date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2022/02/07
| 483
| 2,068
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student at a well ranked US institution A, and my undergraduate was from a very low ranked and small institution B in another country. Sometimes students from institution B (encouraged by my previous advisor there) ask me for the documents I used to get admitted to A. This includes my CV, motivation letter, and even the emails I sent my current advisor at A to contact their for the first time.
I don't feel like sharing my CV is a big issue, but I feel uncomfortable with things like my motivation letter and first-contact email with my current advisor. This is because:
1. I invested a lot of hard work and time in these (probably months and several rejections until gaining some experience).
2. I want to help them so I offered to give them feedback on their documents, but they insist on having mine to see how I did it (and because my previous advisor at B tells them to do so).
3. I am afraid that I could get involved in some problem, most of them plan to apply to my same program (somehow small) and even contact my current advisor.
Should I just share these documents? Maybe I am overthinking something small, but it does not feel completely fine.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I think you are doing the right thing. Your point 2) especially - offering advice and feedback. And if someone else copies your SoP and such and it is noticed, then it will be bad for them anyway.
But answer requests as we do here, with general advice. Even better share that advice with an old undergraduate advisor who can pass it on without bothering you much.
They are asking for something that isn't their due, actually.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Give them a general advice and explain a general procedure but do not share your personal things like CV, e-mails, correspondence etc.
You have invested a lot of hard work and time in these and your experience could be valuable for many but it should not harm you in any way so just guide them in general terms but not very specific.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/07
| 530
| 2,396
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm going to be brief with this post. We have submitted a paper to journal x. We had two reviewers. Both had comments which we addressed in our response letter. Reviewer 1 endorsed the paper. However, reviewer 2 rejected it cause we did not use western blot to confirm the protein level of gene x. Is this normal? This same reviewer wanted us to repeat the whole experiment using a method they suggested. Morevover, this method, if applied, deviates from the goal of our work and is not suitable at all.
Finally, I should mention that our work focuses gene expression
Manipulation and possible mechanisms involved.
I appreciate any feedback shedding lights on reviewers requesting additional work or differentvmethods that are not important to the work.<issue_comment>username_1: Your paper can be rejected if any of the reviewers are able to convince the editor that your paper is deficient in some way. That can include things that are in the paper that are done wrong, and things that are not in the paper that make the results questionable or open to other interpretations not fully explored.
If a reviewer requests experiments that do not fit the goals of the paper, and you are not willing or not able to do the experiments, it's up to you to make the best case for it in your response to the reviewers (which is also for the editor) while also being polite and respectful of their concerns. Even if their proposed solution does not seem to make sense to you, you can propose alternative methods/explanations to reassure them. If the protein level of gene X is important in your study, and you haven't shown that the level is consistent between conditions or whatever it is that the reviewer is hoping to verify, it seems you have to do something about it.
After that, the editor decides. The paper can be rejected for any reason they see fit; that's their job, after all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A referee can recommend rejection for a number of random reasons. The point is that the editor has judged the argument to be reasonable and have merit, whether you yourself judge the argument to be reasonable and have merit.
You can reply to the editor arguing that the argument of the referee are not important, but it seems to me the editor has shown their hand already. Thus, it would appear that you are out of luck with that journal.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/08
| 486
| 2,167
|
<issue_start>username_0: After presenting a paper at a conference, I have been invited to publish an extended version in a journal. The only requirement I have been told is that it must have at least 30% new material and an explicit justification of how it differs from the original version presented at the conference.
My question is: what title should I use? If I use the same title as the original version, I run the risk of confusing the audience with two papers with the same title. If I use the original title plus the expression 'Extended Version' I run the risk of devaluing the original publication. Could I use a substantially different title?<issue_comment>username_1: The title should be different but may not be substantially different. Just adding 'Extended version' is not enough.
You will add 30% new material. Give a new title based on new material.
If you really want to keep the old title, then mix the old title with some mention of new material like 'using', 'adding'.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Using a substantially different title would confuse people almost as much as using exactly the same title, because it would suggest that the two papers are greatly different. It would also probably result in a bad title, because you thought of the best one the first time round.
Could you add a few words to the original title to account for the new material? If not, I think adding "extended version" is OK.
Or, if the conference paper is not going to be published anywhere, you could use exactly the same title.
Whatever you do, state in the abstract or first sentence that it is an extended version of the other paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There must be previous examples for this in your field. Look at these examples for inspiration.
One pattern would be to use a "colon title" in which the part after the colon clarifies the content of the extended version. For example, let's assume your original paper was called "X" and presented the theory for "X", and that the 30% extension added an empirical evaluation. The title for the extended version could then be "X: theory and empirical evaluation".
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/08
| 473
| 2,097
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have applied for a postdoc position in October 2021 by sending my application to the responsible professor by email (as it's the only way to apply) as announced in the poster (in Germany). I got an instant automatic reply email from the professor mentioning that she was away for 10 days. I never heard from them after that.
After five months, yesterday, I emailed the prof again asking about the position and if there are any updates. Today I got an email from her secretary saying that they have already chosen someone and my application document will be destroyed.
The question is, how to make sure that my application was even on the list for the competition (because I didn't get a rejection email or any feedback until I wrote them yesterday)? Is there anything I can make it to make sure the process was fair and indeed they evaluated my application? I believe the professor just forgot my application completely as she was on holiday the day I have applied.<issue_comment>username_1: In theory, the *Personalrat* is informed about hiring processes for open positions and is eligible to see a list of all applicants. However, I am not sure if they would tell you if your application was on the list or not if you contacted them. Besides, what would you do with this information?
Unfortunately, it is not unusual to not receive a rejection letter. It's typically not done before the preferred applicant has signed the contract and once that's done they have probably already forgotten about the rest or just don't care anymore. I wouldn't take this as a sign that they didn't consider your application.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is there anything I can make it to make sure the process was fair and indeed they evaluated my application?
>
>
>
No. I do not know about your local laws, but in most places there is no requirement to evaluate every application. Some might argue that hiring the first qualified applicant found is "fair." Others might argue that, so long as no discrimination law was violated, the process is "fair."
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/08
| 5,883
| 23,840
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was looking at faculty jobs, and most of the jobs in UK publish the salary range and band, which (from my understanding) is essentially non-negotiable and adopted by most universities in the UK. It ends up being roughly 65k USD for an assistant professor / lecturer entry level position, even for top-tier universities in places like London, compared to places like NYC or Boston where beginner faculty salaries are easily upwards of 100k to start.
From reading a bit about this, and from looking at other posts on Academia.SE, people often say you can't compare these, or that the UK has other perks. But what exactly are these? The tax rate in the UK is 40% of what you make over 50k GBP (20% below), so even if you do get a good incremental raise, you lose almost half of it; and on top of this you pay 12% of your paycheck for National Insurance. UK universities do tend to have good pension matching (20%), but that's common in a lot of US universities too. They offer good leave (5 weeks) but many US jobs are only 9 mo contract, and still pay in the 80-100k range. So you can either take 12 weeks off per year, or, if needed, you work another up to three more months and have a higher salary supported by grants (which isn't possible in the UK scheme).
So... What am I missing? Are there hidden benefits? And otherwise how do good universities like Oxford, Imperial, UCL actually recruit good faculty?
I get that places vary a lot and some people can't move or they like one place more than another. But I'm not asking a hypothetical... I'm interested in **specific reasons why you or someone you know has preferred the UK over a similarly ranked, better paying *faculty* job elsewhere in the world**. I get that there are a lot of what ifs, like maybe the US uni has worse healthcare or childcare. But in my experience with R1 universities in the US, these perks are really really good, even for postdocs. The best answer so far is the non-tenure system in the UK, which does seem better.
For even more clarification, I'm asking this as someone that has never been to the UK, so I have no idea if I would like it more than the US. I don't care about less money – that's the whole point of my question. I'm happy to take less if there are other perks. But what I'm asking is what exactly are these perks? And ideally from the perspective of someone that has worked in academia in the UK vs elsewhere.<issue_comment>username_1: My answer builds on excellent comments of [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058/massimo-ortolano) and [Buffy](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/buffy).
You question stems from the assumption that high salary is what makes an occupation most attractive. Although it might be true for some, people who choose academic careers typically are aware that academia is not paying very well. You will see a much more attractive paycheck if you work in IT, banking, finance, management and administration, distribution of illegal goods. However, there are obvious downsides in doing a career in distribution of illegal goods; and similarly some people see downsides in other well-compensated employments. Paycheck is important; but other factors are also important, and academics are not mostly motivated by a paycheck.
Obviously, there is a huge difference in academic salaries in the UK and US. If you include EU, China and Asia, Russia and post-Soviet countries in comparison, the difference is even more striking. For many academics the scale of US salaries and research budgets is a sufficient motivation for the move - if you look at the faculty lists of many US Universities you will find a lot of surnames associated with China, Russia, European countries, etc. But obviously, not every non-US academic is motivated enough to move to the US. Why?
Well, we already answered it: not everyone is motivated to move. Moving countries is a big challenge!
1. When families move, often both partners have to leave their jobs, and only one partner has a job offer at the moment of the move. Another partner may or may not have work permit in the country, and may or may not have good chances to get a well-payed job, depending on their background, skills, language proficiency, etc. Even when salary of one partner improves, family as a whole is forced to leave on a tighter budget at least for some time.
2. US immigration system is not the easiest to manage. EU citizens do not experience immigration issues while working in EU (UK leaving the EU recently has caused many UK academics to move to EU and US).
3. US does not always look like to be the country that particularly welcomes refugees and economic migrants - and work migrants can feel that they will not be particularly welcome as well. People working in their own country do not experience systematic bias based on how they look and speak.
4. US healthcare bills look exorbitant; healthcare in many EU countries, including UK, is free for patients.
5. Childcare, education and University tuition fees vary from country to country. While children of faculty are typically considered home students (vs international), they may not be eligible for loans to finance their education, making it less affordable.
6. The cost of life, including cost of accommodation, is very high in some places in the US, making it not affordable for academics and even higher-payed IT specialists, etc.
Arguments above apply to more or less any professional employment.
There are also a few specific differences between academic employment in the US and UK/EU.
