs to be addressed with the students is another: *if you have to read and change the words to write your essay, it means that you didn't understand the concepts enough to make use of them and, consequently, to pass the exam.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is not a question of proportion, or how many words: plagiarism is a qualitative assessment. It is largely a question is claiming as own the *idea* of someone else.
Clearly direct copying without attribution is plagiarism, but consider the following examples.
During a final exam, two students Charlie and Bob make the same sequence of conceptual errors on a question where they are asked to evaluate the ground state energy of a molecule (for instance). One or both of Charlie and Bob could be guilty of plagiarism even if the texts explaining the calculations are largely different.
As another example, suppose Bob somehow accesses the work in progress of Charlie, and decides to redo this work on his own without acknowledging the source of the work as Charlie’s. Even if Bob’s paper is significantly different in language and structure from Charlie’s, Bob can still be accused of plagiarism.
In the examples above, one can argue that the *ideas* were improperly claimed to be that of one person (say Bob) whereas in fact they are Charlie’s idea.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Looking at [this definition](https://www.ox.ac.uk/students/academic/guidance/skills/plagiarism) of Oxford University, plagiarism is using other people's ideas without acknowledging them. Under this definition, even if you were to change all the words, or rewriting the whole thing in your own words, you would still commit plagiarism, as long as you don't give credit to the original source where you took the idea from.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Is taking someone else's writing, and changing some of the words, inherently plagiarism?
>
>
>
The most concise, clear answer I can think of is the following: **Disallowing plagiarism is about protecting ideas, not words; however, the way something is written is often a (protected) idea.** The writing's structure and organization, the details that are included or excluded, the transitions, the figures, the references -- all of this may be protected intellectual property, and none of this is addressed by simply substituting some words for others.
Hence, students are wrong when they believe that all they have to do is "change a few of the words" -- even if one does not steal the words, they are still stealing the *writing*, which is much more than just word choice. The most egregious form of this is when someone copies an entire document and then goes through line by line making trivial changes to the wording. This is absolutely plagiarism: using different words does not change the fact that they are still stealing the writing. (On the other hand, *detecting* plagiarism is much harder when these substitutions are made...and many students honestly believe that plagiarism is defined by what TurnItIn can detect).
So I'd love to say the answer to your question is an unambiguous "yes" -- but consider this sentence:
>
> Elementary particles comprise quarks, leptons, and bosons.
>
>
>
Many students mistakenly believe that they need to make some trivial modification to this sentence to avoid plagiarism. But this sentence contains no "novel ideas" -- certainly not in the content, but not really in the writing either; there are only so many reasonable ways in which one can state this fact. Indeed, it is likely others have published this exact sentence before. Hence, taking this sentence without attribution (with or without having changed some of the words) would probably *not* be inherently plagiarism. But this is a slippery and ill-defined slope: while this seven-word sentence is probably not complex enough for "plagiarism" to be possible, other sentences (particularly longer ones) certainly are.
Finally, we should note that schoolwork presents some unique challenges for avoiding plagiarism. In most nonfiction work, there are four types of information: (1) well-established facts, (2) primary sources, (3) secondary sources, and (4) our novel contribution. Usually, an essay will have most or all of these -- #4 is the reason for writing the essay at all, #1 and #2 are important because our work doesn't exist in a vacuum, and occasionally #3 is helpful. Many schoolwork assignments, however, only have #3 -- there is already some writing in a secondary source that single-handedly meets our requirements. And so the student's job is just to rewrite the existing essay but somehow to make major enough changes so that it becomes original work. This is a subtle distinction that doesn't have much in common with the real world -- no wonder students are confused.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: Students sometimes believe or claim to believe that plagiarism is some highly technical, perplexing concept. While it is important to clarify what plagiarism is and is not to the student, in an actual discussion with a student who believes that they should have "changed more words", I find it helpful to start from an ethical principle that the student will find it much more difficult to misunderstand or claim to misunderstand, namely to **give credit where credit is due**.
Here is a concrete suggestion. One can get the conversation going by asking whether the student found it helpful to have the relevant passage as a starting point. Make the distinction between using general ideas found in some text and using an actual passage in some book or article as a starting point for one's own writing. This way of putting it makes the number of words they changed irrelevant. Even if they change every single word, the point is whether or not the specific writing in the source passage was substantially used in the writing process, whatever the end result of this process.
If they answer negatively, you can express skepticism about their answer, since they did in fact actively choose to use it as a starting point for their own writing. If they did find the work that the author of the original passage helpful in composing their own writing, you can ask them whether they believe that the original author is due some credit for that. Whatever they answer, explain that owe some credit to the original author. Then you can get into a discussion of what plagiarism is or is not, but I believe that grounding it in a familiar ethical principle will help. (Confession: I myself find it useful to think in terms of fair vs. unfair use instead of plagiarism vs. not plagiarism, and to use the term "plagiarism" primarily when ill intent is clear.)
Another approach if they say that they will "change more words" next time is to paraphrase this back to them as: I will change more words so that I can avoid citing source X. Then ask them why they wish to avoid citing source X.
If you want to wax philosophical, you can then explain that science only works as a cumulative enterprise which encourages people to stand on the shoulders of giants and ordinary mortals alike. This cannot work unless it is a win–win situation for the people involved. Other people's work allows you to see further and write better, and conversely, they benefit from having their share in your work acknowledged.
(The point raised by username_1 is also important to get across to the student.)
Edit: the other answers focus on using other people's ideas, which is justified but potentially a bit nebulous. You can also choose to focus on using other people's *work* instead, which I find a bit more concrete in this case: they are building on the work that some other person has already put into composing the passage in question.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't think there can be a clear definition. The point is whether "changing a few words here and there" meets the learning objectives of the assignment. If not, then it is trying to pass off the the content of the passage that *does* meet the learning objectives as being their own work and ought to be viewed as plagiarism.
Using a thesaurus or grammar checker to paraphrase the passage probably does not demonstrate any understanding of the topic in addition to the choice of passage. So being able to choose a suitable passage is all that the student deserves marks for (which probably isn't very much). What value have they added by paraphrasing? What understanding have they demonstrated?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The easiest thing to tell your students is this:
>
> If you use someone else's work, cite them. If you don't, you're committing plagiarism.
>
>
>
When this issue comes up in undergraduate work, it almost inevitably comes down to intellectual laziness. The student in not focused on school; s'he wants to slide through to a passing grade with minimal thought and effort, because s'he has other concerns: social life and dating, activism, emotional issues or anxiety, etc. These other concerns are natural and important — we all go through a lot of crap in that age-range — but part of the job is encouraging students to learn focus and balance. You're not doing them any favors by being overly lenient.
If I were in your shoes, I'd look them in the eye and tell them that I understand (because I really do), but that the ***behavior*** isn't acceptable. They need to step up. I'd give them a choice between a zero on the assignment, or a chance to rewrite the paper in a way that convinces me they understand the material. And I'd let them know I'd be reading the revised paper extra carefully. If you can find a way to break the myopic fixation on grades and get them to focus on acquiring knowledge, this problem should solve itself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Changing a few words is the worst form of plagiarism. It's basically proof the student knew it was wrong and is trying to hide it (I saw it most often with students copying from a friend's assignment, but same idea). "I'm sorry I didn't change more words" is really shorthand for "I know this class doesn't matter and you don't care. Let me go and I'll cheat better next time so you can pretend everything is fine".
There are two reasons we care about plagiarism. One is so our graduates don't do it. A few years ago an influencer (<NAME>) posted "still...I RISE" without saying it was from Maya Angelou's "And still I rise". She got ripped a new one and never recovered. And she changed almost half of it! If you have to write an original article and start by rewriting someone else's, people go nuts. Here's one about a [fired student reporter](https://www.iowastatedaily.com/news/iowa-state-daily-news-academics-editorial-board-member-fired-for-plagiarism-mckenzie-mccray/article_0892c812-7636-11eb-97f2-47b4afd68bcf.html) from my Alma Mater "*Tibbs ran an editorial that was about to be published through a plagiarism checker: 71 percent.*" Strangely, the article doesn't mention whether 29% changes were enough -- apparently copying with any number of changes is fireable plagiarism. Huh.
The other reason we care about plagiarism is that the assignments are meant to show what you know. Being able to turn it into your own words is the proof you understood something. If you just use an internet search and a thesaurus (also on the internet), that proves nothing, so is worth 0 points, and is also lying. "I wrote this" means you thought of all the words.
For dealing with it, one fun thing is to talk to other students. I've found that most fully understand doing your own work vs. copying. And they get seriously angry if they think someone is getting away with messing up the curve and the school's reputation by cheating. Getting a faceful of "tell me you're not going to fall for their bullsh\*t and let them pass" may be helpful. For a real earful, also tell the student "but they changed a lot of the words".
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: The clear, definitive answer to your question
>
> Is taking someone else's writing, and changing some of the words,
> inherently plagiarism?
>
>
>
Is **YES**, and you need to go no further than a dictionary.
>
> the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them
> off as one's own.
>
>
>
The moment your students (or anyone, for that matter) tries to solve a writing task by looking for what someone else has written and then trying to include it in their work as their own, it becomes plagiarism no matter how many words they can change; it's the action of putting/trying to put someone else's work into theirs what constitutes it.
The thing is, the rest of the body of your question shifts it to both "how can I tell my students/make them understand that what they do is plagiarism?" and "am I wrong by assuming that what my students are doing is plagiarism?".
The latter is easier to answer: no, you're not wrong. The former, though, is a bit trickier.
Your students already believe that plagiarism is about what can be detected as such, and not what they're intending to do. This probably isn't on purpose - they might not be "evil" students, merely misled. You need to make them understand that their offense is not "not changing enough words", it is "thinking of taking the writing of someone else without proper acknowledgment".
Maybe you can make it clear by establishing it with a simple "do/don't" rule:
>
> **DO**: write your own thoughts and conclusions, and use citations from other authors or written material to support them.
>
>
> **DON'T**: take the writing of other authors/material and put it in your work as yours, neither by copying it as is nor by changing or paraphrasing it.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_10: Types of Plagiarism
-------------------
It often helps to break down plagiarism into different types. That's what [Harvard](https://usingsources.fas.harvard.edu/what-constitutes-plagiarism) does, for example, breaking it down into six kinds. A lot of other universities use the same or similar categories. The beginning of the course is the best time to (re-)explain what plagiarism is (ideally quoting your school's own policies) to hopefully prevent it before it happens.
If a student points out they didn't use the exact same words as the original author, you can point out that they are referring to only a single type of plagiarism (usually called **verbatim plagiarism**). The type of plagiarism you're seeing where they "didn't change enough words" is called either **inadequate paraphrase** (the wording is too similar) or **uncited paraphrase** (paraphrased without citation), or both.
The key is that it's not plagiarism if they paraphrased completely (changing enough of the words and wording) *and* cited their source. And if they did both but they weren't allowed to consult with sources, that's a violation of academic integrity (but not plagiarism).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: The key concept of plagiarism is presenting someone else's work as your own. Deception is central to it. If you copy a passage verbatim, that's not plagiarism if you openly declare it to be a quote. It might be copyright violation, and handing in a paper that consists of nothing but direct quotes is unlikely to receive much credit, but it's not plagiarism.
Where it gets confusing is that if you're a student, obviously you're not doing your own primary research. If you write that most of Napoleon's troops in the Russian invasion died, then (unless you're in a really advance program, maybe) nobody's going to come away thinking that you pored through historical record calculating how many the initial and final troop numbers were. *Obviously*, you looked up someone else's work. So using general facts from other people isn't deceptive (but that doesn't mean you shouldn't cite them!).
Using other people's wording, on the other hand, is deceptive. And "using" doesn't mean just copying verbatim, it also means taking that wording as a basis. Changing someone's words around is different from writing something *de novo*, and presenting the former as the latter is deceptive. Taking the dailies from a movie and editing them into a new cut doesn't make you a director. That's not a perfect analogy, though, because there's a clear line between actually shooting scenes versus using someone else's scenes (and, actually, re-editing a movie *is* a creative act, it just doesn't constitute "making a movie"), but there isn't such a bright line between "moving someone's words around" and "writing something new".
As to the language issue, while you should make accommodations for language difficulties, ultimately this is your student's responsibility. It's your student's responsibility to learn what plagiarism is, failing that it's their responsibility to learn enough English to understand an explanation of what plagiarism is, and failing that it's their responsibility to find someone who can translate the explanation. It's not acceptable that "more complicated responses are likely to be disregarded", and if they have such a cavalier attitude towards core academic concepts such as plagiarism, they have to live with the consequences. They don't get to dodge disciplinary repercussions just because "this is hard to read".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: From my experience, this is taught by high school teachers because they, themselves, do not understand plagiarism; at least, in the US. I wouldn't blame the students as they were never taught what any of this means: they were taught they have to produce the work required, and if they don't produce the work required, they cannot continue and will fail the class and are not given any sort of out or alternative path.
This is a version of Goodhart's Law ("When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure") in effect; so many words are required in that assignment, where they come from doesn't really matter. On top of this, they are taught that referencing *anybody's* work (while simultaneously teaching them how to cite work and what citing means) is wrong: if you cite too many works, teachers will happily shave points off your grade as if you had done something wrong.
Sometimes an argument is complex and requires citing a lot of previous work, and all your core contribution is providing the glue for a bunch of cites. In science, this could be the form of a meta-study and all you did was pull your conclusions out of a wider body of work that no single cited paper represents, and it's entirely possible your paper just concludes that multiple papers agree and reinforce each other and finding that out was your contribution to science because no one else ever wrote this.
Citing other people's work is not plagiarism, citing other people's work and paraphrasing it (without changing the meaning) is not plagiarism. Copying it verbatim without cite is plagiarism, paraphrasing without citing and without adding anything meaningful to the new version is plagiarism. This is commonly not taught to students, so don't blame them, just try to teach them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_13: Regardless of whether it is plagiarism, think about the context: if a student does this in an assessment then all they are demonstrating is the ability to use a thesaurus. Assuming the goal is not to assess the student's ability to use a thesaurus, any coursework demonstrating only that ability deserves a very low mark.
This follows regardless of whether you call it "plagiarism". That matters if you are deciding whether to put the student through the institution's procedure for academic misconduct. I would do this if the student failed to cite the source they had mangled, and not if they had cited it properly. But either way, "work" done this way gets a very low mark because it deserves one.
What I tell students is this:
>
> The ideas are supposed to go from the textbook (or whatever other source) into your head, and from your head into your coursework. If the ideas are going straight from the textbook into your coursework, without going via your head, then you are missing the point.
>
>
>
The problem is not that the work they submitted is "too similar" to the source material, it's that the process by which they are working does not and cannot lead to useful, meaningful learning. That is true whether or not the process is called "plagiarism", so [I'll leave that question to the philosophers](https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-09-22).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_14: Yes.
As a student, many institutions provide access to plagiarism checkers, which highlight text that may be dubious.
I used a small paperback version called APA: the Easy Way, my father had once shown me a similar compact Chicago Style Manual.
Here is a link to Worldcat's list of libraries around Washington DC that have a copy of the first one:
<https://www.worldcat.org/title/apa-the-easy-way/oclc/1183823482&referer=brief_results>
These work, but you need to read and refer to them.
As a teacher, see if your institution offers a plagiarism checker (turnitin, for example <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG9mtsMkQaDDq3PSxa5zMEA>). These allow you to show students exactly how to check themselves and are worth some class time to teach them what's expected, what's accepted, and what isn't.
They also lighten the load for submissions, grading and (in the case of the one I mentioned above) designing assessments.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_15: Yes, this is a form of plagiarism called *close copying*.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_16: To answer the titular question: absolutely yes.