7. Tenure in the US is competitive and takes ~5 years. Tenure in the UK (a permanent lecturer post) is awarded after a probation period, which is between 1-3 years in most UK Universities. The probation process is non-competitive and typically >90% of lecturers in the UK pass their probation without issues.
8. Work-life balance differs from place to place; some US departments are notorious for their exploitative work practices towards non-tenured academics and PhD researchers.
9. The academic culture, teaching practices and student expectations vary from one place to another; some academics find US students not adequately prepared for their classes and expecting/demanding too much from their professors.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: UK universities are willing to hire people who cannot legally work in the USA. Many US universities do not want to hire people who cannot legally work at their location because the application for a work visa is tedious and risky.
In other words, the upside of US salaries is mostly only available to UK faculty who already have a work visa or passport for the US.
US universities may also decide not to interview someone simply to avoid the cost of an international flight.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll answer from the perspective of someone who has worked in both the UK and the US and also in Industry as well as academia during my lengthy career.
Although all the other answers and comment raise valid points, many of which I concur with, they do not completely resonate with me, as someone who has done both.
One of the perspectives I noticed while travelling backwards and forward across the Atlantic over the years which may have influenced the question is the expectation that life elsewhere would be "just like here"; but it isn't. When I was in Houston, for example, I acted like an Englishman and walked from place to place and caught the Bus, much to the horror of my hosts who were surprised that I came out alive without speaking Spanish. I was horrified they were horrified! Similarly colleagues from LA tried to rent a car from Heathrow to drive to their hotel in Mayfair which I considered madness. They thought I was rather common sharing transport with other people. (Not academic examples but they exaggerate the point).
Although I am a native speaker of English and was aware of the cultural and linguistic differences I found that working in UK academia at a "lower salary" much more cost effective than when working in the US at a much "higher salary". For example, although food cost more in the UK, housing cost less. Health care cost less, emergency provision cost less, child care and education cost less, daily travel cost less. I also found that the pressure on working hours was less and the time available for vacations and my family was much better. The pension scheme was (when I entered it, but not now) miles better and so on.
I have friends and colleagues who left the UK and remain in the US, both in Industry and Academia. It suits them. I miss much about the US, but there is much to like about many places and cultures where I have been. Every single one has value. I guess I long for *Un monde sans frontières*.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: A major thing to keep in mind is that it's relatively unusual for someone to have multiple offers that differ only by one being in the UK and one in the US. For example, many people only have one offer. But also suppose you have two offers, one in London and one in Iowa City, then most likely your opinions on living in a major city vs living in a cute college town is going to matter just as much as salary. Similarly, perhaps the offer in the UK is at a more prestigious school than the one in the US.
Speaking of prestigious schools, at the very top schools in the US there are no permanent entry-level jobs, whereas in the UK there are. Someone deciding between Princeton and Cambridge at a junior level is deciding between a temporary job and a permanent one, which allows Cambridge to be competitive. Moreover, at the senior level someone deciding between Princeton and Cambridge will likely be offered some kind of very fancy chair in the UK where the salary bands don't apply.
A second thing to keep in mind is that most faculty made their job decision in the past and not the present, and if circumstances change it may be unappealing or impossible to move to a comparable new job. This is especially important when comparing the US and the UK because right now the Pound is worth $1.3 but between 1990-2010 it was usually around $1.6 and got as high as $2 several times. A 25% pay raise would make British positions significantly more appealing. Especially with Brexit I do think it will be increasingly difficult for UK academia to maintain its historical competitiveness, but it takes decades for these trends to play out.
Finally, as everyone has said culture, familiarity, and proximity to family plays a huge role. Generally Americans prefer to stay in America and British people prefer to stay in the UK.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> I was looking at faculty jobs
>
>
>
why? Are you considering a career in teaching? in research? are you looking to maximize your bank account and retire as a 45 years old? What are your motivations?
>
> the UK has other perks.
>
>
>
Like [lower death per gun related crimes](https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/03/24/980838151/gun-violence-deaths-how-the-u-s-compares-to-the-rest-of-the-world?t=1644340035499) constant autumnal weather (hey, someone likes it), a national health service which cares of you even if you are unfit to work while being sick (even if you are without contract from your employee: try to get cancer while a postdoc on 1-year contract in the US system ... the nice and generous health insurance offered by the uni will end as soon as your contract ends)
Why don't you consider moving to Singapore? there the academic salary are among the highest in the world.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: In any developed nation, and most others, higher faculty are sufficiently well paid to afford you a decent quality of life well above the local median, therefore choosing between jobs in different countries based on the salary rather than **just choosing the country you want to live in** doesn't seem a particularly compelling idea.
There are many reasons you might prefer the UK to the US, or *vice versa*, but how you prioritise these reasons is largely personal preference. Equally so for other countries.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I think your initial premise that US faculty salaries are higher is flawed and looks only at part of the picture. There definitely are US universities and colleges where the starting salary for an assistant professor/ lecturer is 80-100k US$. There are also colleges where the starting salary is more like 30-40k US$. The range of potential salaries in the US is huge and prestigeous universities will pay significantly more than less prestigeous ones.
This happens to a much smaller degree in the UK and even less in continental Europe. The UK system is graded into lecturers, readers and full professors with significant salary differences between these but a reader will have approximately the same salary at every university in the UK.
This means that if you are able to get a position at one of the very good institutions in the US you will earn a much higher nominal salary both compared to an average institution in the US and compared to any university in the UK. If you are not among those select few the UK system might actually offer you a higher salary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: If you're American, I don't think there is any particularly good reason to prefer an academic job in the UK. And in my experience there aren't many American academics working at British universities - fewer than there are British academics working at American universities.
However, UK universities have no trouble recruiting strong candidates from Europe, and from the UK itself, for whom there are clear geographical advantages of living at most a short-haul flight away from family. I would happily take a US faculty job if I didn't have family ties to the UK, but since I do it's simply not practical.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I see with some of your comments to some of the offered answers that you consider the social benefits (healthcare and other forms of job security, life security), the community and safety (gun violence, walkability of cities), work benefits (annual leave and how it is perceived) as "not real benefits" or as "reasons that the UK sucks a bit less".
I can understand that as somebody coming from a country where these things are not standard and nor, you assign value to these things as "added bonus". However, as somebody who comes from *this* system, these are **absolutely dealbreaking for me**.
For example:
* I am absolutely horrified by the idea that I would have to keep a certain amount of money (I heard as much as $10k from friends and acquaintances) aside just in case I needed to call an ambulance.
Honestly compared to other European countries where I've lived prior, the social protections, worker protections and health care in the UK are not even the best I've ever experienced. Giving even more up would feel like a step backwards to me.
* You put the US 9-month contracts (where you could make extra money by working for the remaining 3 months) in the same context with the UK 5 weeks of annual leave "during which you can not make extra money".
The very approach to this is fundamentally different. The ([government-backed](https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights)) attitude here is that any worker *needs* time off work in a year (and I mean more than just weekends). This is fully paid annual leave. The UK academics have a more generous leave allowance than some UK jobs, but there is actually a minimum prescribed number of leave days that you are *obliged* to take annually (28). Taking time off here is *expected*; nobody will interpret it as being *unmotivated* to work.
(Check ["What does it mean to have vacation time in European academia?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/16888/4249) for an old but excellent question on the vacation topic specifically)
* The whole gun thing in the US. The idea that you can get one without going through a rigorous certification process. Shivers down my spine.
* Car-oriented cities vs human-oriented cities.
I am already disappointed by how car-oriented some UK places are and how hard it is to get around on foot, by bicycle or using public transport. But I am still generally succeeding in having a high standard of living without driving at all.
* The reliance of the Higher Education system on tuition fees.
(Decided to edit this one in after a discussion in the comments).
Obviously, when considering an academic faculty position, *the considerations about tuition fees are different from an undergrad*. I actually think there are two aspect to this one.
The first academic position is one of the earliest points of stability in an academic career that allows one to plan for a family. I am of a firm opinion that education should be free. I would never start a family in the US, knowing that I'll either have to save up substantially for my children's education, or settle them with a crippling debt before they ever join the workforce. And while the UK is definitely not Europe (the Universities are still tuition-reliant, and the tuitions are high), it's certainly not the US either; residents of Scotland do not pay tuition, and the UK student debt is treated much differently to the US one (for one, most of the students are never required to repay the majority of it).
But even beyond hypothetical future children, there is a personal motivation for doing research. One of the reasons I chose academia over industry was the potential for my work to be more widely accessible rather than behind a paywall. The idea that the students should pay to access my knowledge goes fundamentally against why I'm doing research.
You might not consider any of these as a tangible benefit, and I can respect that. But basically, I would **never consider a job in the US**, academic or otherwise precisely for these reasons. With my current perception of the society in the US, I think living there would necessarily induce sacrifices to my standard of living which I am simply not prepared to make.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_10: Firstly, I see the salaries for *junior* lecturers being in the range £35,000 - £50,000 which is around $48,000 - $66,000 at current exchange rates. So your estimate of $65,000 is more at the top end of this range than in the average.
While many UK institutions have group health/invalidity/life/childcare/sports/etc benefits, these may vary a lot from one college to another. You would do well to read the fine print of these following an offer.
But to your question as to why - money apart - academics would choose UK over USA positions.
There are reasons that are specific to the field of study the academic engages in such as:
* UK is the home of English language & literature and a period working and teaching here would be impressive on a resumé for someone involved in that endeavour. A similar case could be made for those involved in history, archaeology, politics, economics, philosophy, etc research centred on or closely related to developments in the UK or even Western Europe.
* In fields that are declining, e.g. metallurgy, there may be few local applicants and it has become common for UK universities to recruit such faculty from countries with far bigger mineral/metallurgical industries like USA, Canada, Australia, South Africa or Russia.
* It could happen that the an academic wants to be involved in the research work happening at some UK university department and peer congeniality is worth more - at least for a few years - than salary as they cut their research teeth.
There are also other reasons independent of the academic's field like:
* USA students are quite challenging verbally in class, expect more assignments (plus feedback), take no pomposity and humbug from professors and thrive on continual engagement. Even for those brought up in US, some may not find this as agreeable as the more detached and generalized way of relating to students that is the norm in UK universities. (Of course there are also some UK-born academics who prefer the American way of education.)
* There are loads of foreign faculty in UK universities - perhaps even more so than in USA - so academics who like exotic college social lives will really have a good time.
* Education, health and social security benefits in UK are better in UK. This is important as an academic's own family reach their mid-teens and become a greater expense.
* Lifestyle and human relationships in the UK suits people who are more reserved and don't want to mix with people purely on the basis of economic status.
* Housing, especially housing in rural villages outside provincial UK cities, is relatively cheap and academic jobs are seen by bank managers as a good basis for a mortgage: fairly secure, many other expenses part-subsidized and promotion almost certain.
* Some people are Anglophiles, Formula 1 enthusiasts, horse racing fans, rugby or soccer screamers, etc and find ample outlet for these passions within UK.
I think that it all comes down to what sort of person you are and what your priorities, both in academia and in the community, are that will guide your decision to work in the UK.
Please don't decide on the basis of some brief summer school experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Some concrete, financial, benefits for the UK salary:
* The total cost of healthcare is zero (actually, overseas people do have to have to pay a one off charge, but most universities will cover that). Not only does this mean you don't pay your monthly contribution to health insurance (I paid about 10% of my insurance costs when I was a postdoc in Boston), but if you were to get ill, there are no co-pays etc.
* The pension scheme is very different: the university doesn't match 20%. The university pays 21%, and the employee pays 9% - the university pays in more than twice what the employee pays in. What that gets you is also very different from a 401K scheme common at US universities. The exact offer is the subject of on-going industrial action at the moment in the UK, but which ever side wins, the scheme will be a defined benefit scheme: in retirement you will be paid a guaranteed monthly payment, irrespective of how long you live, or what happens to the economy (this guarantee is ultimately backed by the government). The size of the payment is dependent on how long you work and at what salary. At the moment the offer is 1/65th of your (inflation adjusted) average salary for every year you work.
* If you are in London it is highly likely you will not need to own a car. This is a massive saving on many peoples outgoings.
* When I was in the Boston, the sum total of federal, state and property taxes was actually higher than my tax bill in the UK (I guess MA is a high tax state).
* You get legally guaranteed employment rights from day one, not just paid holidays, but 28 weeks of sick pay, 9 months of parental leave that can be split between the parents (that's just the minimum, most unis give a year). After two years you cannot be sacked without a "legally valid" reason, and are legally entitled to severance pay. After 4 years you are automatically a permanent employee, which means "your contract is up" is no longer a "legally valid" reason.
* As the employment is full-time 12 months, you will never be expected to fund your own salary, nor your take home pay affected by your ability to bring in research funding.
While this all adds up to the UK salary being worth more in the best case than it first appears, what it really adds up to is it being worth much more than it appears if anything goes wrong in life. The UK job offers more security, including financial security.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/08
| 5,467
| 22,380
|
<issue_start>username_0: I passed the interview for a postdoc position some weeks ago, and the department asked me for various documents so they could begin the mandatory background/references check. I sent in the files pretty quickly (~2 weeks ago), but did not receive any confirmation that they got my email, or any kind of follow up. My references also did not get a call. I assume the international background check part is what's taking so long, since I am very sure that my documents must have been in order (I was very careful in preparing them).
However, I need to decide between this offer and another one this week, and in order to make this decision, I need to see the details of the actual offer they will have for me. I already negotiated a starting date and some other things with the administration, but I'll need to see the proposed contract to be able to compare to the other one. How do I politely ask for an update without annoying anyone or sounding pushy?<issue_comment>username_1: My answer builds on excellent comments of [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/20058/massimo-ortolano) and [Buffy](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/buffy).
You question stems from the assumption that high salary is what makes an occupation most attractive. Although it might be true for some, people who choose academic careers typically are aware that academia is not paying very well. You will see a much more attractive paycheck if you work in IT, banking, finance, management and administration, distribution of illegal goods. However, there are obvious downsides in doing a career in distribution of illegal goods; and similarly some people see downsides in other well-compensated employments. Paycheck is important; but other factors are also important, and academics are not mostly motivated by a paycheck.
Obviously, there is a huge difference in academic salaries in the UK and US. If you include EU, China and Asia, Russia and post-Soviet countries in comparison, the difference is even more striking. For many academics the scale of US salaries and research budgets is a sufficient motivation for the move - if you look at the faculty lists of many US Universities you will find a lot of surnames associated with China, Russia, European countries, etc. But obviously, not every non-US academic is motivated enough to move to the US. Why?
Well, we already answered it: not everyone is motivated to move. Moving countries is a big challenge!
1. When families move, often both partners have to leave their jobs, and only one partner has a job offer at the moment of the move. Another partner may or may not have work permit in the country, and may or may not have good chances to get a well-payed job, depending on their background, skills, language proficiency, etc. Even when salary of one partner improves, family as a whole is forced to leave on a tighter budget at least for some time.
2. US immigration system is not the easiest to manage. EU citizens do not experience immigration issues while working in EU (UK leaving the EU recently has caused many UK academics to move to EU and US).
3. US does not always look like to be the country that particularly welcomes refugees and economic migrants - and work migrants can feel that they will not be particularly welcome as well. People working in their own country do not experience systematic bias based on how they look and speak.
4. US healthcare bills look exorbitant; healthcare in many EU countries, including UK, is free for patients.
5. Childcare, education and University tuition fees vary from country to country. While children of faculty are typically considered home students (vs international), they may not be eligible for loans to finance their education, making it less affordable.
6. The cost of life, including cost of accommodation, is very high in some places in the US, making it not affordable for academics and even higher-payed IT specialists, etc.
Arguments above apply to more or less any professional employment.
There are also a few specific differences between academic employment in the US and UK/EU.
7. Tenure in the US is competitive and takes ~5 years. Tenure in the UK (a permanent lecturer post) is awarded after a probation period, which is between 1-3 years in most UK Universities. The probation process is non-competitive and typically >90% of lecturers in the UK pass their probation without issues.
8. Work-life balance differs from place to place; some US departments are notorious for their exploitative work practices towards non-tenured academics and PhD researchers.
9. The academic culture, teaching practices and student expectations vary from one place to another; some academics find US students not adequately prepared for their classes and expecting/demanding too much from their professors.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: UK universities are willing to hire people who cannot legally work in the USA. Many US universities do not want to hire people who cannot legally work at their location because the application for a work visa is tedious and risky.
In other words, the upside of US salaries is mostly only available to UK faculty who already have a work visa or passport for the US.
US universities may also decide not to interview someone simply to avoid the cost of an international flight.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll answer from the perspective of someone who has worked in both the UK and the US and also in Industry as well as academia during my lengthy career.
Although all the other answers and comment raise valid points, many of which I concur with, they do not completely resonate with me, as someone who has done both.
One of the perspectives I noticed while travelling backwards and forward across the Atlantic over the years which may have influenced the question is the expectation that life elsewhere would be "just like here"; but it isn't. When I was in Houston, for example, I acted like an Englishman and walked from place to place and caught the Bus, much to the horror of my hosts who were surprised that I came out alive without speaking Spanish. I was horrified they were horrified! Similarly colleagues from LA tried to rent a car from Heathrow to drive to their hotel in Mayfair which I considered madness. They thought I was rather common sharing transport with other people. (Not academic examples but they exaggerate the point).
Although I am a native speaker of English and was aware of the cultural and linguistic differences I found that working in UK academia at a "lower salary" much more cost effective than when working in the US at a much "higher salary". For example, although food cost more in the UK, housing cost less. Health care cost less, emergency provision cost less, child care and education cost less, daily travel cost less. I also found that the pressure on working hours was less and the time available for vacations and my family was much better. The pension scheme was (when I entered it, but not now) miles better and so on.
I have friends and colleagues who left the UK and remain in the US, both in Industry and Academia. It suits them. I miss much about the US, but there is much to like about many places and cultures where I have been. Every single one has value. I guess I long for *Un monde sans frontières*.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: A major thing to keep in mind is that it's relatively unusual for someone to have multiple offers that differ only by one being in the UK and one in the US. For example, many people only have one offer. But also suppose you have two offers, one in London and one in Iowa City, then most likely your opinions on living in a major city vs living in a cute college town is going to matter just as much as salary. Similarly, perhaps the offer in the UK is at a more prestigious school than the one in the US.
Speaking of prestigious schools, at the very top schools in the US there are no permanent entry-level jobs, whereas in the UK there are. Someone deciding between Princeton and Cambridge at a junior level is deciding between a temporary job and a permanent one, which allows Cambridge to be competitive. Moreover, at the senior level someone deciding between Princeton and Cambridge will likely be offered some kind of very fancy chair in the UK where the salary bands don't apply.
A second thing to keep in mind is that most faculty made their job decision in the past and not the present, and if circumstances change it may be unappealing or impossible to move to a comparable new job. This is especially important when comparing the US and the UK because right now the Pound is worth $1.3 but between 1990-2010 it was usually around $1.6 and got as high as $2 several times. A 25% pay raise would make British positions significantly more appealing. Especially with Brexit I do think it will be increasingly difficult for UK academia to maintain its historical competitiveness, but it takes decades for these trends to play out.
Finally, as everyone has said culture, familiarity, and proximity to family plays a huge role. Generally Americans prefer to stay in America and British people prefer to stay in the UK.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> I was looking at faculty jobs
>
>
>
why? Are you considering a career in teaching? in research? are you looking to maximize your bank account and retire as a 45 years old? What are your motivations?
>
> the UK has other perks.
>
>
>
Like [lower death per gun related crimes](https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/03/24/980838151/gun-violence-deaths-how-the-u-s-compares-to-the-rest-of-the-world?t=1644340035499) constant autumnal weather (hey, someone likes it), a national health service which cares of you even if you are unfit to work while being sick (even if you are without contract from your employee: try to get cancer while a postdoc on 1-year contract in the US system ... the nice and generous health insurance offered by the uni will end as soon as your contract ends)
Why don't you consider moving to Singapore? there the academic salary are among the highest in the world.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: In any developed nation, and most others, higher faculty are sufficiently well paid to afford you a decent quality of life well above the local median, therefore choosing between jobs in different countries based on the salary rather than **just choosing the country you want to live in** doesn't seem a particularly compelling idea.