Now when it is dealt with, the bigger issue at hand is that students don't understand your expectations and the reasoning behind them.
Make sure they understand what materials they are supposed to use for their assignments, how and *why*. Similar to how students doubted the need to not use the calculator for arithmetic in school, they now might be doubting the need to calculate something else by hand when Wolfram or Maple exist. To the similar tune, if they looked it up online and there is the exact solution to their problem, why not just use it? Are they to pretend they never saw it?
To me, the perfect approach is when they either already know from your material or find in someone else's work the approximation to an answer and have to fill in the gaps, and if the problem is purely technical, doing calculations by hand is helpful but only if they are your focus as a teacher, and some people struggle more than others with those; you might need to consider accommodating them as well. If taking prior work is fine by you long as the proper attribution is given (after all, someone has to teach students to work with literature!), state that explicitly. Unfortunately, school focuses on "no cheating/copying" in a way that leads students to the "just don't get caught" mentality you seek to get rid of.
So meet the students where they are, consider what skills you deem important for them to develop, and sit down with them so that they explain their solutions to you.
As an exercise, you might even ask them to explain some relatively trivial fact so that they know the difference between common knowledge, where the attribution is not needed, and deriving works.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_17: Let's look at from a different perspective. What would it look like to not plagiarise a source. You would discuss how the ideas and information from the source applies to your specific problem (or topic). So at the very least you synthesise the source with your own essay topic. This might involve a bit of paraphrasing (or quotation in even less cases) but only in so far as you explain the ideas in order to then relate them to your own.
Of course there are cases where you need factual information, in which case a simple quotation may be best. At university level that should not earn many marks though (only demonstrating the skill to summarise)
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/10
| 2,689
| 10,508
|
<issue_start>username_0: I live in an Asian country and I wrote to three professors in France asking to discuss PhD research opportunities in Math.
I introduced myself and told them my background in the particular branch of mathematics (courses done, title of my master's thesis) and e-mailed them my CV along with mentioning how my research interests match with them.
I e-mailed them on 22 December and 23 December and haven't received any reply.
>
> I think now is a good time to send a reminder E-mail. Am I right?
>
>
>
>
> Question : How should I frame my reminder E-mail so that the E-mail is not interpreted as rude or impolite or disrespectful? I am not a native speaker although I have a good command over English. But still I thought I should ask, as such impressions really hold value if done badly (I think).
> What I thought of writing:
>
>
>
>
> Subject: A very polite reminder of my previous E-mail regarding
> discussing PhD research opportunities in ...
>
>
> Dear Dr. ABC,
>
>
> This E-mail is a very polite remainder of my previous E-mail written
> to you on December 23 regarding discussing PhD research Opportunities
> in ....
>
>
>
After this line I will copy contents of my previous E-mail and attach my CV.
Is this way of writing fine?<issue_comment>username_1: Though this is really a matter of opinion, in my view *every and any reminder for an unsolicited communication is rude*. It carries with it the presumption that your original contact warranted a response. Yes, it would probably be most polite for people to graciously decline, but unless they've solicited contact by advertising an open position I don't think they are being rude by not replying.
As pointed out in the comments, you've sent your message immediately before or right after the start of a typical holiday break period in the country you are targeting. To expect a reply while people celebrate the primary holiday season in their country is even more rude. Although working styles vary immensely from person-to-person in academia, my impression from the French academics I have worked with is that they are far more serious about separating their work from their vacation than the average US academic.
I personally would not recommend sending any reminder email after unsolicited emails like this. If you do, follow the general guidelines in [How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90725/how-should-i-phrase-an-important-question-that-i-need-to-ask-a-professor) and please do wait for at least a couple more weeks past the holiday season for people to catch up on more important things first.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems to me that:
1. the recipients might not have yet read your email as they are still on holidays, OR
2. the recipients have read your email and are not interested for whatever reason.
I would consider it rude to send a reminder. These people do not owe you anything so if item 1 applies it is indeed rude, and if item 2 applies they will be annoyed and not answer back anyways.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: #### Don't frame it as a "reminder" at all
For any unsolicited emails where the recipient has reasonable grounds to ignore the email, it is not a good idea to send a "reminder" (and especially not a "very polite reminder" --- yuck!). As [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475/) points out in his answer, a reminder could be taken to imply that the original email demanded a response, and this can come across as presumptuous.
Instead of sending a "reminder" you should just send another email that makes it clear that you're **still really keen to work there**. Remember that the *inevitable effect of the email is to remind him you exist* so you don't have to explicitly tell him that it is a reminder. There is also no need to explicitly mention your previous email, since you can just put your new email as the next part of that email chain and speak in a way that assumes previous contact. The goal here is to get the recipient to draw the conclusion that you are eager and ambitious, not that you are bossy and presumptuous.
If it were me, I'd wait about six business weeks from the previous email (not counting the holiday break) and then I'd send another email, in the same email chain (i.e., with your previous email showing below) just saying how keen I am to work with him and how much I'd appreciate it if he could consider me. If I felt like I was being a bit pestering/annoying then I'd probably even ham this up a bit with some self-deprecation. Something like this:
>
> Dear Professor [NAME],
>
>
> Hello again --- I hope you had a nice holiday break.
>
>
> I'm sorry to keep bothering you, but I just thought I'd write again to let you know that I'm still really eager to see if there are any opportunities for a PhD candidature under your supervision. I hope my CV and previous experience looked okay to you. If you think I might be a suitable fit for your supervision then I'd appreciate an opportunity to talk more about this. Alternatively, if you think I'm not suitable, I'd love it if you could send me back any critical appraisal of weaknesses in my skills that are holding me back, or just reply to let me know I'm not a good fit.
>
>
> Thanks so much for your time.
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> [NAME], Pestering PhD wannabe
>
>
> [My previous email in the email chain appears here]
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Don’t follow up. It is rude if you’ve never met before. At my university, PhD students are frequently students and paid employees (research assistants or teaching assistants). If a professor had a position open, they’d be required to post it in an official way and would probably link to it from their lab’s website. If you’ve checked all the right places, that professor probably doesn’t have any student positions open right now. Might be time to look around at other institutions and other professors.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: * Sending an email the 22nd of December, just before holidays, is not the best idea. You can leverage on that to rephrase your second email, if you want to write a second one.
* Also keep in mind, when I was looking for a PhD, about 80% of professors I have tried to contact have not answered my email (a single one). And at the end I ended up working with a professor I sent no emails at all before the interview.
* The official channel, which is the PhD application form, is a better idea.
* After applying via form, it may help to have a phone call with one of
their assistants, that is NOT directly involved in the decision
process (that would be then your co-supervisor). Prepare some humble
questions about what they expect from you and if you would be a good
fit for them. This would help you both to understand if the future
years of collaboration would go smoothly in the department. Also if
the phone call goes well the assistant would support you at the
moment of the decision.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: As an alternate strategy to [Ben](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/87026/ben) which had a good template, I would propose to send a follow up email which does not directly refer to your original email at all. First, based on your proposed emails for the follow-up, there's some odds that your original emails were dismissed for cause (i.e., they had issues). Second, if they did not see your prior email, then including the prior email on the thread is a nudge, even if you never refer to it. It says: "Hey, I tried before and you didn't get a response." Sometimes this is what you want, to add a bit of pressure, such as when bothering an admin where a paper trail of non-responses will help light a fire if you need to escalate the issue.
In the current case (and for professors in general), you're asking for a favor you messaged during the middle of the most prevalent religious holiday in their country, so including the prior message in the thread will definitely not help you. I would say don't include it and don't directly refer to it. There is no upside. They either already dismissed you (and will again) or you will be highlighting to them that you messaged them days before Christmas and actually expected a response.
As a proposed contact.
>
> Dear Professor [NAME],
>
>
> I hope you had a good holiday break and are doing well.
>
>
> I hope it is not a bother, but I was writing to see if there may be
> any opportunities for a PhD candidature under your supervision in the
> upcoming year. I have attached my CV and previous experience.
>
>
> If you think I might be a suitable fit for your program then I'd
> appreciate an opportunity to talk more about this and to read any
> articles or whitepapers that reflect your current directions.
> Alternatively, if you think my background is not suitable, I'd love it
> if you could send me back any critical appraisal of weaknesses or
> skills that I could build which would make me a better candidate (or
> even just reply to let me know I'm not a good fit).
>
>
> Thank you so much for your time.
>
>
> Yours sincerely,
>
>
> [NAME], Pestering PhD wannabe
>
>
> [No prior email chain. Nothing here. But attach your CV and whatever
> else you're giving]
>
>
>
This is sufficient to alude to the prior email (it references the break, which excuses them for not responding) and it apologizes for bothering them.
Then, before you send anything, have two people look it over: someone who is ideally somewhat familiar with the academic culture of where you are sending it, and a second person who is good at French.
With that said, rather than starting by cold-calling professors: I would encourage you to look for the CV's of the students who are currently in the labs you are applying to. Take those CV's, cross out everything that happened since they started the program, and compare your CV to those CV's. What are you missing? Are you actually at all competitive for where you are inquiring? It's fine to inquire at a few places that are a reach, but you need to know where your standing is: if you're well-below where the average accepted applicant is, you need to own that and know where you stand when you contact. People are more likely to respond if you're actually closer to a fit and if you have reasonable metacognition of your strengths and weaknesses.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2022/01/11
| 2,092
| 8,795
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently in the process of applying to different PhD Programs, and I have a very specific topic/theme in mind that I would like to work on and that resonates deeply with my personal mission, goals, and expertise.
However, in applying to certain PhD programs, I find that many potential supervisors already have predetermined topics for their researchers to pursue and that there's little flexibility to go beyond the predefined research themes.
Herein lies my dilemma: Is it better to pursue a less exciting topic at a top-ranked university or to pursue research that is more aligned with my research interests at a lesser-known university?
Should I be more open to other research areas/topics than the one I had in mind?<issue_comment>username_1: I think what this comes down to is which advantages do the two options have - in general and for you.
While going to a top-ranked university might yield better/different job opportunities afterwards, the question is: do you need these better opportunities for what your future plans are?
Doing a PhD requires a lot of work and time, and in the end, this will be made much easier if the topic you are researching as part of your PhD will one that you like a lot. And, if you are researching something very specific, chances are that you will be become one of only a few experts on this topic, making which university you've been at less of a concern.
Furthermore, I think it also very much depends on where you are based. From my time on this site, I have gotten the feeling that being obsessed with going to a top tier university is much more of a thing in the US than in Europe for example.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Herein lies my dilemma: Is it better to pursue a less exciting topic at a top-ranked university or to pursue research that is more aligned with my research interests at a lesser-known university?
>
>
>
It's a matter of risk-management, that depends on the precise parameters, i.e., which universities you have in mind, what's your end career goal, and how passionate you are about your ideal research comparing to your indifference to the other research.
Based on these parameters, you formulate a formula (say, a linear inequality) that captures the threshold you need to decide in favour of the top-ranked university or not.
For instance, if the top-ranked university is MIT, and the low-ranked university is really "horrible", plugging in the numbers should end up in you going to MIT.
If it's TUM against Lausanne, probably not so much.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I like to think of pursuing a PhD as an apprenticeship with the goal of becoming a researcher. As others have suggested, it can be quite difficult and having interest in a topic can help, particularly in those moments of great difficulty. At the same, however, it can actually hurt your goals if you aren't pursuing research in an effective way -- even if the topic is the 'right one', so to speak.
From my own experience, I was very interested in a specific topic offered by almost no universities. It was interdisciplinary and not well-defined. While working in industry, I spent my free time "researching" independently. After two years, I wrote about 300 pages of a book that, in retrospect, is very difficult to read and will likely have no audience (too technical for laypeople, not enough status for academics).
After considering my options, I eventually ended up in a PhD program in a field that can be applied usefully in almost any domain (think statistics or applied math). My thesis research was not exactly aligned with my ideal research, but I learned many useful skills including perhaps the most important of all: how to conduct research suitable for publication in academic journals.
One day, I plan to return to my specific topic. When I do, I am now much more confident in my research approach and ability to be taken seriously. This is something I'd encourage you to consider. I'd pick the school that enables you to become the best researcher (which may even be the 'lower-ranked' university anyway). In other words, I'd much rather work on a less interesting topic with an excellent advisor than fascinating topic with an incompetent advisor. The excellent advisor will train me so I can one day work on the fascinating topic, competently.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It's a very tricky question. It really depends on what you want a doctorate for. Is it to add "PhD" after your name on a business card? Is it to pursue a career in academia? In industry?
For an academic career, where your PhD is from will matter little, but what you have done as a grad student will matter a lot. Having good publications in a "hot field" plus some teaching experience will work wonder. In industry, brand name recognition is a little more important.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: If this is the only difference, go to the top university.
The reason is that what is "exciting" to you right now can very easily turn out to not be exciting once you start working on it. An example from last century is the search for [Planet X](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planets_beyond_Neptune#Planet_X). This hypothetical planet beyond Neptune had been predicted from theory, and now "all that's left" is to actually find it. Given that Neptune had been found a few decades ago from similar theoretical considerations, this can very easily sound exciting. After all there were at the time only 8 known planets in the Solar System. Finding the ninth would permanently etch your name into history. If you find it, you would also be looking at something nobody has ever done before, treading new ground, writing new chapters in humanity's knowledge from a blank slate.
But what if I were to tell you that finding new planets involves looking at millions of otherwise-unremarkable images of the sky using a [blink comparator](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blink_comparator)? It's boring, manual work that still has to be done because there's no better way to do it, and you need to do it for years.
Something similar could easily apply to your case. The end goal might be exciting, but the process to get there is what you'll be dealing with every day, and that might not be exciting. It's not easy to predict from the outside (or even from the inside) what the process will be like - a modern example might be you discover that your calculations work for simple cases but for the more interesting cases they are too slow, so you need to find ways to improve the speed. If you dislike figuring out how to make code more efficient, then you are not going to like the process even though the end result is still exciting.
This neglects the other advantages of going to the top university: more/better colleagues, visitors, library access, brand name for post-PhD job searches, etc.
This doesn't mean never go to the lesser-known university, but you need more/better reasons before doing so, e.g. they offer better funding, your supervisor there is well-known even though they're based at a lesser-known university, your current supervisors recommend you go there, etc.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: Far more important than the prestige of the institute, or even the topic, is the quality of the supervisor and the research team you'll be in. And by "quality" i don't mean intellectual quality, but personal quality. How good a supervisor are they? How much support will they give you? How much freedom within the topic agreed with the funder? Are they generally a nice person to work with? Will they have your best interests at heart? Will they allow you to go to conferences? What are their publication policies? Are they well connected and able to introduce you to others?
These are far more important questions than the prestige of the institution. Generally you can only find these things out by talking to current and former students in private one on one meetings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: It is crucial that your rubric of a study and interest in a specific field parallels that of a scholar associated with a University.
Graduate departments are looking **for graduate students that can actively contribute significantly pioneering work** to a *specific area under the supervision of a scholar completing research in that specific area.*
Thus **you are most likely to be admitted to the institution in which the scholar’s interests parallels yours more completely** rather than selecting ahighly ranked institution in which the parallel doesn’t align as completely.
To conclude, it is better to pursue interest within an institution that parallels your research more passionately that one that may be higher ranked
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/11
| 790
| 3,464
|
<issue_start>username_0: For my PhD experiment, I am using a video game for my control condition, do I need permission from the video game developer?<issue_comment>username_1: That depends on what you do with the video. It is probably covered by copyright and it is conceivable that patent law also applies. If you cite things it will help, but reproducing segments of video or image captures from it requires you give thought to fair use and copyright restrictions.