There are many reasons you might prefer the UK to the US, or *vice versa*, but how you prioritise these reasons is largely personal preference. Equally so for other countries.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I think your initial premise that US faculty salaries are higher is flawed and looks only at part of the picture. There definitely are US universities and colleges where the starting salary for an assistant professor/ lecturer is 80-100k US$. There are also colleges where the starting salary is more like 30-40k US$. The range of potential salaries in the US is huge and prestigeous universities will pay significantly more than less prestigeous ones.
This happens to a much smaller degree in the UK and even less in continental Europe. The UK system is graded into lecturers, readers and full professors with significant salary differences between these but a reader will have approximately the same salary at every university in the UK.
This means that if you are able to get a position at one of the very good institutions in the US you will earn a much higher nominal salary both compared to an average institution in the US and compared to any university in the UK. If you are not among those select few the UK system might actually offer you a higher salary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: If you're American, I don't think there is any particularly good reason to prefer an academic job in the UK. And in my experience there aren't many American academics working at British universities - fewer than there are British academics working at American universities.
However, UK universities have no trouble recruiting strong candidates from Europe, and from the UK itself, for whom there are clear geographical advantages of living at most a short-haul flight away from family. I would happily take a US faculty job if I didn't have family ties to the UK, but since I do it's simply not practical.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I see with some of your comments to some of the offered answers that you consider the social benefits (healthcare and other forms of job security, life security), the community and safety (gun violence, walkability of cities), work benefits (annual leave and how it is perceived) as "not real benefits" or as "reasons that the UK sucks a bit less".
I can understand that as somebody coming from a country where these things are not standard and nor, you assign value to these things as "added bonus". However, as somebody who comes from *this* system, these are **absolutely dealbreaking for me**.
For example:
* I am absolutely horrified by the idea that I would have to keep a certain amount of money (I heard as much as $10k from friends and acquaintances) aside just in case I needed to call an ambulance.
Honestly compared to other European countries where I've lived prior, the social protections, worker protections and health care in the UK are not even the best I've ever experienced. Giving even more up would feel like a step backwards to me.
* You put the US 9-month contracts (where you could make extra money by working for the remaining 3 months) in the same context with the UK 5 weeks of annual leave "during which you can not make extra money".
The very approach to this is fundamentally different. The ([government-backed](https://www.gov.uk/holiday-entitlement-rights)) attitude here is that any worker *needs* time off work in a year (and I mean more than just weekends). This is fully paid annual leave. The UK academics have a more generous leave allowance than some UK jobs, but there is actually a minimum prescribed number of leave days that you are *obliged* to take annually (28). Taking time off here is *expected*; nobody will interpret it as being *unmotivated* to work.
(Check ["What does it mean to have vacation time in European academia?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/16888/4249) for an old but excellent question on the vacation topic specifically)
* The whole gun thing in the US. The idea that you can get one without going through a rigorous certification process. Shivers down my spine.
* Car-oriented cities vs human-oriented cities.
I am already disappointed by how car-oriented some UK places are and how hard it is to get around on foot, by bicycle or using public transport. But I am still generally succeeding in having a high standard of living without driving at all.
* The reliance of the Higher Education system on tuition fees.
(Decided to edit this one in after a discussion in the comments).
Obviously, when considering an academic faculty position, *the considerations about tuition fees are different from an undergrad*. I actually think there are two aspect to this one.
The first academic position is one of the earliest points of stability in an academic career that allows one to plan for a family. I am of a firm opinion that education should be free. I would never start a family in the US, knowing that I'll either have to save up substantially for my children's education, or settle them with a crippling debt before they ever join the workforce. And while the UK is definitely not Europe (the Universities are still tuition-reliant, and the tuitions are high), it's certainly not the US either; residents of Scotland do not pay tuition, and the UK student debt is treated much differently to the US one (for one, most of the students are never required to repay the majority of it).
But even beyond hypothetical future children, there is a personal motivation for doing research. One of the reasons I chose academia over industry was the potential for my work to be more widely accessible rather than behind a paywall. The idea that the students should pay to access my knowledge goes fundamentally against why I'm doing research.
You might not consider any of these as a tangible benefit, and I can respect that. But basically, I would **never consider a job in the US**, academic or otherwise precisely for these reasons. With my current perception of the society in the US, I think living there would necessarily induce sacrifices to my standard of living which I am simply not prepared to make.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_10: Firstly, I see the salaries for *junior* lecturers being in the range £35,000 - £50,000 which is around $48,000 - $66,000 at current exchange rates. So your estimate of $65,000 is more at the top end of this range than in the average.
While many UK institutions have group health/invalidity/life/childcare/sports/etc benefits, these may vary a lot from one college to another. You would do well to read the fine print of these following an offer.
But to your question as to why - money apart - academics would choose UK over USA positions.
There are reasons that are specific to the field of study the academic engages in such as:
* UK is the home of English language & literature and a period working and teaching here would be impressive on a resumé for someone involved in that endeavour. A similar case could be made for those involved in history, archaeology, politics, economics, philosophy, etc research centred on or closely related to developments in the UK or even Western Europe.
* In fields that are declining, e.g. metallurgy, there may be few local applicants and it has become common for UK universities to recruit such faculty from countries with far bigger mineral/metallurgical industries like USA, Canada, Australia, South Africa or Russia.
* It could happen that the an academic wants to be involved in the research work happening at some UK university department and peer congeniality is worth more - at least for a few years - than salary as they cut their research teeth.
There are also other reasons independent of the academic's field like:
* USA students are quite challenging verbally in class, expect more assignments (plus feedback), take no pomposity and humbug from professors and thrive on continual engagement. Even for those brought up in US, some may not find this as agreeable as the more detached and generalized way of relating to students that is the norm in UK universities. (Of course there are also some UK-born academics who prefer the American way of education.)
* There are loads of foreign faculty in UK universities - perhaps even more so than in USA - so academics who like exotic college social lives will really have a good time.
* Education, health and social security benefits in UK are better in UK. This is important as an academic's own family reach their mid-teens and become a greater expense.
* Lifestyle and human relationships in the UK suits people who are more reserved and don't want to mix with people purely on the basis of economic status.
* Housing, especially housing in rural villages outside provincial UK cities, is relatively cheap and academic jobs are seen by bank managers as a good basis for a mortgage: fairly secure, many other expenses part-subsidized and promotion almost certain.
* Some people are Anglophiles, Formula 1 enthusiasts, horse racing fans, rugby or soccer screamers, etc and find ample outlet for these passions within UK.
I think that it all comes down to what sort of person you are and what your priorities, both in academia and in the community, are that will guide your decision to work in the UK.
Please don't decide on the basis of some brief summer school experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Some concrete, financial, benefits for the UK salary:
* The total cost of healthcare is zero (actually, overseas people do have to have to pay a one off charge, but most universities will cover that). Not only does this mean you don't pay your monthly contribution to health insurance (I paid about 10% of my insurance costs when I was a postdoc in Boston), but if you were to get ill, there are no co-pays etc.
* The pension scheme is very different: the university doesn't match 20%. The university pays 21%, and the employee pays 9% - the university pays in more than twice what the employee pays in. What that gets you is also very different from a 401K scheme common at US universities. The exact offer is the subject of on-going industrial action at the moment in the UK, but which ever side wins, the scheme will be a defined benefit scheme: in retirement you will be paid a guaranteed monthly payment, irrespective of how long you live, or what happens to the economy (this guarantee is ultimately backed by the government). The size of the payment is dependent on how long you work and at what salary. At the moment the offer is 1/65th of your (inflation adjusted) average salary for every year you work.
* If you are in London it is highly likely you will not need to own a car. This is a massive saving on many peoples outgoings.
* When I was in the Boston, the sum total of federal, state and property taxes was actually higher than my tax bill in the UK (I guess MA is a high tax state).
* You get legally guaranteed employment rights from day one, not just paid holidays, but 28 weeks of sick pay, 9 months of parental leave that can be split between the parents (that's just the minimum, most unis give a year). After two years you cannot be sacked without a "legally valid" reason, and are legally entitled to severance pay. After 4 years you are automatically a permanent employee, which means "your contract is up" is no longer a "legally valid" reason.
* As the employment is full-time 12 months, you will never be expected to fund your own salary, nor your take home pay affected by your ability to bring in research funding.
While this all adds up to the UK salary being worth more in the best case than it first appears, what it really adds up to is it being worth much more than it appears if anything goes wrong in life. The UK job offers more security, including financial security.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/08
| 1,587
| 6,710
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been experiencing a phenomenon for a couple of months now that I cannot understand. I'm a first year phd student and I'm working on a problem that my advisor has suggested. I've made some progress, but nothing publishable yet. My advisor however says that I shouldn't worry and that I'm making good progress.
There are other students in my peer group with other advisors. Some are in their 2nd year and they are much more successful than me. They have publications, pre-prints, collaborations, they have given many talks etc.
Even though these students are friendly towards me, I have the impression that I'm being considered a "lower class" member of the group by them. I cannot help but notice that when we are discussing about our subject, they are not even looking at me, as if I'm not part of the conversation. Whenever I mention something, I feel like they try to make it clear to me that this is something obvious to them.
I've also noticed that they will very often make negative comments about my advisor (who is a leading expert in our field), they say e.g. that my advisor is extremely strict, that they will keep a grudge against someone if they miss a few seminars, that they are very difficult when it comes to handling funding, or they tell me gossip they've heard about my advisor for petty things that happened many years ago which I don't even know how much truth they contain. I personally have never had a negative experience with my advisor: they have been nothing but kind, understanding and helpful towards me so far, so I don't know what to make of these comments.
I have wondered many times if this behavior towards me is just my impression, since it is only based on minor observations. But still, the outcome of this is that I feel inferior towards these people. I started to doubt my advisor (whom I trust a lot), my potential and even myself because of this situation. I've always believed in myself but lately I find myself comparing to these students and thinking that I will never know as much as they do, progress in my research as they do, get involved in collaborations as they do and give talks as they do. When I first joined this department I felt so motivated and inspired, I felt very confident that such a renowned scientist such as my advisor selected me as their student, but the above situation is affecting my psychology greatly.
Has any of you had any similar experience? Does anyone have any tips or advice in handling such situations?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm a scientist, so I think you should believe that your observations about your advisor are the truth, and other people's claims are less reliable.