But, if it is software that you have a valid license for, you can use it for its intended purpose without further permission, just as you can use word processing software to write. It is the reproduction of copyrighted content that you need to be concerned with. And, copyright law varies.
Note, especially, that images are a bit special. While you can quote from text, reproducing images has issues since an image can be construed in some cases as "a complete work" even when within another.
---
Don't even think about reproducing anything that Disney has copyrighted.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: As has been suggested, the license is the place to start. But not the end of the story. Not every possible thing that could be found in a license agreement is reasonable. It has happened that some things in license agreements have been voided by courts.
The details of the license regarding how many people are permitted to use a given copy probably are binding. So if a video game license says "one person" or "three people" or some such, that probably means just that. Lots of software has such limitations. Other possible phrases are "exclusive use" or "non-transferable" and so on.
Also, if you need to copy images or text from the game, the licensing conditions regarding that are probably binding.
There is another aspect to it. Suppose you make use of a video game. And suppose the owner of the copyright decides they don't like that use. You could find yourself inovled in a struggle with lawyers and trips through courts etc. Even supposing you win in the end it could be a horrible time wasting experience. It could put strain on your life, your relationship with your university, etc. If the copyright holder is particularly nasty they can make such things last years.
Far better to get permission in advance. In writing. If you make a polite request to the video game maker and get permission then Research Time! If they say no, or they try to put on conditions that you can't live with, or they don't respond at all, there are other video games.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are using, say, timings of people playing a video game as data in an experiment, as long as you don’t use images from the game or pictures of people playing the game without appropriate permissions, then you’re probably OK, but I’d ask your university’s legal department for advice before starting such experiments. It’s their job to protect the university from ignorant (of the law) researchers like us. If y’all have a law school, go see if there’s a legal clinic that’s there to a specific case like this (research on the edge of legality). Otherwise, I’d check with your grants compliance office since they try to protect you, too. I’d do this even if you’re not grant funded on this project. You are also going to need to run your plans past your institution’s IRB and demonstrate that you human subjects will be treated humanely and according to requirements.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/11
| 2,263
| 9,120
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm working on a paper and found myself using certain words very frequently. For instance, the word "condition" or "study" or "group" or "participants" or "the results suggested"....?
I mean I was just looking at a paragraph and realized I had used the word condition 14 times!
Do you have a list of synonyms you use so as not to be repetitive? I've never been good at writing, so I'm finding this very frustrating. Thanks for your help.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> For instance, the word "condition" or "study" or "group" or "participants" or "the results suggested"....?
>
>
>
Synonyms in technical writing are not always good. If you have been calling your groups "*conditions*" in the entire paper, switching to calling them "*groups*" or "*categories*" would be jarring. Are you referring to something else now? I would stop and scan back to figure out what you are talking about. Same for "*study*" or "*participants.*"
You might have a bit more wiggle room with "the results suggested." Recall though, that most papers are not read beginning to end. It should be clear what you are referring to for someone to pick up your paper, find the paragraph they want, and get the information they need.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: At least in math and STEM fields, it would seem difficult to avoid repetition of keywords without damaging the meaning!
In a STEM context, especially mathematics, I'd strongly recommend just saying, literally, what you assert. Don't try to be "cute" or any other rhetorical device (unless you're a bit more senior, and know your audience, and know what you're doing).
c. 1978, I asked <NAME> about what seemed to me a very repetitive use of "thus" and "then" in others' and my own mathematical writing. It was a minor revelation to me when he told me to worry about bigger things, and not to avoid that. :)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: To echo, but also to supplement what others have said: clarity comes first; but for me producing nice-to-read prose is also an important criterion. If you do it right, then these two demands will go hand in hand; but if they don't, then clarity and precision should not be compromised on.
And yeah, writing well is very hard!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If you have a tendency to use a certain word or phrase very frequently, you can come across as a more eloquent writer or speaker, and your writing can flow better, if you actively try to limit your use of that word or term.
But this applies to English/language in general and I wouldn't worry about this when writing a research paper any more than I usually do (but I'm usually semi-formal and fairly pedantic about my use of language). The goal of a research paper is to clearly convey the methods, data and results of some research. Eloquence and well-flowing text is easier and more pleasant to read, which is helpful, but this is secondary to clarity (it doesn't help to have a paper with text that's easy to read, but where the actual research isn't understood or it's misunderstood).
**Using synonyms** is one way to avoid the overuse of certain words, but, like others have mentioned, you can't necessarily do this in a technical research paper. It can cause confusion to use different terms for the same thing and often it would be more clear to just stick to the same word. If you were replacing e.g. "likely" with "probably", that's much less likely to cause an issue, given that different instances of those words are typically not so closely linked (although they do mean slightly different things).
**Rephrasing** is another way to avoid word overuse. You could possibly avoid reusing a word by combining sentences. Although long sentences tend to be more confusing, so try not to overdo it.
**Using pronouns** like "it", "this", "them", etc. is also a common technique to avoid word reuse. Although this may also lead to more confusing sentences, as it's not always clear which noun a pronoun is referring to, so approach with caution.
As an example, this would sound very unnatural (not only due to the repetition of "equation"):
>
> The equation is based Newton's laws. The equation was determined in consultation with leading experts. But no-one fully understands why the equation works.
>
>
>
It can be rephrased to something like the below, which sounds much better.
>
> The equation is based Newton's laws and was determined in consultation with leading experts. But no-one fully understands why it works.
>
>
>
But you'll need to figure out how to do this (if it's even possible or a good idea) largely on a case-by-case basis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I second the recommendation to minimize the search for synonyms. username_1 explains the reason very well.
My first bit of advice would be to go back and look at papers you thought were especially clear, and see what they did. Of course you can't copy their wording, but you can learn from how they phrased things. This is a big part of becoming a better writer.
My second thought is that, if you are using the same word 14 times in one paragraph, then it may be organized poorly. If the groups are in the hot condition and the cold condition, then maybe you are ping-ponging back and forth between talking about those two conditions more than you need to. Perhaps you can list some properties of one condition, and then the other.
Clarity, however, is the rule. Ideally, reorganizing the paragraph will actually make it clearer. Sometimes trying to rephrase things to satisfy some arbitrary-seeming constraint will lead you to come up with wordings you otherwise would have missed. But if you are losing clarity, go back to what you had before.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Don't use synonyms to avoid repetition. It may create an impression that two different words refer to two different things. This might be confusing, especially for the readers who don't know the language very well.
Synonyms often have only *similar* meaning, not exactly the same. Searching for synonyms can help to find a word to describes something the most precisely. But if you exchange synonyms at random, you disregard part of the meaning and add noise to your message.
As Mark suggested, excessive repetition may signalize there is some other area where you can improve your writing.
There is a relevant article on Wikipedia:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_problem_with_elegant_variation>
>
> Elegant variation is the attempt to relieve repetition by replacing words with synonyms. (...) Elegant variation distracts the reader, removes clarity, and can introduce inadvertent humour or muddled metaphors. It can confuse readers who are unaware [that two different terms refer to the same thing]
>
>
>
Also, a related question (possibly a duplicate, but I don't have enough reputation to flag): [Repeating technical terms using varied ones](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108596/repeating-technical-terms-using-varied-ones)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I do worry about that indeed, but it depends on the part of the paper these repetitions are encountered in.
In Materials and methods, the language would be very dry and precise, and sentences terse. Does one need to worry about having 20 instances of "bolt" on a single page of a furniture assembly instruction? I believe not.
In the more free-form parts, however, you might want to avoid these repetitions. Again, this does not have to do with substituting technical terms, rather rephrasing the whole thing if it does not sound fluent or eloquent enough.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: **If you are referring to the same thing(s), use the same term.**
This isn't creative fiction writing, or dramatic historical writing. Your readers want to understand quickly, clearly, and unambiguously.
You can help by ensuring they don't have to stop, backtrack to figure stuff out.
If you called them a sample, then every time you refer to the same thing/s or people, call them a sample again. If you called some set of people a group, use the term "group" every time you discuss something similar, such as that or a parallel group. If you refer to a study in a paper in 2018, then use the word study for an equivalent study in a paper in 1993. And so on.
*(At most, check if you can condense a bit. If its obvious what you mean, can you use "that/it/those condition(s)", instead of "the above/the same condition", for example?)*
You get points for clarity, unambiguity and ease of fast reading. You get points docked for making readers have to work out if the "group" of people in section 2 is the same as the "set", "study population", or "target cohort" of people in section 3.
Similarly, you get points docked if you use the word condition in section 4 para 3, but a different synonym for the same kinda thing in section 4 para 4.
**Using that term 14 times means you saved your reader 13 occasions of having to check what it meant and learn a new group, subset, criteria or whatever, to understand your work.**
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/12
| 1,292
| 5,843
|
<issue_start>username_0: When publishing in a non-open access journal, one (*Author*) is usually required to sign a copyright transfer agreement with the *Publisher* such as [this](http://wiki.publishing.umich.edu/sites/mpublishing/uploads/c/ca/Author-journal_article_transfer.pdf).
Now, when the paper includes some work, say a photo, by a third party *XYZ*, obtainable under a CC license and properly noted ("Photo by XYZ, licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0"), I assume that it is understood that this is not part of the transfer, but Author assures the Publisher that Author and Publisher actually have the permission to use it. (Since the CC license is non-exclusive, distribution of the article by Publisher will then be business between Publisher and XYZ, right?)
If that understanding is correct, now my actual question: what happens if Author and XYZ are identical? Say Author has produced some photo, and previously posted it somewhere under a CC license. They then reuse the photo in their own paper, with the same kind of attribution ("Photo by Author, licensed under CC BY-ND 4.0").
Author in this case actually holds the copyright to the photo, and it looks like they are in a position to transfer it, which they cannot escape from when signing the (unmodified) agreement. At the same time, it seems to me that this transfer does not work -- there are previous rights granted to everyone else! Can Author in this case (implicitely) transfer the copyright of the rest of the work, and independently grant usage rights for the photo throught the pre-exising CC license?
And even worse: suppose the work in question is not just an arbitrary photo, but depicts something obviously specific to the paper (say, photography of experimental setup, or a diagram relating to the research). In such a case, if Author dutyfully adds a copyright notice, they practically reveal their identity to the reviewers! How is this case resolved?
---
Background: I'm new to academic publishing and was a bit appaled when I saw what kind of copyright transfer agreements I am supposed to sign. I came up with this idea to at least be able to CC license my diagrams, and was wondering how much sense it makes. Related to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60277/why-dont-academics-bypass-restrictions-on-the-distribution-of-their-papers-the), but not the same.<issue_comment>username_1: If you give a license you don't hold unrestricted copyright any more since you have yielded some rights. You can only give rights you hold. If you license something under CC as you suggest, then I have some rights to use it that you can't withdraw. You can yield any and all of your remaining rights to the publisher or anyone else.
So, the situation is exactly as before. You can give a publisher copyright, but only the rights you retain after giving a license. The publisher will understand the implications as long as they know of the license. And, you should inform them to avoid problems in the future. Note that the publisher already has license for that photo (or whatever) since you granted it to the commons, of which they are a part.
In short, the boilerplate agreement with the publisher needs amendment before you can sign it. If the publisher isn't willing to do this, then they won't publish your work.
With respect to the no derivatives clause, that still applies to "the commons". But you have the right to make derivative work yourself. You haven't given that up. And if you yield all *remaining* rights to the publisher then they get that right as well. So there is no conflict. But you then don't have the right to make derivative works thereafter unless the publisher permits it.
Note that CC licenses are irrevocable and hold for the term of the copyright (seemingly infinite these days in the US) and become void (only) if the terms are broken by the licensee.
So, if you want to CC your images before yielding copyright you can do this. That isn't a problem. The problem arises if the publisher won't accept an already restricted copyright in exchange for publishing your work. I suspect that the risk is small but not zero, depending on how much of the "value" of the work is in he images.
Note that the purpose of copyright is actually to retain value to creators for a limited amount of time.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The situation of transferring copyright over material which is already licensed under a Creative Commons license is very common in mathematics, where papers almost always get uploaded to arXiv before they are accepted to a journal. The publishers are aware of this, and the copyright transfer agreement will typically list a series of standard exceptions to the publisher’s ability to assert the copyright, to account for the rights the author has already waived away by uploading their content to the arXiv (and to give authors certain freedoms that they generally like to have, like the right to post a preprint version of the paper on their home page). So, there is nothing unusual about such a situation, and it does not make it impossible to transfer copyright, it just means this must be done with appropriate caveats.
In your case you should also make it clear to the publisher that even though are transferring the copyright, you have already waived certain rights in connection with the image. Do so before you sign the copyright transfer form to allow them to suggest how to proceed before you sign away legal rights that you effectively no longer have. But the example above with mathematics papers shows that this is not a difficult situation for publishers to accommodate, so I’m reasonably confident they will find a way to allow the process to move forward, probably by making a slight adjustment to the language of the copyright transfer agreement.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/12
| 2,419
| 9,523
|
<issue_start>username_0: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives became an almost overnight transformational success in academia beginning one or two years ago (in the US and several other countries such as Canada and the UK). The most visible change is perhaps the introduction of Diversity Statements as a required document to be submitted by every applicant (faculty and graduate applications). See for example [here](https://ofew.berkeley.edu/guidelines-applicants-writing-statements) for Berkeley's requirement from applicants to describe past experience or background that made them "*aware of challenges faced by historically underrepresented populations*". This caused concerns (justified or not) by [some academics](https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/19/mathematician-comes-out-against-mandatory-diversity-statements-while-others-say-they) who claim that diversity statements serve as a political litmus test for new faculty, while [some other groups of scholars](https://www.newsweek.com/diversity-problem-campus-opinion-1618419) argued that DEI as a practice and as a goal in itself (e.g., equity) is essentially unethical because it treats individuals as part of a group (i.e., group-identity) instead of
individuals independent of their supposed group (e.g., women, ethnic groups, LGBT).
**Question**: Regardless of the arguments for or against DEI, has there been any example of initiative by academics that *succeeded* to revert DEI practices, and specifically in preventing the implementation of mandatory diversity statements?
---
**Edit: I have decided to accept Ben's answer** because it is the closest to a publicly known attempt (on legal basis) to tackle DEI initiatives. Other, more local and non-public successes in pushing back against DEI were mentioned by <NAME>, but these are as mentioned not public, and lack clear organization as it seems. <NAME> also had a good example, but it seems it was unsuccessful eventually.<issue_comment>username_1: I personally have had some limited success in pushing back against "DEI initiatives" with arguments such as:
* This does not go far enough because it only helps "x minority" but doesn't help "y minority." We need to amend this to also help "y minority."
* This "DEI initiative" actually harms members of "x minority" because it requires them to do more paperwork and serve on more committees. Unrewarded paperwork and committeework needs to be equitably distributed.
* This "DEI initiative" is actually designed to prevent change by shifting responsibility to another organization, instead of helping people who have been harmed by discrimination.
Presumably this is not the sort of push-back intended by the asker, but diversity statements are about how you will do your job well, not who you are or what you believe in.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: For what it's worth, quite a few people in my own math department did a lot of "pushing-back" in 2019-20, while I was chair of the "Diversity Committee". The pushing-back was "successful" if the following means "success": in 2020-21 and in 2021-22, we have not required diversity statements from job candidates, and current faculty are not obliged in any way to comment on such things. For that matter, the committee itself was renamed to "Climate Committee" because "Diversity..." ... "upset people".
(Incidental to that push-back, I found myself vilified and yelled-at in various amazing-and-saddening ways by various colleagues whom I'd known for decades, had to my house for dinner, and so on. I suppose that that behavior is an indicator of their commitment to "push back"...)