If your colleagues are engaging in gossiping or stereotyping or rumor spreading, you don't need to address it directly. You're not their supervisor or underling. Instead, lead by example. Behave professionally yourself.
Now, if the behavior worsens and becomes harassment of yourself or others, then you might want to speak to your supervisor, a department chair, an omsbudsperson, or a student union. Who you should contact would depend on who did what and how your university is organized.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a difficult situation for anyone; I'm sorry it's happening to you.
First, data is king. You have specific observations about your advisor; if they are good, trust them. Gossip of any kind is *not* data and it doesn't help anyone. Ever. Period. Furthermore, even if the information were true, people can change over time, so whatever your advisor did 10 years ago (or however long it was) doesn't matter to you now. As far as that stuff goes, try to ignore it the best you can. If you want to stand up for your advisor, you might say something like, "That's not how [he/she] has treated me." However, I think it's best not to start something like that. Focus on work-related topics.
I think it's terrible when students make others feel bad. In most cases, it's because they themselves are insecure. With respect to this situation, I would advise you that it doesn't do you any good to compare yourself to these students who are further along in the program than you. They are taking different classes, working on different problems (likely in different subfields), so it doesn't make any sense to compare their publication records, etc. to yours. It's like comparing apples and smokestacks.
If there are any other first-year students, stick with them. You're likely taking the same courses, the same prelim exams, etc., so if they are friendly, you've found your crowd.
Only you know your heart and only you know your mind. Don't let others make you doubt yourself.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, unfortunately I had this experience.
I think they reached their goal, because you wrote 'they are much more successful than me'. Firstly, don't think like this way.
Of course, nobody has to give you a very friendly working environment, but they don't have any right to make you feel sad, or don't make you think you are in a lower class.
Please, make some prediction about these students. Why are they doing this? E.g., maybe they want to get a postdoc position from the your advisor. Probably, they don't want to have another competitor.
I always wonder that if someone is bad, why they are working with him?
Don't let anyone show you as an aggressive person in the group. But, you should talk about everything that hurt you to your advisor, maybe in the lunch time. I did, and now I am very pleasant.
And in my personal experience, I have never seen a successful person who is making someone annoying. Be confident, focus on your studies, never gossip about your advisor, and always stay close to the advisor.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: There is definitely toxic behaviour there, especially disregarding you and making you feel inferior. They have no right to do that.
However, about the advisor: there are advisors who are very kind to those who are new in a group (kind of grooming), but they become less reliable and kind if they realize that the student is burning out, does not perform always on 120%, not keeping up a good picture of the supervisor, etc. - and they just discard them for the next 'fresh' student whom they support again.
I really hope you are not in this situation (I had been, it was terrible, and I am still in therapy after such a [PI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_investigator)). The new students mostly admired him, the leaving/graduating ones were just sitting silently and grumpily, trying to get out ASAP... If that is not the case in your group then great, but look out for such behaviour.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/09
| 631
| 2,695
|
<issue_start>username_0: The following instructions were sent to poster presenters at some online conference ([AAAI 2022](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AAAI_Conference_on_Artificial_Intelligence)):
>
> Submission guidelines: All posters must be uploaded as PDF files. Posters may not exceed 1 page/side. Recommended file size: under 2MB. Posters should be horizontally oriented in 16:9 or 4:3 aspect ratio. **Do not include any URLs or hyperlinks**.
>
>
>
Why would the organizers of an online conference ask poster presenters not to include any URLs or hyperlinks in their poster?<issue_comment>username_1: Presumably they don't want hyperlinks because you can't click on a physical poster. As to eschewing URLs, that's unclear, particularly since posters frequently refer to external sources in the bibliography. I guess if you want to find out why they don't like URLs you'll have to ask them. Alternatively, you could be really cheeky and use QR codes instead.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This can steem from possible technical causes, such as organizing and publishing software will be used by the conference organizers, to limiting the possibility of publishing harmful material, where harmful can cover the whole spectra from cultural (indecent content, political messages, religion, hate speech) to technological (hacking smartphones, browsers, etcetc).
It is rather easy to present an abstract good enough to pass the screening, then you have access to the poster room (either in person or even riskier in the virtual room).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The organizers of a conference generally need to put restrictions on the amount of content presenters can communicate to their audience. For example, talks cannot go over time, a poster has specified dimensions, conference papers have page limits and sometimes limits on font sizes and page margins, etc. This is to ensure that attendees have a pleasant experience and are not overwhelmed by an unreasonable amount of information by presenters eager to capture more than their fair share of the audience’s attention.
(This eagerness is amplified in competitive situations in which getting more of the audience’s time and attention can increase a presenter’s chances of, say, winning the Best Poster Award, or of generally improving their standing in the community. So these restrictions are also about fairness and ensuring that presenters don’t game the system to gain an unfair advantage over other presenters.)
As for the rule about hyperlinks, I don’t have a strong opinion about whether it’s a good rule, but it seems likely that it’s at least motivated by these sorts of considerations.
Upvotes: 4
|
2022/02/09
| 562
| 2,002
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have doubts about which of the university rankings is more reliable in terms of academic reputation, because there are notable differences in ranking for the same universities across different portals.
For example, if I consider a university X, I will find the following results:
a) [QS World University Rankings](https://www.topuniversities.com/) (QS): no results
b) [Academic Ranking of World Universities](https://www.shanghairanking.com/) (ARWU), result: 601-700 **Note:** Here I am confused, its rank is 601 or 700?
c) [Times Higher Education](http://www.timeshighereducation.com) (THE Ranking), result: 801-1000; the same as before, its ranking is 801 or 1000?
d) Scimago Institutions Rankings (SIR), result: 669.
so which rank should I consider?
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: If you are looking specifically at *academic reputation* then the best ranking is the [THE World Reputation Rankings](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Times_Higher_Education_World_University_Rankings#World_Reputation_Rankings), which is based solely on reputation. The next-best ranking is the QS ranking, because it gives a 40% weighting to "academic peer review" (see the [methodology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QS_World_University_Rankings#Methodology)).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In short: none.
In long: really none of them. Academic reputation is known to the practitioner of a specific field, it is very qualitative and there are no metrics, because it is limited to three categories:
* departments in the top 20 universities;
* good departments in some other universities;
* unknown departments in unknown universities
and you will get it by simply looking at which affiliation had the people who got prizes from conferences and international research associations in the last 5 years.
If you come from an unknown department of an unknown university, it does not matter if the ranking of the university is 50,500,5000, it will be simply unknown.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/09
| 2,053
| 8,199
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished my PhD in physics in the middle of last year in the UK, and have started my postdoc in Germany. My PhD had a lot of guidance and I met with my supervisor every week, but it's totally different with my postdoc. The big thing is that my postdoc is not a fulfilment of a specific grant for an experiment or project, but is a general appointment and gives me total freedom to do what I want. This means I have to be totally self-motivated, but unfortunately I'm just not. I have work to do, but it just isn't happening, and it's almost physically painful to even consider doing it. I'm not alone in this country, I live with my wife, which helps a bit, but I do miss living in the UK too. My postdoc here is for 3 years at least.
I'm proud and happy with my PhD work, but this totally undirected self-motivated career is pretty crushing. Combined with working from home due to the pandemic, and having no regular meetings with my new boss, who seems to be letting whatever happens happen, it is difficult. When I was in my PhD my old supervisor mentioned that he went through a similar depression when he started his second postdoc which was similarly unguided. How on Earth do I make the transition? Is this normal?
I also have strong feelings of guilt: I'm being paid for this, yet I'm too lazy to actually work, and yet my wife is out there working a lot as a mechanical engineer.<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds like classic burnout. It is a common occurrence after an intense degree program. The solution is to find a mental health professional who can give you advice.
Advice from a layperson may be helpful or not. But some things help, like getting exercise, taking breaks, getting enough sleep, taking up a hobby...
Anyway, yes, it is pretty normal. "Toughing your way through" is probably not optimal. For most it will probably clear normally over time, but you don't have a lot of time to be catatonic.
Talk to a pro. The university may be able to provide one for you, though I don't know the custom in Germany.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, I do not doubt that Covid and the personal and professional isolation of working from home (in a foreign country) have some impact here. Getting the help username_1 suggests is highly recommended.
Second, looking back on my post-doc, I moved from the US to The Netherlands and took up a similarly unstructured post-doc role. I was pretty independent already, had lots of ideas, but it was not clear what I should do, exactly. What I decided to start with was jumping in to help the students make progress - I knew the research techniques and analysis tools quite well, and was a better writer/editor than they were. I also knew that I did not want to 'compete' with the students on ideas and projects. So, I helped a lot while I continued to contemplate what I could take on as my own. In the first few months I didn't personally get much done, but the students did. Lots of data (theirs) to discuss, ideas to bounce around, papers to write (and rewrite, and rewrite). And I got to know the students, and everyone else in the institute really well (staff, technicians, the coffee lady).
I also decided that I needed to learn Dutch since I lived in The Netherlands, so started taking courses. That got me out of the institute and meeting a variety of people, and got me feeling more comfortable at coffee time when everyone around me started speaking Dutch rather than the English used for science. I could schedule squash games with other players at the local club. I was no longer felt like a tourist, I lived there (in retrospect, I should have played tourist more).
Once I felt I was part of things, I started getting new ideas, could plan out new experiments, and got motivated to get things going. I could 'play' again in the lab and get excited about things. In some ways I am reminded of the section in one of Feynman's books when he went to Cornell after the Manhattan Project and felt really burned out until he saw a spinning plate in the cafeteria and started wondering about the mechanics of it even though it wasn't 'heavy duty' physics, just play. That reignited his motivation, much like mine was.
Now, none of what I did is currently possible for you because of Covid (although perhaps there is finally light at the end of the tunnel in Europe). Get help, get outside, get to meeting people at work and outside of work. Find a question to play with, with no deadlines or expectations.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The problems of lack of motivation and difficulty getting started on a massive task aren't confined to those doing postdoc.