Two years down the line, (happily, in my own opinion), currently it seems that quite a few people have recovered from their initial surprise and shock that human-society issues should be taken into account in faculty hiring and such, and there is a sort of quiet acknowledgement of the significance of these issues.
At the same time, I've had a few people continue to attempt to dismiss my input on department affairs by declaring it "a personal agenda". I gather that they are "successful", at least in their own minds, at finding adequate rationalizations ...
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: The "decolonising the curriculum" program in a sister department to my own at our university was temporarily derailed by a campaign from a certain national newspaper not known for views friendly to the diversity agenda.
The program is back. Now as "contextualising the curriculum". This is partly a response to the newspaper campaign. But also a recognition that to believe that as a group of majority white, rich westerners at a majority white institution in a subject whose history is deeply connected to notions of "western culture" its impossible to remove colonialism from the whole field, and perhaps arrogant to propose that we can. The actual actions recommended havn't changed - recognising the cultural forces that led us to studying the subject the way we do, why certain questions are valued over others, highlighting problematic history and individuals where appropriate and highlighting the work and ideas of those often excluded from mainstream curriculums. But this is now framed as contextualising the mainstream curriculum, rather than decolonising it.
Oh, and all this is no longer available on the public facing website.
Whether you think thats a case of successful push back or not is open to debate.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I am not aware of any major successful pushbacks against DEI initiatives, but I know where you might look for more information and some possible leads. In 2020, philosophy professor <NAME> wrote an [article in the *Chronicle of Higher Education*](https://www.chronicle.com/article/the-legal-problem-with-diversity-statements/) critiquing the requirement for diversity statements and mounting a philosophical/legal argument against it. In the US context, various other commentators have argued that the practice is illegal (due to prohibitions on political discrimination from the First Amendment and/or labour laws) and some have speculated that this might lead to a class action lawsuit against one or more universities. This is just one DEI initiative, but it is one that generates particularly severe issues.
Since Leiter's article on the subject does not mention any existing lawsuits, I assume that so far there have not been any; my own internet search on the topic also yielded no results, so if there is a present legal action on the matter I am not aware of it. Nevertheless, it might be worth [contacting Leiter directly](http://www.brianleiter.net/contact.html) to see if he is aware of any major campaigns against mandatory diversity statements or other DEI practices. Given his past writings on the subject it is likely that he has his "finger on the pulse" on this issue.
One other thing to consider here is that "DEI initiatives" is a very broad category of actions, some of which are innocuous and some of which are highly controversial and of potentially dubious legal/ethical validity. Consequently, you may have more success if you break down the particular kinds of actions that you are interested in and then search for information on narrower categories of action. For example, you might want to keep an eye on the use of diversity statements, demographic targets, and institutional enforcement of cultural issues like pronoun usage.
---
**UPDATE (18 April 2022):** Shawnee State University just entered into a $400,000 legal settlement with one of its professors in relation to adverse treatment against him after he refused to use the preferred pronouns of a student (see report [here](https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2022/04/18/shawnee-state-pays-professor-400k-settle-pronoun-lawsuit)). The professor previously received a favourable court ruling from the US Court of Appeals (6th Circuit) in 2021 in relation to the matter (Case No. 20-3289). The settlement apparently includes both the monetary compensation and a guarantee to the professor that he will not be required to use students' preferred pronouns in the future.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: A [twitter thread](https://twitter.com/thankubayesgod/status/1310996238008025088?lang=en) from someone claiming to be 'an immigrant woman of color who grew up in poverty, sleeping on a dirt floor' (run by [UNH professor <NAME>](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8808293/UNH-prof-accused-posing-immigrant-woman-Twitter.html), who has since resigned) claims to have successfully derailed DEI initiatives in their department.
The system that this person used was to:
1. Get involved and volunteer for DEI committees.
2. Interject in meetings to request specific definitions for any terms used.
3. Demand specific examples of racist conduct.
4. Insist on high standards of evidence for any claims of bad conduct, and evidence that suggested remedies will work.
5. Continually point out the need to treat all people equally, and suggest that insinuations of privilege are themselves not treating all people equally.
I have no reason to suspect that this strategy was not successful (it bears some similarity to the tactics in the [CIA guide to sabotaging meetings](https://www.authenticcomms.co.uk/blog/the-1944-cia-guide-to-sabotaging-meetings)). So this is likely an example of successful (albeit intellectually dishonest) pushback against DEI in academia.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/12
| 1,282
| 5,485
|
<issue_start>username_0: How likely is an instructor position to be a stepping-stone for an assistant professor position?
I'm a postdoc in the US and currently applying for academic positions in the US. Is it a good move to consider an instructor position at a relatively well-known university relative to tenure-track positions at colleges that I have never heard about?<issue_comment>username_1: There are no guarantees, but it can help at the margins if you do a good job. The issue is that most "relatively well-known" universities are bound by rules that require a public, national (at least) search for tenureable faculty. You would need to apply and be judged along with others.
It is possible for a department to write an publish a job description that describes you almost perfectly so that you are guaranteed to meet the requirements. But I've seen it happen that this was done by an R1 State University and the committee got three candidates (among others) who met the criteria at least as well as the one they wanted (really wanted) to hire.
But, it isn't a step backwards. Get involved with the "life" of the department to make the transition as likely as possible. Don't just teach your courses and go away. Get involved with faculty research seminars, for example.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the U.S., in math, at research-oriented universities, there are at least two sorts of "lecturers". (And, note, this title is entirely different from that in the UK.)
First, there is non-permanent, but long-term, contracted sort of adjunct faculty, whose duties are exactly teaching, nothing else. There is *not* a progression to assistant professor, etc. It is not at all tenure-track.
Second, analogously, there are explicitly temporary versions of "lecturer", to fill teaching needs. No long-term commitment at all. Similarly for more elevated titles (and pay?), but no long-term commitment: visiting assistant prof, visiting X.
Third, there *are* some fancier "lecturer" or "instructor" positions intended as approximately post-docs, sometimes with honorific names attached. So-and-so instructor/lecturer in mathematics. But, again, no long-term commitment.
And, as @username_1 says, these days there is usually a legal requirement to conduct a well-advertised nation-wide search for any tenure-track position. Since lecturers/instructors are usually not in the pipeline for tenure at a given place, they have to compete with everyone else. Sure, it's good to have cultivated good-will and appreciation, but that's not a guarantee.
(So, most likely, if you have a lecturer/instructor position for a year or two, you'll be back to the same spot at the end, of applying for tenure-track positions all over again, with no promise that the place that made the offer this year will make you another one that year.)
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As a general principle, *ceteris paribus*, if you have the choice between *offers* of an instructor position at an elite institution versus a tenure-track position at a non-elite institution, I would think that the latter is a bigger stepping stone towards a faculty position at an elite institution. The main reason is that a tenure-track position will have a substantial focus on research work, whereas an instructor position is heavily focused on teaching. It is valuable to gain teaching experience and do enough of it to remain good at it, but competition for tenure-track positions at elite institutions is heavily based on research/publication/funding records, which is something you will more easily build up in a tenure-track position at a non-elite institution than an instructor role at an elite institution.
Since you are a postdoc, you should already have some research experience, and hopefully you have the ability to progress your own research with minimal or no supervision. An Instructor position can be a stepping stone to an Assistant Professor position in the sense that it provides you with some teaching experience and general university experience that will bolster your candidacy for the latter position. However, the main drawback is that it might not give you much time for your research. If your research work does not progress adequately, that is likely to make it difficult to compete with other candidates for an Assistant Professor position.
Of course, in practice, all other things are never equal, and so you will want to take account of all sorts of differential factors, including where you would prefer to be located, marriage/children, which set of job duties you prefer, which set of job duties will advance your skills more, which place/institution has a culture you prefer, etc. It also seems from your question that you are not talking about *offers* of positions, but just opportunities to apply for these positions. In this case you could cast a wide net over both types of positions and see what offers you get --- after all, you gotta eat!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Very, very few assistant professors in the sciences in the USA have ever been instructors.
Some instructors have gotten promoted to a higher rank within their university, but it was not called "assistant professor." There can be a separate system of ranks.
If you like teaching, either "instructor at major university" or "assistant professor at a little known university" might suit you. If you want to write grants, neither is likely to suit you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/13
| 586
| 2,611
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a friend from Germany who was a foreign exchange student in the US for a couple of years. She has a master's degree in Political Science from a German university and several years of experience managing academic programs at a university in Frankfurt.
She would really like to work and live here, so I did some some searching and found an opening for an Assistant Professor of German at a local university. As you might imagine, one of the requirements is a Ph.D. However, I'm guessing that this assumes that the candidate is not a native speaker of the language.
Do you think an average university would consider her native speaker status a suitable substitute for a Ph.D. in a relevant field? The teaching responsibilities of the position involve teaching German. Would it be worth applying for similar positions at other universities, or will the absence of a Ph. D. be a deal-breaker regardless of the institution?<issue_comment>username_1: Professors do much more than just teach. Their job mostly consists of research, and a PhD is in fact a *bare minimum* requirement for a position as an assistant professor. It is expected that person has published significant work in their field, for instance.
If you get a PhD in a foreign language, you don't just spend the whole time learning how to speak the language really well. You're writing and researching constantly, and produce a thesis in your specialty that consists of substantive research. So no, being a native speaker is in absolutely no way a replacement for this necessary training, in the same way (as pointed out in the comments) being a native English speaker is not sufficient training for teaching literature.
There is a caveat, however, in that some universities might hire *lecturers* whose primary responsibility is to teach foreign language courses, and those might not have a PhD. My university (a top private school in the Northeast) does seem to employ several non-PhD holding lecturers for foreign languages (though a cursory glance suggests they do all seem to at least have an M.A. in literature for their respective languages, or a Master's in foreign language education). These positions would not be listed as "assistant professor" in the U.S., and may not exist at many institutions. Such a position might be a possibility for your friend depending on her background.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You’re overthinking this. If an academic position description says that a PhD is required, then a PhD is, well, required. Your friend does not qualify, sorry.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/13
| 2,440
| 10,464
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year PhD student in a lab in Europe. I joined the lab 6 months ago and soon afterwards realized that the topic and institute are not what I had imagined it would be.
It took me quite some time of thinking to come to the difficult point to realize that I have to quit my PhD to find another topic where I can do fulfilling work within my interests.
I also started to apply for other PhD positions and I got an offer, which would suddenly start very soon, in 2.5 months.
My problem is that I feel very guilty about leaving my current PhD position, because I am the first PhD student of my supervisor. He is currently still in the process of setting up his lab, the money is tight and time limited and we are few people (2 other PhD students). I feel that if I leave as the first student to join the lab, it would have a big and negative impact on the lab and the career / reputation of my supervisor - But does it?
I feel very guilty about my situation and I don't know what to do anymore. But I have to decide whether I move on with the new position which I would prefer as a topic. If so, I need to speak with my supervisor about quitting my PhD, but I currently lack the courage.
How would you judge this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, you are all capable adults, aren't you? Feeling guilty is normal under your circumstances, and you might offer your supervisor some extra help to smoothen things out, but at the end of the day, you have already made your decision and are not staying, and it is in their capacity to handle the lab.
The sooner you two start working something out, the better. You do them a disservice by having them make plans you already know won't work out. The best you can do is to have this tough talk early and try to maintain a good relationship. Best of luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While it might have a negative impact on your supervisor, it also might not have a negative impact if you handle it properly! And it will definitively have a negative impact on **your** career if you do not make this switch.
Handling it properly in this sense means soon and professionally. Schedule a meeting to talk to him about your expectations not being met and how this other opportunity is the thing you actually want to do. Offer to help in your remaining time there, document anything you can. That is the best way to limit negative impact in general.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Consider the alternative:
Six months into my six year program, I realized I made a bad decision. I doubled down and finished.
That was the worst mistake of my life and I am still trying to dig myself out of the personal, financial and professional hole that I dug for six years (I finished 5 years ago).
**You don't owe your supervisor anything.**
By the end of my program, I tried claiming federal disability to obtain reasonable accommodation to address the depression, anxiety and stress disorders that I developed.
I currently work a job nearly identical to a member of my cohort that dropped from the program about the same time I made the decision to stay.
The only thing I 'earned' by staying are negatives. Not one positive resulted from my decision to stay.
You are fine. Sleep easy.
\*Edit: Just to give you an idea of 'What-could-have-been'.
Toward the end of my program, I read a news article about a student murdering his supervisor and committing suicide on campus. My immediate reaction was 'The student really comes across as the villain in this article'. Thats a true story... and it wont be your story because you had the GUTS to make the right decision.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Some of the longest days of my work life were those before I actually left somewhere I had already mentally checked out of. And the least productive. And the grouchiest.
Do everybody in that lab a favor: leave, and *soon*. Rip the band-aid off. Like long goodbyes, long transitions are highly overrated.
Truth: you aren't anywhere near so unique that you can't be replaced. You will be. Despite any BS guilt trip you supervisor may try to lay on you to save themselves some trouble, it's just a boring 'ol management issue. Replacing you will just be yet another management to-do *for your supervisor*. That's exactly what they signed up for by opening their own lab: personnel management, funding management, supplier management..., you get the picture, i.e. doing business.
Besides, it sounds like you were sold a bill of goods, at least to some extent. At very worst you may or may not make an enemy (probably not), but everybody eventually ends up with a few of those. To make omelette, you have to break eggs.
You've learned something. Just be sure to ask the hard questions before taking the next position. Even if embarrassing to ask, assume nothing. This is important: *keep repeating or reformulating questions until you get full, straight, non-evasive answers.* Otherwise, you'll know it's another bill of goods. Talk to people, future peers. Ask around. Fool me once...
Be that as it may, guilt or no guilt, it's your life and you only get one of 'em. You're at a stage of your life when big decisions have irrevocable, life-long repercussions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: One of the most important/common challanges of management is to deal with staff turnover. It is a standard part of running any enterprise, and something that managers have to learn to deal with. If you feel that your present placement is not good for your career, and you would prefer this other offer, it is reasonable for you to act on that. This will be inconvenient to your supervisor, and may exaccerbate the difficulties with setting up and running the lab, but that is part of the responsibilities of management. (It is unlikely to harm his reputation; you don't lose reputation merely because your students decide they'd prefer to study a different topic to your specialty area.) In the long run this is something that is a good skill for a new supervisor to learn.
Contrary to another answer here, I don't think it is reasonable to say that you don't owe your supervisor anything --- you owe him gratitude and thanks for taking you on as a student and for his assistance in your program. But you don't owe him your life. If you decide to take a position elsewhere, just be honest with your supervisor and try to give him a reasonable period of notice/work before you leave. It is best to accept this offer immediately and put in your notice for your present position as soon as possible, so that you give your supervisor as much notice of your departure as you can. Before you leave you can do other helpful things like teaching your work responsibilities to your replacement, and making sure you leave on a good note. Two-and-a-half months is plenty of time for you to finish up your immediate duties and brief someone else on your work responsibilities in the lab.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Setting expectations is very important in any relationship, whether it be in a personal, romantic, or work relationship. Changing those expectations is tough and needs to be done in a transparent way to everyone involved. This time, your current situation didn't live up to your expectations. That's perfectly fine. Now you need to let your supervisor know that and what new set of expectations exist.
Just sit down with your supervisor and have an open and honest discussion with them. State any mistakes you think you made in your assumptions prior to joining and that you are leaving. Give them any constructive criticism you can to help them in the future, let them know any positives you had while there, and maybe even offer to help them find a replacement for you. Basically put yourself in their role and do what you would want someone else in your role to do for you. Well, do them if you can actually and reasonably do those things.
FYI, in most situations 2.5 months isn't "very soon". In the non-academic world, that's a long time. Most people don't give more than 2 weeks notice and, in some industries like retail and food service, giving zero to 2 days notice is common.
It's unfortunate that this situation is happening, but it'll probably happen several times over your career. It's unfortunately normal and the sooner you understand and accept this, as well as how to deal with it without unnecessary guilt, then the better off you will be. There's very many different variables when joining a new job or any situation to know 100% that it'll be perfect for you. Employers know and understand this. It's why so many jobs have a probationary period (often 3-6 months), so they know you are a good fit for them.
It's actually a good thing that you've recognized the problems this early. You aren't wasting your time, energy, or mental health any longer than necessary. Being in a bad situation, or "just" an uncomfortable one, can seriously damage your self-worth, your confidence, in working other places or even wanting to work other places. I've seen people in bad work environments that are afraid to change jobs for fear the same problems will exist or be worse. They got to the point where they think that kind of problem is normal, even when everyone else tells them it isn't. They think "better the devil you know than the devil you don't know", giving up and believing every employer is "the devil".
You haven't said your situation is this bad, so that was just me making a point.
Yes, it's hard to come to the realization that a choice you made was wrong and/or that other people aren't living up to their promises, but don't dwell on it. Use it as a learning experience, deal with the emotions that come up with, and move on to the next opportunity. Unless your supervisor is unreasonable, they may take you leaving better than you think they will. A reasonable person would understand that, as a first time supervisor, they aren't as polished as other supervisors and need to learn how to do better. They should also understand the existing time and financial constraints the lab is under and realize that it's not great conditions to work under.
You have to make the decisions that work best for you, not everyone else. It's not always easy, but it gets easier the more often you do it. Don't worry about your supervisor. You leaving will likely have very little impact on their reputation and future.
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/01/13
| 465
| 1,954
|
<issue_start>username_0: It looks like I'm about to apply for a postdoc position to go back to my former PhD supervisor, with only one PI in between.
Normally as a Postdoc going for a 2nd (or 3rd depending on how you count it) position, the PhD supervisor would be a good person to ask for a reference (one of 3 in this case). My supervisor was also the last person I worked for before my current PI - again, last but 1 boss would be a sensible reference.
But what if the position being applied for is working for the former PhD supervisor? It seems obvious to me that you can't ask someone to for a reference when they're the one hiring. In this case everyone I'd ask for a reference from my PhD days is on the hiring committee. Is the only course of action to not have any references from the PhD period?
---
In this case I'm on good terms with everyone, but have a fairly limited network (partly because of the geographic limitations that are why I'm applying to go back there); I'm moving on because of funding running out so my PI knows I'm applying for stuff (and I've actually asked them pretty much this question).<issue_comment>username_1: I would just drop your former supervisor an informal email - he will know what to do.
And honestly, given that he knows you most likely very well the whole interview process might only be a formal procedure while the actual decision if it hires you again or not takes place in the moment he knows that you apply.
One other thought that you should keep in mind is that doing a post-doc in your former PhD supervisor's lab might not be the best choice for your career as the aim of a postdoc is to show independence from the former supervisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In the end, on advice from my current boss and with limited time, I put the former supervisor down as one of 3 referees. I haven't had any complaints, and I would expect to have done by now.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2022/01/13
| 1,386
| 5,638
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it **generally** a **big** case of academic integrity/plagiarism to lie about the date accessed of a certain document or whatever when making citations, at least in the following case?
**The case:** The idea is for procrastinators/crammers who do work at the last minute to change the date accessed to, **a day earlier** so they don't get judged by whomever/whoever is reading the citations and comparing with the date of the publishing of whatever document the citation is going to be in.
Notes:
1. I'm not asking if it **can** be a big case. The answer to that is obvious. Just make up some really wild thing in a case where precise date and maybe even *precise time* is highly sensitive.
2. I'm not asking if it **is a** case. Again, obvious. But we don't give the death penalty to case of, oh say, '[take a penny, leave a penny.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDNKzJHrPIo)'<issue_comment>username_1: Lying is a bad habit to get in to. Slippery slope and all that. It is also unnecessary in a case like this, but there won't be a penalty as no one but you will know. There are even good reasons to use a late date for some things like web resources, since you point to the most recent resource.
And, it has nothing to do with plagiarism.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As cases of academic misconduct go, falsifying the date of access to a resource for such a stupid reason certainly would not be the biggest case ever, but it would still be a considered to be misconduct. Intentionally falsifying information about sources is a giant red flag for more general academic dishonesty --- it shows that the researcher is willing to lie in their research to gain something they perceive to be a benefit to themselves. The stupid/trivial reason for the lie might arguably make it worse, since it shows that they're willing to lie for the most marginal possible gains.
In practice it might be difficult to show that the erroneous access date was an intentional falsification (as opposed to an error) so an actual misconduct case might involve some complex trade-offs relating to evidentiary matters. Nevertheless, if intentional falsification was established, I think this would generally be a reasonably big case and would be likely to lead to a fairly severe reprimand/punishment for the researcher.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Do not lie.
If you are an academic, people will assume you procrastinated until they see you work ahead many times.
Access dates in references are among the least important things about your academic writing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Let me say first that I think you should strive for integrity in any academic work. Lying is never acceptable, regardless of whether or not there are any consequences.
Having said that, I think you are worried about the wrong thing here. Procrastinating is not necessarily a problem in itself, as long as one is meeting deadlines and producing quality work. The issue is that leaving things to the last minute tends to diminish the quality of one's work.
It is much more likely that whoever is reviewing a work will be able to tell that it was written hastily or sloppily than it is that anyone will catch anything fishy about citation access times. And if the work is excellent, nobody is going to care about the timestamps. So your proposal is not only unethical but very likely to also be pointless and ineffectual.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: The underlying issue here seems to be that you either (a) are engaging in this thought exercise over a trifling matter as a way of further procrastinating, or (b) have an outsized fear of being judged for procrastination. In reality, no-one is going to notice. If they do notice, they are not going to conclude that you procrastinated. And finally and most importantly, if they do notice and conclude that you procrastinated, **so what**?
I submit that the best course of action here is to **get over your fear of being judged for procrastion**. Not that I have a psychological study to base this on, but I am going to go out on a limb and conjecture that this fear of being judged for procrastination, far from pushing you to do things in time, is something that might very well contribute to your actual procrastination.
I suggest that you:
1. Leave the dates as they are.
2. Submit your assignment.
3. **Observe that nothing horrible happened as a result**.
4. Pat yourself on the back for having one less irrational fear in your life now.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Your question is very specific in a way that makes it unlikely to be useful to anyone but yourself, so let’s generalize it a bit. You are really asking whether it’s a big deal in an academic context to lie a pointless lie about a matter that has no significance whatsoever. For example, if I submit an assignment and write my name as “<NAME>”, will there be any negative consequences?
The answer is, no, not officially, because no one is likely to care enough to accuse me of misbehavior, and also likely no one will understand why I’m even lying about such a thing.
That does not mean that there is no cost to the lie. In my opinion this is a case where someone developing a negative opinion of you is the main form of punishment for the act. It may not even be an effect that you are aware of or that you notice happening, but people thinking that you are an immature or untrustworthy person is something that can have a pretty negative effect on your career, so I’d advise you to avoid actions that cause this effect.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/14
| 468
| 2,110
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been invited to present a talk at another university on a topic of my choice, and I have decided to share the literature review section of the paper I'm working on and haven't published yet. Wondering if it is okay to ask the organizers not to record my presentation? What's the right way to approach this situation? The lit review has strong hints about my research question, and I am worried about potential plagiarism since I have been burned before when I openly shared too many details about my research ideas. Should I hold back on sharing the niche I've identified in the literature since I haven't published the paper yet? So conflicted.<issue_comment>username_1: You tell the organizers you don't want your presentation to be recorded. That's about it. I've attended talks where the speaker said "these results are preliminary, please do not share" which is similar.
Although in your case I wonder why you are giving a presentation in the first place, if you don't want other people to know what your research question is. Like, what are you going to say in the presentation if you are not going to discuss your research question? Are you hoping to make your presentation so arcane that the audience cannot remember what you are doing? It doesn't make sense. You might just want to decline the invitation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Where there is an audience, there will be some recording. If not a full recording, there will be some who take photographs, voice notes, screenshots and the like. The organizers can never guarantee against these. You can only request them and hope the audience acts in good faith.
Crucially, you are allowed to choose the topic of choice, so why not choose something else? Also, a talk based on literature review alone does sound a little unappealing, although this might be field-specific.
It seems to make more sense to instead talk about something you've already published, give some insights into it that aren't already there in the paper, maybe show its connection with the evolving state of the field, etc.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/14
| 1,252
| 5,453
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Context**
* Under my mentor's guidance and support, I've been working on a paper that has really bloomed.
* It is exciting **technically** and **scientifically** - the technology invented and the new findings it uncovered are both novel and impactful.
* My mentor really pushed me to add additional analysis and the paper improved under their rigor.
* Over the course of a year, we met with a number of experts to discuss our findings and they have been nothing but supportive.
* Skeptical at first, my mentor came around to accept the results (after talking to said experts and validating the results using orthogonal datasets) and we began discussing which journal to send this to.
**Problem**
* Without much warning, my mentor withdrew their name from the paper. The reason cited is they feel the work belongs to me and they claim it is only fair I am the corresponding author.
+ As a graduate student, I know I cannot publish without my mentor's support.
+ More seriously, I know I **cannot graduate** without a paper including my supervisor.
+ If it were lack of confidence in the results, we spent nearly a year talking and confirming with experts + validating with orthogonal analysis to confirm our results.
+ This was clearly supported by my mentor since its inception and I am confused they would pull out as the project is nearing completion.
+ Lastly, when I tried to engage with my supervisor to hear their concerns (via a meeting), they deflected - saying no need, citing again this work belongs to me.
+ I considered at length if I offended my supervisor, as this felt like a punishment somehow; I apologized for what I thought were wrongdoings, but again was told this was not part of their concern.
I suspect the underlying reason is not what my supervisor told me. I am also confused they won't engage with me. They are extremely senior and there is no point talking to my PhD program director (who is not in a position to direct my supervisor). **What is the right thing to do now!?**<issue_comment>username_1: You could consider to add a footnote to your name stating that you are the corresponding author, and still include the name of your supervisor on the paper (if they agree).
Detailed answer:
In the life sciences, the first author is usually the one who did most of the experimental research and analyses, and (usually) also most of the writing. The last author is usually the supervisor and (explicitly or implicitly) marked as corresponding author.
The "corresponding author" is (quite literally) the person who will answer any questions about the paper because they are expected to be in the best position to do so. The reason for this is that, importantly, the corresponding (last) author is the one who came up with the idea or hypothesis, decided on the research goal and possibly the methods to reach it, or otherwise made the largest intellectual contribution to the paper (\*1).
Given the description in your question your supervisor is right and you indeed deserve to be the corresponding author. Besides being the one who would potentially be contacted, being listed as corresponding author can be a big advantage for your career: you get the credit not just for executing the work but it acknowledges your substantial intellectual contributions to the idea itself and the design/planning etc. (in other words: the things that would usually be done by your supervisor).
Therefore your best course of action is to accept this generous (and probably well deserved) offer.
Option 1:
Leaving out the name of your supervisor will most likely not have any negative consequences. I seriously doubt that having your supervisor as co-author is a strict requirement for your graduation (you should check that and discuss it with your supervisor).
But there is an other solution.
Option 2 (recommended):
Publish with their name on the paper and add footnote to your own name, stating that you are the corresponding author. If your supervisor accepts, this may be the best option.
---
(\*1) for people from other fields: in life sciences, setting a realistic research goal may be the hardest part of the research: it requires detailed knowledge of the extremely complex systems that are being studied, as well as thorough knowledge of the available methods that might lead to an answer
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Some of your assumptions are wrong:
>
> As a graduate student, I know I cannot publish without my mentor's support.
>
>
>
There is a difference between not having your mentor's support and not having them as a coauthor. From they way you describe the interactions with your mentor they are very much supportive of you publishing this paper. They just feels that they didn't contribute to this work significantly enough to merit inclusion as a coauthor. This is a very ethical stance. (If their main contribution to the work is pushing your for further rigor by their skepticism, this is not an unreasonable position.)
>
> More seriously, I know I cannot graduate without a paper including my
> supervisor.
>
>
>
Does your institute/university have this as an explicit requirement for your PhD? I'm skeptical because I've never heard of a university imposing such a requirement. None of my papers during my PhD were coauthored by advisor. Not because he disagreed with them, but simply because he rarely published with his students.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/14
| 2,634
| 10,936
|
<issue_start>username_0: At my university (in Germany), a discussion is going on for some months. The issue is that some (professors and PhD students) want to establish a policy that, prior to the oral defense of their PhD thesis, candidates should have access to the (written) assessments of their thesis by the examiners (that is the main supervisor and further professors/experts). Others are against this, and want to keep things as they are – the candidate holds their oral defense without prior knowledge of the assessments.
To clarify: the thesis examiners assess the PhD thesis. Afterwards, the defense is held; it is an event open to the public where the PhD candidate first gives a presentation, presenting their PhD research results. Afterwards, the examiners will ask the PhD candidate critical questions about the thesis and beyond. Based on the thesis itself and the quality of the presentation and questions answered, the grade is then decided by the examiners.
This discussion is going on for quite some time now, and no side seems to be able to convince the other that their take on the PhD defense is the better. I personally don’t see any real downside to making the assessments accessible to the PhD candidate, but then on the other hand I am “only” a PhD student and have no real experience with thesis defenses yet.
My question is: Are there any universities that already have a policy like this in place and if so, is it beneficial for the PhD candidates?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> is it beneficial for the PhD candidates?
>
>
>
>
> I don't think anyone really "fails" the defense
>
>
>
This is not specific to your university, but:
Nearly always failing PhD students never attempt a defense. They are gone one or two years into their PhDs. The defense has largely a ceremonial function, so changing around the rules for defenses is not going to be very beneficial.
More details: [Academia varies more than you think it does – The Movie](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4471/academia-varies-more-than-you-think-it-does-the-movie#4478)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> My question is, are there any universities that already have a policy like this in place and if so, is it beneficial for the PhD candidates?
>
>
>
Yes, my university has a policy like that: the candidates receive an assessment of their dissertation and a grade from the reviewers (two), and then have some time to amend it according to the reviewer's remarks. At the defense, the examination board (five members, including the reviewers) decides a final grade (the defense consists in a ca. 45 min presentation from the candidate, followed by 1-2 hours of questions from the board).
Receiving the assessment from the reviewers is indeed beneficial: a purpose of such an assessment is that of allowing the candidate to not only improve the dissertation but also their work at large, to understand what are their weak points that need work.
Does your university want to improve your candidates' skills or not?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think at the stage of PhD defense, the candidate has a brief idea of the quality of the thesis. A well-written thesis is obvious for those in the field (both the candidate and the comittee). I don't think it can give any significant advantages just before the actual defense. Also, in many universities, only a "successful" thesis can be defended. Therefore, there is a brief pass/fail situation before the actual defense.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: It is definitively a thing at my University in the Czech Republic. PhD candidates get the assessment about two weeks ahead of the defence, so that they can prepare for whatever questions came up in the assessment.
The defence then works the following:
1. The student gives a presentation about their main thesis results.
2. The examiners give a short summary of their assessment and present the questions they had.
3. The student answers to the questions from the assessment.
4. Surprise questions.
5. The examiners decide on a grade.
6. Party.
I'm not sure if this is specific to my university or if this is a common approach.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It doesn't suprise me that you are at loggerheads on this, because I see benefits/drawbacks in each position. This is also wrapped up in the revisions that the candidate will make to their thesis in response to referee feedback, so some complicated timing issues arise. As a general observation, allowing the candidate to have access to their referee reports will make the oral defence somewhat like the thesis revisions/response-to-referees that would ordinarily occur. By being put on notice of the (alleged) problems, the candidate can determine their view on this and their proposed actions.