Here are some general tips:
### Set a tiny goal
In *Atomic Habits*, author <NAME> argues that if you aren't a runner, but you want to be, you should start with extremely small goals. Not 1km, not even 500meters, but *just putting your shoes on and tying the laces*!. The next day, try to do that again, or even go further and walk out the door. By slowly forming a habit, however small you start, you can build on it until it's at the extremely productive level you desire.
### Identify the critical tasks
We can sometimes be unmotivated to take on tasks that feel impossible. Break the massive task into tiny ones, throw out (or at least set aside for now) the non-essential ones.
### Take pause to think about why your task matters
If you're dreading a large task, take the pressure off, and try to find a way to get excited about it before you start working on it. That might be through things as simple as researching its history, finding people who work on the same problem who you admire, thinking about how it will benefit you, or understanding what makes it important (to someone, even if it doesn't feel important to you right now).
### Change environments
Take your laptop to a cafe or park table and work from there for 2 hours. Go for a walk and talk your idea out aloud on a video recording. Changing environments has massive effects on our psyches, and walking has been shown to improve creativity!
### Survey the entire task/problem
Ask yourself: *if I only had 2 hours to do this, how would I go about it?*. Then set yourself the challenge to do it in that crazy timeframe (even if it's 2 months' work). You'll inevitably fail, but just getting ideas (however nascent) on paper can really help. You can delete whatever you produce (whether it be a written document, code, whatever) shortly after completing the exercise. I have done this exercise alone and with colleagues and have been very surprised how much we learned in such a short time. You'll also be indirectly surveying the problem, necessarily at a high-level (since you simply don't have time bogged down by details).
### Get physical exercise
You'll be healthier and happier, and able to think more clearly. Of exercise, [<NAME>](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoEezZD71sc&t=320s) (at 5m20s) says:
>
> Play a sport. Do yoga, pump iron, and run, whatever but take care of your body, you’re going to need it.
>
>
>
And [<NAME>](https://blog.samaltman.com/the-days-are-long-but-the-decades-are-short) gives similar advice:
>
> Exercise. Eat well. Sleep. Get out into nature with some regularity.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Since I had the exact same experience with my first postdoc, I would write a few thoughts.
First, I don't believe it's just burnout. The motivation, for most normal people, is external. If your environment motivates you, you do things, if it doesn't, you don't.
The problem is that with the pandemic your environment is gone. You do have to have your regular meetings with someone, you have to have your busy schedule, prepare for conferences and so on. Your boss isn't giving you homework. Neither are your colleagues. Setup regular meetings with them and start designing new projects and promising (realistic) things and set deadlines for completing tasks.
Also, working from home isn't easy. If you don't remove all distractions, there is a high chance you won't work efficiently. If you can't, you need to work from somewhere else.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/09
| 661
| 2,852
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the scope of undergraduate college courses, is there any known precedent of being able to drop students from the course due to excessive absences without reason, lack of any real contribution, or little to no performance?
For example, something like:
>
> Notice: given your grade of 35% you are at risk of being dropped from the course, you have 2 weeks to make a passing grade.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Your example simply won't work in many US institutions. There are too many ramifications for the student (e.g., failure to reach full time student status, tuition dollars already paid,...)
The time to address this is before students enroll, by being very specific about prereq work. The catch-all would be "instructor permission required" as a prerequisite.
For the example you describe, the correct course of action is to let the student know they're at risk of failing the course... period. This lets the student determine if there is a mechanism to safely dropping the course. If the student doesn't drop, and does not merit a passing grade, at the end of the semester, you simply issue a failing grade.
As an aside, if you're providing adequate feedback as the course progresses, the student should be aware that they're at risk of failing without such a notice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not unusual for students to be required to attend class during the first week and to be administratively dropped if they don't but I think you're talking about something less clear cut than that.
In my experience, I've taught for schools with the following policies that I think address what you're asking:
* Students who are inactive for two weeks are administratively dropped regardless of their grade.
* Students who are inactive and can no longer numerically pass the class are dropped.
* Students who have a grade below passing at a fixed point in introductory math and English classes are dropped.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Most often this is done via prerequisites being enforced. Generally, in such a course you will need to have received at least a "C" in the prerequisite classes or you will not be allowed to register for such a course or you will be de-registered before the term start (in the case where you enroll in the next course in a sequence in consecutive semesters).
Generally it would be unethical for a professor at a university to outright drop you from a course. However, you can ask them advice based on your background and they can give feedback as to whether their course might be appropriate given your background. In institutions like mine where classes can be as big as 200+ students it is almost a given that at least 1 student will fail the class, so professors and instructors generally are not as worried about this.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/09
| 2,310
| 9,738
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently enrolled in a Master's program in electrical engineering at a public research university in the midwestern United States. I am currently focusing on power distribution and transmission, as it seems like there are only a small number of well-defined channels between such things and militarism (compared to, say, controls engineering).
Unexpectedly, I was approached about a PhD opportunity by a mechanical engineering professor, and will be discussing the matter with him further.
However, I am not really sure how to make known the sorts of projects and actors I will not work with. It is only fair to him that I be upfront about these things, but for a variety of reasons I am not really sure how to articulate my boundaries (a pre-condition for even considering his offer).
In my mind, it would be quite reasonable to tell someone "I would not like to be involved in any project directly benefiting Defense, Aerospace, Surveillance, Autonomous Vehicles; those kinds of things" (adding "that stuff makes me uncomfortable", if necessary; I have no desire to discuss the matter or proselytize). This is somewhat euphemistic in that I try to avoid explicit "-isms", but paints a pretty clear picture of behavior I will not support, when presented together.
That being said:
* It's a pretty plainly political declaration, even if I try to be somewhat euphemistic and non-confrontational about it. Such things have a chance of offending the other party, but I don't think there's a real way to mitigate this.
* I am worried about even *mentioning* these things, particularly over email, with foreign-born professors--especially Middle Eastern or Chinese professors (see, for example, [this NYT article](https://archive.is/qbP3p) on the "hunt"(!) for Chinese spies from Nov 2021. And it is not exactly a secret that various sectors of the US state keep close tabs on Middle Eastern groups/individuals).
This latter point is of particular importance. There are a significant number of Middle Eastern and Chinese professors in the department. There's also plainly a well-exercised apparatus for surveilling and harassing ambiguously-defined "national enemies". So this is an essential consideration, since there are certainly people who will find my position to be radical. Consequently, it would be quite irresponsible for me to say such things if there is even a nonzero chance they would cause anyone else to receive undue attention.
---
My concern applies more broadly than this particular PhD offer; there are a small number of other situations in which this information about myself is relevant: looking for research to contribute to, or trying to learn about employment prospects. It would also be untrue to say that I am *only* interested in electrical power, because I would be happy to contribute to any number of productive projects.
It's conceivable that the conditions in the US simply aren't right at the moment for such things to be mentioned in these settings, and that my best course of action may just be to keep my nose down and focus solely on the electrical power industry. But after being approached specifically for my math background as a potentially-ideal PhD candidate for this professor's needs, I am tempted to see whether my horizon can be at all broadened.<issue_comment>username_1: While it would limit your choice of advisors, it is good that you express these things at the start. You will find a lot of support for your position in academia generally, though some will certainly disagree with you. If you express an opinion and get pushback, just keep looking for a different advisor or one who will, at least, still support you in spite of differences.
And there is no reason that people should extrapolate from what you say about the nature of a *project* to an interpretation that you disapprove of any individual professor, especially for racial or ethnic reasons. If they do, it is on them, and is unreasonable. You can't prevent people from being offended, but that is due to their own prejudices, not yours.
I once had a friend (lost track of him) who was involved with national defense projects in the US. He had similar concerns as yourself. But his position in such projects was to be a member of the Red Team, whose function was to show the flaws in the proposals put forth by the true believers. Over a number of years he was proven right in that the proposals he attacked (as part of the project) were indeed infeasible. I don't necessarily recommend this, however, since he was still "contributing" to those projects.
I'd guess there are countries in which holding such views would be problematic, but I don't see the US as one of them.
An alternative, of course, is to mention projects that you *would* want to work on, rather than those you don't. That might avoid the issue in the short term while you get a degree and can be more readily public about views you think might be unpopular. Tenure is good for that, of course.
And, be aware that lots of things in science, technology, and engineering that were done with the best of intentions have been subverted to evil purpose. For example, lot of advances in *big data* have been used by large social media companies such as **redacted** and **redacted** to build dossiers on much of the public.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you don't want to do military-related research, just say "I don't want to do military-related research." The basic reason will be obvious to anyone, and there are probably plenty of academics who feel the same way.
If you think that even saying that phrase to a foreign-born professor will cause them some problem, I think you are probably worrying too much.
>
> "I would not like to be involved in any project directly benefiting Defense, Aerospace, Surveillance, Autonomous Vehicles; those kinds of things"
>
>
>
This is too long and confusing. Aerospace and autonomous vehicles research can be completely non-military.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I'd suggest: "I would prefer to work on projects that help people. I think technological interdependence is a better way to build international partnerships than deterrence."
It sounds to me like your concerns might be:
* Warfare is bad.
* You do not want to form relationships that the US government might disapprove of; perhaps you'd like to work for that government later.
* You do not want to be perceived as racist/xenophobic for not helping Asians with military projects.
My suggestion avoids all these issues by emphasizing your goals.
I've not worked on military or intelligence projects, but my experience is that those opportunities are fairly easy to spot and, if desired, avoid. While the exact nature of the project is hidden, the entity funding it is not. If it's got an NNSA logo on it, it's nuclear weapons research.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: My very short suggestion: think about pursuing your PhD degree based on a "private"[1] company fundings, or in a foreign country where active aggressive militarism is not so strongly embedded in the country ruling elite modus-operandi.
Avoid Russia, China, US, Saudi Arabia.
Think about Iceland, Denmark, Taiwan, Switzerland, since you are looking into power distribution and trasmission, these are countries that are trying to play a role in the green energy production.
Then you can go back to the US and apply for grants and funding opportunities that are in line with your ethics.
[1] private, but I would rather aim at big public utilities that have a well delimited scope, there is always the risk of a private company being eaten up by one of the big defense conglomerate ...
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: If you have the freedom to choose the mode of conversation, let it be verbal. This would reduce the chances of your statements being misrepresented/used against you, especially at a later stage.