Here are some advantages and disadvantages I can see with the proposal to allow the candidate to see their referee reports prior to oral defence (compared to the case where they go in blind). One's view of which method of assessment is better will largely come down to looking at the trade-off between these advantages and disadvantages.
* **Advantage --- Ability to respond to errors/problems:** An obvious advantage of this is that the candidate can prepare a response to questions that will arise from critiques in the examiner's report. There will be certain aspects of the thesis where it is impossible to give a satisfactory extemporaneous response to an examiner comment, but having access to the report means that a reponse in the oral defence is now feasible. ( E.g., if the referee has pointed out an error in the thesis, the candidate now has time to check if the referee is correct, determine what effect this error has, and formulate a plan for revision. Even the first part is not really possible in extemporaneous communication.)
* **Advantage --- Overlap with thesis revisions:** Another advantage of this method is that the candidate's preparation for the oral defence will overlap with the revisions to the thesis and response-to-referees. Indeed, probably the best way for the candidate to prepare for the oral defence is to actually begin constructing the revisions and response-to-referees, in order to ensure that their own response to these issues is going to fix the identified problems. The advantage here is that the oral defence then provides a kickstart to the process of revisions, and the candidate is able to "kill two birds with one stone" by working on the revisions and the preparation for oral defence concurrently.
* **Disadvantage --- Narrower scope of review:** One of the things you observe in university courses is that students often seek to probe their lecturer to narrow the scope of what will/won't be on the final examination. They do this because they want to narrow the scope of what they need to study, which alleviates the need to study material that is out-of-scope. Good lecturers generally resist this kind of strategy, because they want to ensure that *any aspect of the material is potentially assessible*, which in turn ensures that student will need to study all parts of the material prior to examination. The advantage of this is that even if a thing does not come up on the exam, there is a good chance that the student learned it well in preparation --- i.e., *high quality responses to anticipated questions generally requires mastery of non-anticipated material*.
It seems to me that a similar strategic interaction might occur here, where the issues raised in the referee reports largely determine the scope of the oral defence, alleviating the need for the candidate to undertake a comprehensive preparation. In this latter case, the candidate will probably focus their preparation largely on issues raised in the referee reports --- i.e., *high quality responses to anticipated questions generally **do not** require mastery of non-anticipated material*.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: I received the reviewer's documents before my defense in France (I do not remember how much time it was, probably two or three weeks before the defense).
I do not really understand what the intent of keeping that confidential would be. To surprise the candidate? This would be childish.
The defense is a ceremony **for the candidate**. It should be fun and leave good memories.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: It is worth looking at [How to survive a PhD viva: 17 top tips](https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/jan/08/how-to-survive-a-phd-viva-17-top-tips) and you will realize there is maybe one tip where having a list of assessment beforehand will help -- for the rest it won't and actually it might hurt. Especially note this tip:
>
> There’s a danger of trying to over-prepare. Don’t learn answers off by heart – it removes the spontaneity and is obvious to examiners. If a student has pre-prepared answers they become a bit like politicians, answering questions they weren’t asked rather than the ones they were.
>
>
>
This policy might be detrimental and make preparation overfocused and (try to) make the viva into a university exam where you are expected to be grilled for what you know and what you don't.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Similarly to @username_4, I am based in Czech Republic and all PhD candidates I've know had access to assessment prior to the defense. I even think it is required by law that you get it beforehand (although I can't find the relevant law now, so I might be wrong).
One aspect of the discussion that was IMHO missed in the answer's so far is about the actual **goals** of the PhD defense. If the candidate is expected to respond to critique they have not seen before the defense, the defense IMHO puts more weight on their ability to improvise and to be resilient to (risk of) public humiliation. I would go as far as say that it gives confident bullshi\*\*ers an edge.
If you give the assessment beforehand, the defense will put more weight on the ability of the candidate to think through the criticism thoroughly and provide careful responses. It also lets you judge the answers of the candidate more critically - if their answer is unsatisfactory, it is most likely because there is an actual problem with the thesis as they couldn't come up with a good answer even when given a lot of time.
Since I think careful response to criticism is usually more important for a scientific career (most notably when writing responses to journal/conference referees) and since I believe good scientists don't necessarily have to be good in improvising, it is probably quite clear which option I find better.
Additionally, I think PhD defense can be stressful enough for many other reasons, so adding an IMHO completely unnecessary element of surprise is especially cruel to people who are having psychological problems at the time of the defense.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/14
| 1,076
| 4,805
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a major revision recently. However, as I was making revisions, I realized that my first draft from a few months ago is badly organized and poorly written.
I want to make some changes to a part that the reviews did not complain about.
My advisor told me to only focus on the question raised by the reviews. And reminded me that making unrequested changes is very dangerous and can even bring up rejection. His point was that the parts of the manuscript that the reviewers did not raise questions about proved to have been satisfactory and accepted.
I personally agree with my mentor in general. However, without changing the original purpose, I hope to improve the quality of the article by better writing and expression, or even new experiments. Is it acceptable?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is legal. The paper is yours until you give up copyright to it.
I think your advisor may be worried about the consequences if reviewers don't think your changes are actually improvements. Or worse, make the paper less publishable.
But since you were already asked for major changes I think the risk is small if you do a bigger revision. It might, probably will, slow the next review process, but if it does result in improvements that is better for everyone.
Adding new experiments, however, might best be saved for a follow-up paper. Changing the scope of the paper, in general, is likely to result in delays (at best).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I realized that my first draft from a few months ago is badly organized and poorly written.
>
>
>
I think there is a fine line to be drawn here. **Based only on your description, I do not think that this is the appropriate time to *reorganize* your paper,** as your advisor said, *parts of the manuscript that the reviewers did not raise questions about proved to have been satisfactory and accepted.* If they did not ask you to reorganize your paper, then receiving a reorganized paper to review again might be frustrating.
Working on your phrasing in individual paragraphs is better, but again, you are asking the reviewers to reread the entire paper, and giving them a much bigger list of changes to work through. I think your advisor is overstating the risk of rejection (but I don't know the reviewers in your field).
>
> However, without changing the original purpose, I hope to improve the quality of the article by better writing and expression, or even new experiments. Is it acceptable?
>
>
>
**New experiments is a very different question, and a domain-specific one only your advisor can answer.** You can (should?) perform new experiments to address specific problems the reviewers raised, but performing them only to enhance your paper at this stage raises an eyebrow.
In short, I would feel free to wordsmith as appropriate, but **otherwise follow your advisor's advice carefully**.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: #### You can do this (but doing it well requires experience)
If you were an experienced researcher, rather than a PhD student, I would say that you should certainly revise in the way you think makes the paper better. Since the paper has not yet been accepted, you are free to revise it in any way you think will improve it. This includes making revisions that have not been suggested by the referees. If you make your paper better somehow, they are unlikely to object, and at worst this might just require some more revisions in the next round of review. I have made unrequested changes to papers a few time after receiving referee reports (just because I concurrently thought of an idea to make it better) and in all those cases the paper has still been accepted.
The only real issue here is that you are a novice researcher, so you probably do not yet have good judgment on what makes a paper better/worse. (And the fact that you now think your previous draft was badly organised and poorly written also suggests this.) Therefore, there is a danger that your proposed revisions might either make things worse, or at least move things around unecessarily without making things better. If this were to occur then the referees might indeed be a bit chagrined, and it could reduce the likelihood of acceptance.
Fortunately, you have at your disposal a supervisor who is probably pretty good at determining better/worse on these matters. In view of this, I recommend you write up a new draft with your proposed revisions and seek feedback from your supervisor on whether your (unrequested) changes have unambiguously improved the paper. If you think you have a good idea to improve your paper, *have a go at this*. Your supervisor should then be able to give you some guidance that is conditional on seeing the actual revisions you have made.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/01/14
| 263
| 1,132
|
<issue_start>username_0: Does anyone know a software that is able to interpret a report. I need help for regularly marking 90 paper, each about 2000 words. This is ver time consuming. I was wondering if anyone is aware an `AI type software package were it can spot key words.
Many thanks
Siavosh<issue_comment>username_1: Marking is one of the responsibilities that academics never enjoy, because it is time consuming and not very exciting. However, it is your job to do it, and you need to do in properly. Consult your University / college policy on marking and check if it allows the use of such software. It is very likely that as a marker you are expected to read all the reports carefully and mark them based on their content, not just a few keywords.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You're barking up the wrong tree. There is no software substitute for grading papers by hand. What you need to do is create a rubric, assigning points or penalties to each aspect of the assignment you consider important, so that grading becomes simply a matter of checking off the items that apply, then adding up the result.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/01/15
| 2,843
| 12,282
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach an advanced engineering undergrad class online and typically I love and encourage students to ask questions both by unmuting as well as over chat.
I have never had this problem in earlier years, but this time around I have a student who asks so many questions that it's almost disruptive to the lecture flow. Many of his questions are also either simplistic / irrelevant / repetitive.
On the one hand, we have this precept that there is no such thing as a stupid or silly question. On the other hand I feel the amount and quality of questions this particular student is asking is not helping the class.
Meanwhile, I don't want to discourage the rest of the class from asking questions. I already offered to spend as much time is needed to answer any student questions at the end of the lecture. I would be happy if this student would ask his questions at the end but I don't want to make this a general policy since I do actually love taking most other questions *during* the class as they pop up.
Any ideas on how one could tackle this sort of situation diplomatically? I don't want to be unfair to this student, but also have the most positive experience for the rest of the class.
Of course, there's no good way I can think of to get the perspective of the rest of the students.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, that's a conflict. One thing you could do is having "question breaks" every now and then. The rule is: *one question per student* (at any given break), and you let the students know of this rule and stick to it. This way would allow more students to ask questions, while keep answering (some) of this particular student's questions.
Of course, you set the timings of these breaks according to your pace in your lecture. If there's a lot of time left, make a break every 15 min. If you need to cover more material (or, if you have already answered too many questions), delay the next break until appropriate. It's now in your control.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Been there. Talk to the student offline and explain your request that they limit their questions in class and come to office hours if they have additional questions. If that doesn't work, you may have to cut them off publicly in lecture, asking that they give other students a chance. If you don't address the problem, you are sure to get dinged by other students in your course evals.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Perhaps you can provide a separate channel for questions, even email or a chat app.
In face to face teaching a student will normally raise their hand to get your attention and you can ignore it at the moment if you need to continue. Hopefully you discourage shouting out then.
A separate channel that you watch lets you do the same thing. It even gives you a written (depending on the medium) list of student questions that you can answer when you like, during the lecture, or afterwards using the separate channel. Zoom, I think, has such a feature, but running another application on the side is usually possible in online teaching.
The student can then "ask" whenever they like and you can answer whenever it is appropriate without interruption.
In a somewhat different context I generally used a simple mailing list to which all students and course staff were subscribed. All questions to the list and all answers were seen by all. I found this advantageous over office hours since some questions from one student are actually unasked questions by others.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Maybe this problem could be addressed my setting clearer expectations. This is important because
1. Your student might not be aware that his questions are disruptive, and in that case he would benefit from having clear guidelines on what constitutes a good question.
2. It's a disservice to the other students to allow one student to hijack the class
3. Speaking from my own experience as a student, I think that the shy students will actually be more likely to speak up if you give them a way to evaluate their questions. No one is going to believe that there's no such thing as a bad question. We've all had experiences with disruptive classmates, and no one wants to be like that. I often avoided asking questions because I worried about how they would be perceived. If you give students clear guidelines, they will know when they have a good question that it is okay to ask.
Some ideas for guidelines:
1. It's always okay to ask a question when you don't understand something. If you're really struggling with a particular point, we can always continue these discussions in office hours.
2. If a question is off-topic, I might tell you to save it for office hours (but it's okay to ask).
3. Make sure you're paying attention in lecture. If you miss something every now and then, it's okay to ask, but if you need me to repeat myself several times per lecture, we should talk in office hours about how to fix that problem.
4. I know asking questions can be scary, but you'll learn much better if you can be brave enough to speak up when something's not clear. It's an important skill that will help you even beyond the classroom.
And of course, the final aspect of this is to apply these guidelines in class and tell your students to come to office hours for questions that derail the lectures.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with the other comments that you shouldn't let one student ruin it/change everything for the whole group (and for you), I suggest talking to them privately and not having to change your class routine too much to accommodate this student. You can always try changing the rules up a bit and be honest to the class and say you want to try changing the question time/rules etc for one day and see how it goes. Have you looked into their file/school history? I have an autistic student that has similar behaviours online so I chatted with them and they are working on it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm not a teacher, so this could be way off mark, but - I think that other students will have noticed this guy too and be moderately annoyed at him. I think it's safe for you to single him out and give him special rules, without having the rest of the class worry if they're next. Just make it clear that you've been patient with him for a long while now, but even you have some limits.
As for the special rule, I think a "cooldown" would be effective and not very harsh. Basically, after he asks a question, he needs to wait for at least 5 minutes before asking another. Or maybe you give him 2 or 3 questions, and after he's out, then he needs to wait.
In addition you could make it clear that he can write them all down and you'll answer them after the lesson in private.
Having the questions rationed like that will make him think twice about what is really important to ask. Making him write them down will help notice the repetitive ones.
Or maybe he's just too lazy to bother, in which case nothing will help him anyway and the cooldown will just keep the rest of the group running smoothly.
Or, as suggested in another answer, he might have some sort of mental disability - it's probably worth checking that out too, before taking any other action.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: This is a Zoom-specific answer, so I apologize if it isn't applicable.
In this case, I would disallow use of the chat function (or tell students they can use it to ask *each other* questions, but you can't keep up monitoring it), and instead have students raise their hand or use the question feature. I like the raising hands feature because it keeps hands in the order they were raised. You can always put off calling on raised hands, just like in-person.
I think the question feature is restricted to webinars, which is a bummer, but it allows others to vote on questions so you can see which questions a lot of people have.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Apart from the other good answers: are you 100% sure the other students know the answers? Flip back the question to the class. So ask either the whole class that question, or ask specific persons like row by row (since the top 20% of your class probably will know everything which is asked).
Also, announce that new format, to avoid people feeling punished.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: My main tactic (mostly in the in-person context) is that after about the 3rd question from a given student within one lecture period, I start polling the rest of the class on whether I should spend time answering it right then or not.
Usually if I get 3 or more "yes" responses then I go ahead and do it; otherwise I say, "we can cycle on that after class". Among other things, I look at this as an honest attempt to gauge how the rest of the class wants to use our available time together.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I had a class that had a similar-ish problem. People were asking questions that were already answered during this or a previous lecture or were just trivial. This lecture was streamed on twitch and most of the time trivial questions were just answered by fellow students but if a question was deemed interesting or new then they were forwarded to the Prof.
So I'd advise the students to use the chat function more often, so that other students could answer the question and if that does not result in a satisfying answer then you should answer the question.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: You are a lecturer. Not an analog copy machine. Make your script / lecture material publicly available and give students reading assignments for the content of the upcoming lecture *beforehand*. This way you can make sure that even if you can't go through all of your material, everyone is on the same page. In any way: Thinking that presenting your material to the students is enough to teach them something is unrealistic. Students have to reread and study the material many times over. Don't constrain questions and interactivity in your lecture as this is more important to the learning process of your students than the pure act of them writing it down (analog copying) or hearing it from you first.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: Maybe there are no silly questions, but there are plenty of *thoughtless* ones! I'm certain your student could answer 90% of those questions with 5 seconds of thought.