It would also be nice to seek permission to express your (non) preference of topic before you actually state it. Doing so is both safe and courteous; you've allowed the professor the opportunity to deny it. If it's permitted, I would suggest being direct about the militarism aspect rather than couching it within sub-fields (the ones you mentioned are non-exclusive, and there could be non-military work within them).
There is a finite chance that your preference would be considered naive; if probed, you should have a reasonably sound argument. I would suggest thinking along the lines of (a) whether non-military work that could be misused to be exploitative is more acceptable than any military work, and, (b) if you do obtain ground breaking results and realise their potential military use, how willing would you be to give up on them?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Your stance is not particularly radical. Academics often have preferences for the types of work they want to do, and in some cases this also consists of an aversion to particular types of projects. It is perfectly fine for you to tell people that you don't want to work on military projects (or other related projects). It is unlikely that you would need to explain your stance, but even if you did, it ought to be simple to set out your aversion to those projects without being seen as a political "radical".
As to your concern that your stance could lead to surveillance, etc., using mechanisms designed for dealing with spies, I would think it would be the opposite --- an actual spy would *want to be put on as many secret military projects as possible*. There is nothing suspicious or unusual about an academic deciding that military projects are not the type of thing they want to work on.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/09
| 3,325
| 13,852
|
<issue_start>username_0: Say I plan to share an idea with a professor that has the potential to inspire a biotech startup. **What forward-looking steps can I, as an undergraduate, take beforehand to ensure the professor won't poach the idea and pretend I never spoke with them?** Assume that the quality of the idea merits this much caution.
I'm frustrated by the fact that I hold seemingly zero leverage in this situation. The only way I can bring my idea into fruition is with a professor's resources. Can anyone give me ideas on how to properly safeguard my idea instead of praying my professor won't screw me over?
Would any of the following help: emailing my ideas to myself before the conversation, talking to my university's entrepreneurial/patent office (our ombudsperson department is somewhat lacking), sharing my ideas with other professors...
(The professor in question has an entrepreneurial flair and successfully founded + sold a few drug companies in the past. While most people say this professor is great, a small minority have also said that they have a bad side. Not sure who to believe.)<issue_comment>username_1: Answer is, you don't. I am sorry to burst your bubble, but ideas themselves aren't worth anything. Not even a broken 0.01$ coin. It is the successful execution of those ideas that is actually valuable.
Thinking that you, as an undergraduate, have come with some flawless million-dollar-idea that an experienced academic -- a professor, no more no less -- is potentially going to "steal", is quite naïve to be honest. It sounds like a Dunning-Kruger effect talking. Even the best ideas aren't flawless and you need other people to take part in the process of development to average out all the subjective biases and you need their help in pointing out the flaws that you yourself cannot see. Let's take the invention of an integrated circuit as an example: it was invented and developed by hundreds of different people who contributed in various areas over a long period. It is not like it was invented by some isolated dude in the basement who just happened to go from 0 to 100% progress himself and then graced the whole world with his miraculous result. Just go talk with the professor, present your idea, listen to criticism, and enjoy your cooperation.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a very real and important threat. The way my PhD supervisor taught me to guard against it is to always withhold an important piece of information that is required in completing it independently. Don't give people your working or your Mathematica notebooks etc. Always consciously leave a few things out that are required to actually realise the project. Hope this helps
EDIT: our group leader always said to be careful who you tell, if you tell a postdoc from MIT your interesting idea it will take you 3 years as a new student but they can do it in a few months
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: As with other considerations re plagiarism, you establish precedence. Set up some kind of paper trail with verifiable time stamps to show that you came up with the idea first, before you talked to the professor. You could for example write your idea on a piece of paper in grand detail, and bring it to a lawyer or justice of the peace and get them to certify it. It probably won't be free, of course, but we are assuming the quality of the idea merits this much caution.
Then if the professor steals your idea, you file a plagiarism complaint with their department using your paper trail as evidence.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The current answers all suggest either completely dismissing any caution, or else a very high level of mistrust. I’d suggest instead a middle ground: **You probably don’t need to worry, and you shouldn’t let this concern get in the way of your discussions with the professor; but there are some easy low-cost precautions that you can take to set your mind at rest.**
For the first side: Theft of ideas is rare (in all the fields I know), but it does sometimes happen. Similarly, undergraduates coming up with ideas remarkable enough to be worth stealing by experts is unusual, but not unheard-of. (Not to suggest your idea is worthless; the point is that most experts’ limiting factor is not ideas but the time/resources to develop them, and it’s unlikely that your idea is *better than all the others* the expert has to work on right now.) So overall I think [Brunon’s answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182193/1277) is right that you don’t need to worry much — but it’s not unnatural to have a bit of nagging worry about this, and want to set up a safety-net.
On the other hand, such theft is unlikely enough that I wouldn’t advise anything that’d slow your development of the ideas, either by requiring a lot of extra work, or by inhibiting fruitful mentoring and collaboration. *Many* more good ideas get lost from demotivation or lack of support than from theft! (In particular, I think the suggestions in [username_2’s](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182194/1277) and [username_3’s](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182202/1277) answers sound counterproductive to me.)
But one simple thing that gives a bit of protection, at low-cost: **Describe your idea+plans casually to a few friends/fellow-students, including in writing (eg by email).** This might not be enough to hold up priority in a court of law — but a lawsuit situation is *vanishingly* rare. The still-rare but slightly more likely scenario is that if anyone later seems to be “stealing” the idea, you can approach them, say “I brought this idea to you; X, Y, and Z can back me up.”, and ask to be included as a collaborator. You can present it with an assumption of good faith, that they’re under-appreciating your contribution not deliberately erasing it — whether this is true or not, it gives them a face-saving way to acknowledge your contribution and bring you back on board, which is the best-case scenario for everyone.
To reiterate, I think that sort of situation is *rare* — but discussing your idea with multiple people doesn’t hurt at all anyway, gives a safety net for the rare chance of theft, and (most importantly) may help set your mind at rest and let you have more fruitful, less inhibited discussions with the professor.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: If you have an idea **worth stealing**, it should also be **worth publishing**. Go ahead and write an article about it, then submit it to a couple of journals for review. Such submissions, even rejected ones, will have a much higher value for establishing precedence than e-mails sent to yourself or conversations with colleagues.
If you get your article published (which is not so hard if you consider second-rank journals), it will clearly establish your precedence as the author of the idea.
If your idea is something extremely generic and vague, e.g. "build a quantum computer to mine bitcoin" without any implementation details, you won't be able to publish it (except in a predatory journal), however, nobody can "steal" it either because there's literally nothing to steal.
Note that publishing your idea makes it impossible to patent, which means a publication will prevent your supervisor from turning the idea into a startup behind your back, but it will also prevent you from doing so yourself. If you want to exploit the idea commercially, you need to patent it **before** publishing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: ''The only way I can bring my idea into fruition is with a professor's resources.''
It sounds like you have answered your own question. You are not able to carry out the idea without the professor, so sounds like you don't have much of a choice in the matter. Just having ''raw ideas'' is maybe not as important as you think it is right now. You'll see as you progress further in your career that these raw ideas generally have to be ''minted'' and turned into something tangible ie. you have to get some actual new results or do something new with the idea.
It sounds to me like you need this professor's assistance to get this idea minted, so I'm not sure what choice you have in the matter.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I am very new to this and have never done this myself, but you can save your idea in a document and then **store a hash value of that document on a blockchain**, e.g. Ethereum. That transaction will have a time-stamp, and in addition only you will be able to provide the document that produces the stored hash, which should suffice to prove you are the owner of the idea.
You can try to start with [this post](https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/7884/how-can-i-store-data-in-ethereum-blockchain) on the Ethereum StackExchange site, or find your own way to how and on which blockchain to do that.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: Before you speak to your professor sit down using, e.g. Google Scholar, and look deep and wide into the available literature. You might need some time to get used to the particular language in your field. After that review it is guaranteed that your idea is now on a more solid foundation.
If in this research you did not discover that someone else described something very similar to your idea or concept then play your own devil's advocate: "Why is this idea not working out?"
If you then conclude that your idea has a somewhat unique touch and potential go to your professors (plural!) and ask them why this might not work out. You do not have to specify every little detail here, a rough sketch is fine.
Now you have a lot of input to refine your idea. At this point you have to ask yourself about how to realize your much refined concept. This could be a patent, a publication or a biotech startup. Each have their benefits and disadvantages, now you have not yet really revealed your idea to the world and all the paths are open for you.
The only sad choice would be to let it sit in a drawer and collect dust because you think someone else will steal it.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: As others have pointed out, ideas are common and generally worthless without execution — that’s where the value is. So, with that in mind, I’d like to present some thoughts that may help you be comfortable sharing your idea and understand what some of risks and benefits may be:
1. Fear around having an idea stolen is typically based on a fear of *losing an opportunity* to realize some large, but *fundamentally abstract*, future benefit. Most people think of this benefit in terms of money. But the reality is if point A is the idea, point B is almost certainly not money — rather, it’s probably the conversation that in you’re case you have anxiety around.
2. Some people are exploitative in nature, but it’s generally rare and in business almost always opportunistic. For example, think about the well-known saga of <NAME>, the Winklevoss twins, and the founding of Facebook. The twins were exploited, but the only reason that was possible is because Zuckerberg had two things, at least one of which they lacked: *time* and *expertise*. Sure, your professor has the expertise, but there’s a very good chance he doesn’t have the time to launch a new venture. Time to give you advice? That’s a much more probable. And, from a purely cynical business perspective, providing advice will still keep him in a position to extricate value from any successful company that results — not that that’s necessarily a bad thing! Maybe he’ll want to be a scientific advisor, on the board, or a chief scientific officer (though that last one’s a much bigger commitment!)
3. As a general principle, especially as an undergrad (I’m assuming you’re in your late teens or early 20s), I’d recommend having faith in the process. When you’re young, the thing you often lack and the greatest value you can extricate from something like this is probably *experience*. Experience working closely on an idea with faculty, experience selling an idea, experience developing a vision, experience trying to launch a company, experience developing a novel technology. Some of these things may directly result in a great financial benefit in the future, but what’s certain is that no matter what happens after you share your idea, it will almost undoubtedly be a learning experience. And you’ll almost certainly have another brilliant idea after it. And when that happens, you’ll have more experience to leverage — and possibly relationships (e.g. with investors) and other contacts too.