Remember, the primary goal of higher ed is to teach people to learn and to think -- not to spoon-feed them with easy answers & facts.
You're actively doing students a *disservice* by answering thoughtless question. You should not answer those as it deprives the student of the mental exercise and habit of answering it for themselves.
You can explain this to the class. Even though you won't name names, everybody will know exactly who and what you're talking about.
When you get those questions, you can just say "thoughtless" or "think about that 2 secs" (depends on your style, but always exactly the same words) and move on without skipping a beat. If they insist, remind them you keep office hours, move on. You can periodically ask the class for feedback to see if you're being too stringent with your thoughtlessness threshold. I guarantee the class is majorly annoyed and will only be too happy to cooperate with your program.
I remember a guy at school who was exactly the type the OP describes. Teacher didn't control him and I hated that class. My friends wanted to grab him in the parking lot! I ran across him many years later. Still interrupts and asks unthinking questions. Hasn't yet figured out that he's not listening when he's talking.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_13: Here's what I would do in this situation.
At the start of your next lecture, announce a new rule. Each student is allowed to ask up to three questions per lecture; and if they have any more questions than that, they should ask them in your office hours (or by email, or the class discussion forum, or however else you prefer).
That way, you're not singling anyone out - everyone has to follow the same rules. You're also allowing the student to ask decent questions if he/she has any. But most importantly, you're putting a lid on him/her hijacking the class.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/15
| 545
| 2,114
|
<issue_start>username_0: Last summer, I was offered a Ph.D. position at a famous University, but unfortunately, while initially I accepted it, then I had to reject it due to significant family circumstances that I explained to my potential supervisor and they understood (at least that's how I understood).
Until last December (2021) the position had not been filled by another candidate (curious about this), and the position re-advertised the same month.
I contacted the supervisor, if could I apply again for this position, and they told me that of course I can, once again.
Do you believe that I have possibilities to acquire again the position or the behaviour that I showed will play a significant factor to reject me?
I'm so anxious about this, because ever since I wanted such a position, and the time that came, life circumstances did not permit it.
I would appreciate any response!
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: They've already told you you can apply, so of course you can apply. If they were going to reject you they'd presumably tell you not to apply to both save your time and theirs.
On the other hand, you'll need to compete against this year's prospective PhD students. Maybe a particularly outstanding student applied this year. There's no guarantee you'll be accepted.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Re-apply and see what happens.
>
> [will] the behaviour that I showed will play a significant factor to reject me? I'm so anxious about this
>
>
>
With respect - I believe this is more of the issue. Academia can be very anxiety-inducing (as many questions here on the site indicate). You need to think about ways to relieve stress, and deal with the fear of being categorized as inadequate, unworthy etc. - which, based on what you've told us, you really aren't!
See also:
[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)
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/15
| 539
| 2,379
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a person who completed his master's last year and now I am preparing for PhD admissions in Europe. I am from a poor country in Asia.
I have 3 PhD interviews scheduled in last week of January to February for universities in France and Germany.1 interview is with prospective supervisor alone and 2 are with admission committee of 4-5 members.
Question: What exactly should I expect in PhD interviews of Pure Mathematics? Are questions related to Master's thesis asked? How long should I expect the length of the interview?
Any advice will be highly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: They will ask you about your research, your masters thesis (possibly also about your masters advisor), and whether you know what to expect from the PhD program. Usually, unlike interviews outside academia, they will not ask you to solve math problems. But they may ask you what classes you took.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The process is likely to be different in different places (even within the same country, or university), depending on the person interviewing you. I currently work in Germany. At the University of Bonn, the topology group interviews candidates together. The interview consists of a 30 minute presentation by the candidate, usually on their masters thesis, followed by 30 minutes of questions. The scope of the questions is informed by the presentation -- the first half is usually based on the talk, and the second half on general questions in topology, of the type we would like the candidate to already know before starting a PhD position. Sometimes we ask the candidate whether there are specific topics they feel most comfortable with, but usually this is clear from their application. Yes, we do ask the candidates to solve math problems.
Even within my university, the process varies from group to group. Others might just have a quite informal (virtual) conversation with the candidate, the talk component might be unique to the topologists. The length of the interview is highly variable.
My advice to you:
1. Ask the person who invited you to interview what the planned format is and what you should prepare.
2. Regardless of the answer, be prepared to answer questions about your masters thesis, your general area of research, and the direction you would like to pursue for your PhD.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/01/15
| 726
| 2,983
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm applying for a faculty position. The required documents include:
1. a letter of application
2. statement addressing the candidate's teaching interests
3. statement addressing the scholarly/performance agenda
4. curriculum vitae
5. contact information for three references
6. graduate transcripts
7. evidence of demonstrated or potential excellence in undergraduate instruction.
I'm a bit confused about items 2, 3, and 7.
In my previous applications, I submitted a teaching philosophy statement, where I elaborated on my views on different aspects of teaching a course and how I plan to engage students with the class. I also had submitted a cover letter where I briefly discussed my interest in the position and my qualifications.
However, it seems that a lot of what I would prepare for this application would be repetitions. For instance, how would items 2 and 7 differ? I should add that I only have been a teaching assistant for a few courses. I can request to teach a class this summer, though (I'm a first-year post-doc at the moment).
**Edit:**
Lastly, in item 3, what is the meaning of "scholarly/performance agenda"? Is this just my research so far or what I plan to do? or Both? Since the application does not further elaborate on what the search committee expects in each document, I would appreciate any suggestion on preparing these documents with the least amount of overlap.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> how would items 2 and 7 differ?
>
>
>
They messed up the wording a bit. 2 is a "statement" and 7 is "evidence." My interpretation is that 7 should be your teaching evaluations or some other evidence from a third party. 2 is the regular teaching philosophy.
>
> item 3 would also be similar to my cover letter
>
>
>
Well, maybe. The contents of your cover letter would really depend on the type of university you are applying to; if it's a research university, emphasize your research. If it's a teaching intensive university, emphasize your teaching. Certainly the cover letter should briefly summarize *all* the other documents.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Specific to 3 and your edit, even a teaching college wants "scholarly activity" from the faculty. At a teaching focused university near me the expectation is 60/20/20 for teaching/research/service activities. You are still expected to have scholarly output and before hiring you would like to know what your plans are for that. "Performance" is a bit harder to understand without explanation unless connected to scholarly activity. But course development and such is a kind of performance connected to teaching for example.
Scholarly activity includes things like conference attendance and participation, papers, even development of pedagogy. Maintaining and developing connections to other scholars and teachers can be important.
All of those things can be important when it comes time for tenure review as well as at initial hiring.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/16
| 582
| 2,544
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to several PhD programs for computer science for this coming academic year. I just received a conspicuously congratulatory email from one of them with an invitation to attend a virtual open house and a link to a page with information about the event.
While the email was very clear that this is a pre-admit event, the website was clearly a template from previous years and used the term "admitted students" in several places. I can see from the email there's about 50 of us who received invitation, along with a specific faculty member who extended the invite.
So to generalize this fairly anecdotal question: is it safe to assume this will become an offer for admission? And if so, what incentives to graduate departments have to structure their admission process in this way (open house, then final admission decision)? I find it very confusing.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it's typical (at least in math, as <NAME> says in a comment) that such events are for accepted grad students. Based on your post, it sounds like this differs from their procedures in normal years.
Here is a guess: since the open house is virtual, there is no cost in inviting more people than usual to the open house event. So the department decided to invite people that fall in one of the following categories: (i) they are a clear 1st-round admit, (ii) they have passed an initial filtering of candidates and will likely either be admitted or at least placed on a waiting list, (iii) they would like more information on the student, e.g. a virtual meeting, before making a decision.
From what you wrote, it sounds like they haven't made any offers yet this year, and decided to wait until after the open house to make their initial list of admits. So I would take the invite as a good chance of admission, but not a guarantee.
FYI, my memory is hazy, and I was never in charge of this anyway, but my memory is that even in pre-COVID times we have sometimes had people we haven't accepted to our open house weekends for our grad program--I think these may have either been local students or people we were trying to convince to apply, but maybe we occasionally invited people at the top of the waiting list too.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Most likely the open house is organized by one office (department secretary?) and admissions is organized by another office (dean's secretary?). Whoever does the admissions is simply behind schedule. They might just have taken a vacation.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/16
| 679
| 2,957
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student in physics who has been self-studying certain subjects in humanities/social sciences due to the pandemic. I'd like to gain more perspective on the subjects, but have been unable to, due to the few people I know in the field and the quarantine.
There are interesting research papers, books, and articles (or even talks) in the fields I am studying, and I wonder how the author would feel should someone email them to simply talk about the topic they're writing. For example, an email about your opinion on the perception of reality based on their research papers, books, and maybe also from other sources. Is it okay to email the author to discuss what they're researching?
Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you can email, but expect that almost every such mail will be ignored or (possibly) answered in only a perfunctory way. People are busy both with their own research and in working with their own students. Most such emails are likely to wind up in the trash.
As an undergraduate who wants to make contact with a professor at another institution, you can have better (not perfect) success if you work indirectly through one of your own professors. If I get an question from a student of another institution, my willingness to deal with it depends on my current workload (and work/life balance). I might be able to reply with a short note but not likely to start a longer conversation.
If I get an introduction to a student from another professor, however, I'd be much more likely to give it serious consideration, just as a courtesy to a colleague. And I would depend on that colleague to vet the seriousness of the person being introduced with some assurance that my time isn't going to be wasted. I still can't guarantee that time and effort would be available, but you might make it past the door labelled Trash.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, cold emails are unlikely to lead to the sort of open-ended discussion you're looking for. I would guess that they would likely be ignored.
You might have better luck attending conferences -- possibly online, and possibly undergraduate-focused. They are a traditional venue in which to meet new people, and people might be more receptive there to invitations to chat about their work.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I’d be more likely to answer an email from an undergraduate student that’s well written and has questions based on clearly having read the material. I get too many emails that start “Dear Professor” and then say something nice about my “lab” and how they’d like to join it. However, I’m not a professor and I have no lab, showing that they’ve done no prior research on me and my work. So, I just ignore those. However, an email that was properly addressed and came with questions about some specific elements of my prior work would be much more likely to get an answer.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/17
| 2,040
| 8,209
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a master's degree from a university outside of Canada. I recently decided to apply for Ph.D. in Canada and I found a potential supervisor, I like his research area, he has more industrial research projects going on. I like the fact that he gets projects from the industry, and his personality itself.
I am only concerned about the ranking of the university which is low. I just do not like to study in a university that has a bad ranking. I definitely do not know a lot about the university, I just looked up the ranking on the internet. It is a smaller university. Would ranking matter when studying for a Ph.D.?
Should I choose this university for a PhD. or should I move on? and search for universities with a better ranking?
I came to know this professor has good collaboration with a few good ranking universities, would that be possible that I share my concern with him and ask him about the possibility of having admission to a better ranking university but also having him as a supervisor/co-supervisor? Would that be rude to ask?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> ask him about the possibility of having admission to a better ranking university
>
>
>
Do not. It is unlikely that your potential supervisor can do anything about admission to another university.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The only relevant thing is your employment after PhD. If you get PhD from McGill or UToronto, you probably will have more chances. But a lot depends on the reputation ("ranking" if you wish) of your supervisor. The potential supervisor probably had other students who got their PhD. You should check where these students are now.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't think you can talk about the ranking of the university to the potential supervisor. This can be very damaging to your relationship, and quite offending to the supervisor knowing that you look down on him/her or their institute.
You should probably see if you have an alternative in a "better" university and decide based on the project, university, supervisor, and future prospects accordingly.
**Comment**: while rankings can definitely sometimes be misleading (with a small difference in ranking being meaningless), a university ranked 900 almost always will have much less research infrastructure than one ranked in the top 100.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The ranking of the university should be quite irrelevant to you as an individual: what matters is what *you* do. In other words, there is good (and very good) research done *everywhere*, and there is bad research done everywhere also. The rankings are affected by all kinds of “meta” factors that have no connection with the quality of research of *this* faculty member.
In practice, you are more likely to find active researchers at higher-ranked institutions, but you are past that as you found a prospective supervisor already.
Of course, you can inquire about co-supervisions but that’s quite a bit trickier as this faculty member would (likely) need an adjunct appointment elsewhere, and would need to find someone else with the same interests to co-supervise.
Thus, if the project seems of interest to you, and the conditions of the thesis look reasonable, try talking to other graduate students of the group (if any); if all of this is positive, go for it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: It's not a good idea to talk about ranking with a potential supervisor, because it can easily offend ([example](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/181291/how-could-i-share-my-concern-about-university-ranking-with-a-potential-superviso?noredirect=1#comment486562_181291)). This is for a few reasons:
* Some professors genuinely [hate rankings](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/181113/are-there-boycotts-of-university-rankings).
* The ranking is not something the supervisor can directly control. The entire university is ranked, and they are but one professor in the university.
* You are implicitly using the university ranking to rank the professor. It's possible there's a correlation (I don't have the data, but I suspect there should be a correlation) but it's still similar to saying "your brother is a criminal so your integrity is suspect too" - see [association fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy) - and people can react badly.
* You send the message that you don't consider them to have had a good career since they're currently at a low-ranked university.
* What do you expect them to say? You ought to know what the university's ranking is before you talk to the professor, and if ranking matters to you, you shouldn't approach them in the first place.
I do think that all things equal there are good reasons to go to the higher-ranked university: the more prestigious institution is more likely to have comprehensive facilities, better journal access, more distinguished visiting academics, etc., and most importantly, better students. Graduate study isn't a solo activity; the presence of other good students can have a huge impact on your development. Higher rank also means a lot if you intend to work in industry after the PhD; even if you don't intend to, it's still nice to have a fallback.
But it's not something to discuss with the prospective supervisor. If you want to talk to an academic about it, ask your undergraduate professors.
See related questions:
* [PhD - Well known professor or well known school?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/131394/phd-well-known-professor-or-well-known-school)
* [How much should university ranking matter while choosing a place for graduate studies?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/66215/how-much-should-university-ranking-matter-while-choosing-a-place-for-graduate-st)
* [University rank/stature - How much does it affect one's career post-Ph.D?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90/university-rank-stature-how-much-does-it-affect-ones-career-post-ph-d)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Join this university. Choose projects that not only have value in the industry but also are academically significant and prestigious. Work like a beaver to produce stellar results and publish famous and often-cited papers. Raise the ranking of the university from 26 to 25.
Don't think you can do it? Then go join university number 97.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> I came to know this professor has good collaboration with a few good ranking universities, would that be possible that I share my concern with him and ask him about the possibility of having admission to a better ranking university but also having him as a supervisor/co-supervisor? Would that be rude to ask?
>
>
>
You can try. Most likely you won’t get a response (and you might get blocked automatically if your message isn't from a reputable .edu domain. We get a lot of unwanted academic spam, especially from foreign countries).
If you do get a response and the professor isn’t offended, it'll probably look something like "Sure. First get admitted into this much more selective institution then come back".
Regarding your question on ranking, there’s a few things things to consider.
Some smaller universities prefer to focus on a few super star researchers in one or two areas of expertise, but have their ranking computed on all their research output. Think of CMU in computer science for instance.
If you are looking at a University in the French part of the country, the situation is a little bit different. French Canadians are notorious for wanting to return home, and I’ve seen guys take a massive drop in institutional ranking to get a chance to move back home. I collaborate frequently with someone who did exactly that (from a top 10 institution here in the US to where he completed did his undergrad in Montreal). He’s still technically on an “extended sabbatical leave” but it’s clear he’s getting tenure over there relatively soon.
It’s especially true in AI, with researchers like <NAME> being clear that he’ll collaborate with everyone interested but won’t relocate whatsoever. I’ve not observed the same pattern elsewhere in Canada, however.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/01/17
| 1,202
| 5,084
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year CS PhD student, I find myself spend 80% of my independent study time learning many computer skills rather than the contents of my research. Does it mean I am less capable than other peer students? Below are some examples.
* I switched to MacOS from Windows, and I learned basic Unix-like commands on terminal.
* Never used C++ before, so have to learn this new language. How to bind C++ into a Python module.
* Learned to connect to remote server with virtual environment using SSH, and how to set up remote connection on VSCode.
* How to manage projects with Git and GitHub.
* How to make an executable bash script.
* How to make better documentation with Sphinx.
* Learning about scientific plot with `matplotlib` on Python.
Not that I never used those tools before, but because I used all the tools with a copy-paste manner as an undergraduate. Now whenever I do need some tools, they do not come to me right away, and I often have to spare some effort look up and "learn" them again.<issue_comment>username_1: Given your background and the info you provided in your comment, this means that you are likely spending more time on this than your peers. This doesn't mean you are 'less capable', as you put it, but simply that you need to learn this aspect first before you will be able to make decent progress in your CS research. Your peers may already know this and will make some more progress initially.
This is not necessarily good or bad, that depends on how quickly you pick it up and how good your other research skills are (discipline, reading/understanding articles, doing the actual research). Try to learn from your peers who already have this experience. Everybody will have their strengths and weaknesses that they need to work on. No need to worry as long as you put in the effort.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I wanna add a bit to username_1s answer. With you having majored in Math and not CS you will of course not have as much insight into the practical work of a CS-major, so will need to (re)learn more than your peers. You can still succeed but it might not be as easy for you.
I wanna go into a bit more detail regarding the list of examples you provided us with:
>
> I switched to MacOS from Windows, and I learned basic Unix-like commands on terminal.
>
>
>
This can happen to anyone who isn't used to Unix commands so I wouldn't worry about this.
>
> Never used C++ before, so have to learn this new language. How to bind C++ into a Python module.
>
>
>
No one knows every programming language. That is simply impossible but only knowing Python(I might be interpreting too much here) is quite rare so you will need to put some time into learning the language that is used in your current position. Tho I think it is quite unusual that you only worked with one programming language during your CS studies it is definetly not too bad if you know the theoretical basics of programming.
>
> Learned to connect to remote server with virtual environment using SSH, and how to set up remote connection on VSCode.
>
>
>
This is in my opinion one of the more basic-ish things that one learns while working in CS. As this seems to be your first more practical positions in CS it is unsurprising that you need to learn some more basic things.
>
> How to manage projects with Git and GitHub.
>
>
>
I learned this in my 2nd Semester of studying CS so my guess would be that most employers would expect you to know this already but it is not particularly hard to learn.
>
> How to make better documentation with Sphinx.
>
>
> Learning about scientific plot with matplotlib on Python.
>
>
>
These two things are somewhat specific to the work you are doing and thus it is not a big deal that you had to learn these things. Most people need an onboarding phase at a new job until they are familiar with all the tools that are used at that specific place. As username_1 had already pointed out it might take you a bit longer, as you have not as much experience as your peers but it is nothing that you can't easily make up.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It is quite natural. Note that there is no reason to learn anything in a PhD if you do not think you should use it. In my experience, the first step when facing a problem that is of a scale or complexity where automation is useful, is to find whether there are standard tools for this, ask you supervisor and your colleagues, and if not, make it yourself. When programming, I prefer simple yet powerful tools in languages with large libraries and a just strong enough type system to make it easy to understand your own code half a year later.
For example, graph drawing is a difficult problem, even if all you want is a "nice" drawing of a planar graph. There are many tools, but most of them use the same techniques, which are simply not suitable for your case. I managed to make a quite involved toolchain in Blender, Mathematica, Python, and Yed, but there are probably simpler solutions with e.g. CGAL in C++
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/17
| 1,667
| 7,018
|
<issue_start>username_0: My theoretical physics paper is being rejected repeatedly at the editorial stage, without undergoing peer review. However, every rejection explicitly states that there is no technical error in my line of reasoning and so far none have questioned the relevance and novelty of my work. After five rejections from reputed physics journals I have received no concrete comments on why my paper is unsuitable for peer review. The paper is purely theoretical and I am repeatedly being offered the option to transfer it to another journal. Each time I do so, I get the same response - Rejected, but not due to a technical flaw in the argument. Having researched the transfer process, it seems to me my paper is technically sound and I am just not able to find the right journal to submit my work even though after each rejection I choose to submit only to journals recommended by the publisher's Transfer Desk.
From my limited perspective it appears that my paper is being judged subjectively for its implications to physics at the editorial stage itself, and since no technical flaw is as yet found, I am being shunted repeatedly through the transfer process.
I am an outsider to the academic field and since I am unaffiliated, I can't upload my paper to a pre-print server.
I would greatly appreciate any inputs.....<issue_comment>username_1: I would respectfully point out that your post has a few "red flags" for what we in the business call "crankery."
>
> My...paper is being rejected..without undergoing peer review. However, every rejection explicitly states that there is no technical error in my line of reasoning and so far none have questioned the relevance and novelty of my work.
>
>
>
This does not make sense, how could the editor "explicitly state" that there is no technical error if the paper has not been peer reviewed? How would the editor know? Moreover, even published papers don't get an "imprimatur" that the work is correct; rather, the work is judged sound enough to be published.
It is more likely that the editor said something like "this desk rejection does not necessarily imply that your work is not technically sound" -- as mentioned in the comments, the paper has not been peer reviewed, so no one has bothered to check if the work is correct or not.
>
> From my limited perspective it appears that my paper is being judged subjectively for its implications to physics... I am an outsider to the academic field
>
>
>
I'm not sure quite what you mean here. Hopefully you are not alleging that your paper is so groundbreaking that the physics community has formed a conspiracy against you. Rather, I assume you mean that you are not getting a "fair shake" since your conclusions seem so surprising. Such things can happen, especially since you are unaffiliated with a research institution. We like to tell the story of [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitang_Zhang), where the system worked as it should. However, it's true that you may need to take some extra steps to [get people to take you seriously](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18491/i-believe-i-have-solved-a-famous-open-problem-how-do-i-convince-people-in-the-f).
>
> After five rejections from reputed physics journals...
>
>
>
After five rejections, it does seem like something is wrong. This could be something minor, like selecting a more appropriate journal. Or it could be something major, like the entire idea being "crankery." Personally, I would rather know -- if I am wasting my time, I would rather someone tell me so that I can pursue other activities instead.
So: I would recommend that you *buy* a few hours of a graduate student's time (preferably one who works in your field). In exchange for, say, $200, they should be willing to spend a few hours giving you a peer-review. If the work is mostly good, they may have advice on selecting a journal and writing it up. If the work is mostly bad, they may be able to point out some technical flaws. But in the latter case, I would recommend abandoning the effort entirely -- I've seen before that there is often a disconnect where the expert says "this is totally wrong; for example, your electron mass is an order of magnitude too high" and the non-expert hears "if I can solve the electron mass problem, we're good!" This communications breakdown can lead to much wasted time.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not in agreement with the other answer here, which suggests that these are red-flags for such a lack of merit as to amount to "crankery". It's possible that this is the problem, but there are other possibilities too. The fact that the journals rejecting your paper are offering to transfer them elsewhere suggests to me that your paper probably has some merit and is not "crankery". This kind of repeated rejection can occur for a technically sound paper merely because it does not fit the scope of the journal well --- I've had experiences where editors of multiple journals make positive comments on a paper I submit, but they just think it's not the type of paper that suits their journal well (too technical, not technical enough, etc.).
For a physics paper that advances some technically sound argument, but is having trouble finding a proper home (possibly due to scope issues), I would recommend you consider submitting to the journal [*PLOS-ONE (Physics)*](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/browse/physics). This journal takes a different approach to other journals, insofar as they do not consider issues of "scope" or "significance". If the paper is technically sound, has a proper methodology, and has any value at all, then it will usually be accepted (see [here](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/static/publish) for some more information on their selection proccess). At minimum, if your paper is rejected from this journal then there should be some clarity with respect to its technical approach.
I have previously had a fairly [quirky paper](https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0247361) (a game theoretic analysis of a popular children's game) published in *PLOS-ONE*. This paper had previously been submitted to about five or six different journals over about six years, without success, until I basically gave up on having it published and waited for more years with it sitting on my computer. In each case the previous journals really liked the paper, and commented positively on it, but they felt that the scope was not in keeping with the types of articles they usually publish. For some journals it did not develop theoretical methods enough, for others it was too technical, for others the subject matter was too quirky, and so on. Anyway, after I'd given up on ever having it published, another academic recommended *PLOS-ONE* for the paper and they accepted and published it, since they were less concerned with scope and significance. It is possible you might have the same experience as me.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2022/01/17
| 626
| 2,534
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have applied to a graduate program in the US, and a Professor emailed me that he wants to meet on Zoom to talk about my application.
He gave me some dates when he will be available for a Zoom meeting.
How do I politely request that I don't want to meet at late night (Indian time)?
Will it be considered rude if I write that I want to meet on a certain date (among the ones he said he would be free), and also specify a time before which I want to meet?
>
> Dear Prof. X,
>
> Thank you for your email. Can we talk sometime Wednesday? Let me know a time that works for you.
>
> I would prefer not to talk late at night (Indian time). Any time before 2:30 PM, EST works for me.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Just stating your preference is polite. Your example works fine. They are likely a busy person but that does not mean your own schedule and preferences should be completely neglected (if it feels like it does, that is a major red flag).
But be ready to offer some concessions. It is not academia-specific, really - just be considerate of others' needs, try to fix these small issues together, and make up for inconveniencing people if you can not help it. One time it is them adjusting their schedule, the other time it is you, that kind of thing.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There is nothing unreasonable about your preference here. I would suggest augmenting it by giving some explanation of why you would prefer not to interview late at night ---e.g., you could point out that you will have difficulty performing well due to tiredness late at night. In terms of how to ask for this, I recommend you look at the time conversion and suggest a reasonable range of times that would be mutually convenient. Presumably there is some reasonable cross-over time for the two respective countries where neither person is required to be awake at an unreasonable hour.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Attending interviews from India to the USA is a difficult job. The time zone difference is 10-14 hours depending on the place. Most of the time, your interviews will be after an evening in Indian time because that's the work time in the USA. You can definitely ask him for another time if it's late-night (after midnight) and explain that it might be difficult for you at such time. But agree to attend if they don't have any other time. US professors are extremely busy and most of the time they don't have much flexibility for their own students.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/01/17
| 1,845
| 7,101
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is well known that wealth is not distributed equally; even within a country, the wealthiest families are sometimes *significantly* wealthier than average or poor families.
My question is: does owning wealth mean these higher level groups of society do better academically than those who have less? Can a correlation or (better yet) a causation be established?
"Doing better academically" may be quantified with test scores, admissions rates to colleges or graduate schools, etc. (Since primary and secondary education are off-topic here, we will consider performance in college and beyond).<issue_comment>username_1: I think this might vary across countries. I can give you an overview on Germany.
On [this website](https://www.hochschulbildungsreport2020.de/chancen-fuer-nichtakademikerkinder), an offcial report on academic education from 2020 looks at the socioeconomic status of university attendants from entering university to PhD. It is only in German, but some of the main points can be gathered easily from the graphs even without knowledge of German:
People with academic parents (and thus presumably also a higher economic status) are three times more likely to go to university, 4 times more likely to obtain a bachelors degree and 10 times more likely to complete a PhD compared to those coming from a non-academic household. On all tiers (BA,MA,PhD), the number of drop-outs is much higher for people from non-academic households.
Reasons given are that more students from non-academic households are more likely to study part-time, as they are more likely working on the side. 72% of university drop-outs from non-academic households do so because of financial reasons - even though university education is free in Germany.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There is a huge literature in sociology on inequality in educational opportunities. A fairly recent review of that international literature can be found here:
<https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.31.041304.122232>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In the US, the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 selected a "nationally representative cohort" of 10th grade (~16 year old) students in 2002 and followed up on them in 2012 to see how far they had gotten. This study quantified economic status by equally weighting "their parents' occupation, highest level of education, and income."
The results are [here](https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/pdf/coe_tva.pdf), but the bottom line is that:
* for those in the top quartile, 60% got a bachelor's degree or higher
* for those in the bottom quartile, only 14% did.
This is a well-regarded study, and the results are striking. My concern with this analysis, however, is that you asked about "wealth," but income comprises only 20% of this study's "economic status" variable. The rest of it takes into account the parents' educational status and careers. So, unemployed parents with tons of student debt could conceivably end up in the top quartile, while rich parents without a college degree could end up in a lower quartile.
This [New York Times Article](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/28/upshot/you-draw-it-how-family-income-affects-childrens-college-chances.html) shows a simpler analysis: college attendance vs. parents' income percentile. [This blog post](https://towardsdatascience.com/data-jam-session-digging-into-the-nyt-teaser-about-college-rate-versus-parent-income-99408e45e4b5) redraws the curve showing college attendance vs. income in dollars. The latter is particularly striking:
* For family incomes of $50K, ~40% of children attend college (the exact number is a little hard to read on the graph).
* For family incomes of $200K+, ~90% of children attend college.
It's not possible to infer *causation* from this: did the extra money open doors directly (e.g., for tutors, private schools, fancy summer programs)? Or is there some other explanation (e.g, that parents whose parenting style engenders college attendance also tend to be rich)?
More broadly, questions like this are plagued by the definitions:
* How do you quantify "academic performance"? Grades? Test scores? Merely *attending* college, as in the study above? Any proposed definition will attract criticism.
* Defining "wealth" is a bit more straightforward, but still challenging. Income alone overlooks several complications, such as debt and the local cost of living. Total net worth has similar challenges.
Hence, it's unlikely that any number from any study would be universally accepted; the two studies listed above seem to be the best that we have.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: In Australia, the Department of Education, Skills and Employment (DESE) has conducted some crude analysis on the [correlation between education level and wealth](https://www.dese.gov.au/integrated-data-research/resources/wealth). This analysis does not go down into the details of academic performance beyond segmenting into groups based on highest education level. Nevertheless, as with many other studies on this topic, they find a substantial correlation between education and wealth.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: On the question “Is there any research showing a correlation between wealth and academic performance?”, interestingly in America, we have an extensive parochial school educational system. Here is a report with statistics as [available here](https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247826/catholic-school-students-outperform-public-school-peers-despite-slight-decreases-in-overall-academic-scores), to quote:
>
> Math and reading are included in the most recent Digest of Education Statistics, published in February 2021 by the National Center for Education Statistics. The NAEP science scores were released Tuesday in conjunction with a press conference.
> “Every year for the last 20 years, Catholic schools have outperformed public schools on NAEP tests—reading, math, science, computer literacy, geography, history,” said <NAME>, PBVM, director of Public Policy and Educational Research for the National Catholic Education Association. “We’re happy to have our achievement validated by an outside, public, federal agency.” …NAEP, also known as The Nation’s Report Card, assesses academic achievement using the frameworks developed by the National Assessment Governing Board. The assessment measures student progress in grades 4, 8, and 12.
>
>
>
Now, Catholic schools are part of the private school population but have fees generally accessible by a large portion of middle class Americans, who would not consider themselves as wealthy.
As such, while there may be an overall seemingly significant correlation between wealth and academic performance, clearly wealth is not a causative variable, given the statistics presented. More likely, it is just a proxy variable for other beneficial characteristics including hard work, discipline and family support, also demonstrated in the more successful wealthy families, that generally promotes good academic performance.
Upvotes: 2
|