4. Finally, you can test the waters before sharing it fully. For example, ask the professor: “Hypothetically, if a student came to you with an idea for a technology/business you found compelling, would you have the bandwidth to pursue it? What would you see your role as? Have you had it happen before? Was it successful?” Those types of conversations will likely help you gauge whether this professor is the right person to share it with.
One final (and very important!) point: **Talk to the tech transfer office at your university before sharing your idea.** It may be that once you bring the professor in on it (and you can ask them this too) that the university now owns the IP because he’s an employee of the university. You may also be subject to an IP agreement as a student, too. Here are a few common reasons IP ends up being owned by the university. 1. It’s something the professor worked on/provided guidance for in an official capacity, 2. University resources were used to develop it (e.g. lab equipment or a university owned laptop), or 3. You signed an IP agreement when you joined the university that gave them rights to any intellectual property you develop as a student. Not all universities are so onerous with their IP, but some are. Be mindful of that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/10
| 386
| 1,782
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted a paper to a conference, but the reviews are not good and the rebuttal is not going well either. So the paper will most likely not be accepted later on.
The "intend to submit"/register deadline for another conference will be in a short time, which requires a title and abstract that can be changed later on.
The final decision on my paper from the first conference is a few days before the final submission of the second conference.
Is it unethical to register to the second conference and show my intend to submit, while the first conference has not made their final decision on my paper yet?
I could still cancel my submission intention on the second conference in case the first conference accepts my paper.<issue_comment>username_1: For the moment, register for the other conference with slightly different title and abstract. Change it or keep the same later on.
When the paper is rejected from the first conference, then revise the paper considering the comments/opinions of the reviewers. Include/exclude things that come to your mind in the mean time. Read the paper again and see if some improvements could be made. Then submit the paper to the second conference.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: "Intend to submit" does not sound like you are promising that you will definitely submit. So in your case, given the timings you mention, I would say it is OK to tell the second conference that you intend to submit, while still waiting for the final decision from the first conference.
But you need to read the rules for both conferences and follow them. If they are unclear or don't mention this scenario, I suppose you could email the organizers, but I would say it is OK to go ahead with the "intend to submit."
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/10
| 1,451
| 6,156
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a grad student with an untenured faculty. Her tenure dossier was discussed last year and I have heard through the grapevine that she may be denied tenure the primary reasons being her lack of productivity (one article published, one in review at the time of ptc meeting in fall now accepted, 2 preprints both currently in review but not at the time of ptc meeting, all in 7 years) and not having graduated a student.
She threw me under the bus with a months notice that I absolutely had to defend by the year end, notwithstanding that my paper isn’t published and I can’t move on without it to any postdoctoral positions. She is now demanding that my paper ‘absolutely has to be accepted’ within 4 months (first round of reviews with major revision decision received in mid December) again for her tenure. This is nearly impossible given my experiments.
I am finding it very hard to find any sympathy for her because of her generally irresponsible behavior toward me since it is extremely unlikely she wasn’t aware of these tenure expectations before, and because she got a year of tenure extension because of the pandemic while I slaved in lab through it regardless.
My questions are:
1. if she is going to be denied tenure is even a last minute paper acceptance going to change the decision? I am concerned if we send out a less than thorough revised paper we will be rejected which will also have very negative consequences for me.
2. is it not considered her responsibility to see her student’s papers through to publication since I have killed myself for it over six and a half years? Does student outcome ever factor in making tenure decisions?<issue_comment>username_1: First, don't believe the grapevine. It may be accurate or not. The decision will be made by the normal faculty rules and I doubt that you would have much impact, especially via a submitted paper that you don't think is ready.
You are in a tough situation. I suggest that you talk to the administration (head, dean) about what your options are. Her tenure decision ideally shouldn't impact your graduation, but only they can say. You might require a "fill in" supervisor to get over the hump and the head/dean might be able to make that happen.
This is one reason that I always suggest students work with tenured faculty for dissertations so that this sort of thing won't occur. Too late for you now, of course, but the university has an obligation to provide you a path.
Ask the head about the effect of a paper and about the effect of a plea. Often, BTW, faculty who fail to obtain tenure get one more year so that they can get other employment. Probably not universal, but common. So, you may wind up OK if you can finish in a year without switching advisors.
I hate to suggest putting a guilt trip on the head, but...
You aren't responsible for the plight of your advisor and shouldn't suffer because of it.
When you discuss things with the head, if you can, make the conversation about your needs, not your advisor's failings as you see them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> if she is going to be denied tenure is even a last minute paper acceptance going to change the decision?
>
>
>
That is exceedingly unlikely. One article in seven years is a huge problem. Only an extraordinary achievement can fix that. Details vary by university and discipline.
>
> Does student outcome ever factor in making tenure decisions?
>
>
>
Yes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many questions in your post, so let me answer just the one that your title is about. I'm going to take your "grapevine" as truth, though as others have pointed out, the grapevine is rarely reliable. With that, let's get to it:
No, getting a single paper published is not going to change anything, especially if it is late in the game.[1] This is particularly true if the department (and at this time of year) the dean have already made their decisions and written their letters that accompany the file as it makes its way upward in the university. I cannot imagine a situation where a department would go back on its decision, retract the letter, and write a new one that states the opposite just because a single paper has been published after the original letter was written. Tenure decisions are generally not made on the basis of a single paper, but based on the entirety of the evidence. In other words, if someone has not been productive over the course of six years, then *that* is the evidence, and a single paper is not going to change the general pattern.
As a consequence, your adviser is clinging to straws believing that that paper is going to make a difference. That may be understandable from a human perspective, but the straw is not going to keep her afloat.
Of course, all of that puts you into an awkward spot. Others are already commenting on that part of your post.
---
[1] The usual caveat applies: Tens or hundreds of thousands of people have over the years gone through the tenure process. Surely there are cases where a single paper, accepted late in the process, made a difference. But just because it has happened does not mean that one should take into account as something that might apply to the current case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I am aware of at least two situations where negative tenure votes were successfully appealed at a high-ranking R1. I shared an office with the lab members in one case and they pushed hard to get all papers that were in process as far along as possible. This did seem to make a difference and the faculty member was granted tenure.
One additional note: the case I am referring to was also one where there was at least one year of stop the clock granted. (I believe there was part of the appeal related to this- some of the negative voters were not accounting for this.) A stop the clock does not imply that no work should have been happening. (You seem to think it was unfair that you worked during this times) It implies that the work is not at a full level and a 7 year time frame should be treated as a 6-year one for judging productivity.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/10
| 1,638
| 7,007
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm hoping you can help. My background is that I became a parent at an early age, and chose at the time to prioritized raising and feeding my child over going to college. Doing both really wasn't an option. I've done well, and I've been doing community college courses part-time since my youngest is pretty independent and is finishing high school. I work full-time, standard US office hours.
I have a professor who's causing me a bit of tension. I have to be highly organized with my time, for obvious reasons. This very knowledgeable gentleman has poor time management skills, and I think it's far less of an issue for my young classmates who don't have the same level of other responsibilities in life. He's an adjunct. He rambles for long periods of time, takes water breaks (gets up, leaves, and comes back) while on camera, and actually spends about half the class time preparing the materials he wants to present to us. Early on, I spent three days trying to get an add-code to register because he doesn't read his email -- finding his home phone number via a Google search was the only way to reach him.
He has shown up on camera wrapped in a blanket (We live in sunny southern California, not Iceland!), or wearing clothing that he'd probably be counseled about if he showed up wearing it on campus. He's late starting class (online) about 75% of the time, across two classes that I have with him four mornings a week.
The nature of the homework is very detailed (it's a music theory class). I'm finding that the written instructions don't convey the outcome he's expecting (some other instructor in the department created the worksheets). I also find that I'm the only one who's asking for such clarification. With the haphazard way he communicates expectations, it gives us the least amount of time before it's due (usually three days), and it's a lot of work!
This class got moved online very suddenly at the start of the semester, and I don't see anything in our learning management system where he offers "office hours". He's mentioned using two virtual tutors that are available to us, but this approach feels really counterintuitive to me, and is obviously more time consuming. The lack of in-person opportunities makes the communication really challenging.
Do you have any tips for managing around such a messy situation?<issue_comment>username_1: This sounds like a complaint to the head would be appropriate. And dropping the course at this time if that is feasible and the head can't find a solution.
Given the COVID disruption you probably need to expect some issues to arise, but this seems like an ill-prepared and sloppy instructor. And, it is just possible that an unprepared instructor was the last gasp option of the department faced with illness or resignation or ...
Some people can handle such situations studying on their own, but that isn't, and shouldn't be the expectation.
Of course, you need to play this off against how important it is to take this course at this time and what blowback might occur from a complaint, but it seems warranted.
And, if you can manage it, a complaint from a group of students, rather than an individual is more likely to be taken seriously.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, I'm very glad you prioritised feeding your child; that is a good priority to have. ; )
As to dealing with your problem, I think this is a case where student feedback needs to occur. All/most of the problems you list are things that reflect bad teaching practice and detract substantially from course quality. In particular, the lack of punctuality and proper preparation for classes sounds like it is wasting a lot of time. Universities typically have a mechanism for formal student feedback on courses at the end of each course, but in addition to this, students can give feedback on course quality or problems at any time during their courses. You can give named feedback directly to your lecturer if you wish (e.g., via email) or you can give anonymous feedback by putting a note in their office pigeon-hole. (Note that in your present circumstance the anonymity might fail; your lecturer might be able to guess who the feedback is from.) In extreme cases where you feel it is warranted, you can also give feedback directly to the university (e.g., to the undergraduate coordinator, Head of School, etc.). This sounds to me like a situation where the problems are bad enough to warrant that.
One thing to bear in mind in present circumstances is that universities are giving some latitude to lecturers due to the difficulties of transferring courses online due to COVID-19. Expectations may be dropping a little bit, but the problems you have raised are still well below the expected standard of teaching even in a difficult circumstance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Excellent job prioritizing; I dare say that the "real-life experience" you got has helped you significantly, and you should be commended for that. It's my guess that you are one of the students who is a joy to teach.
All of your concerns are valid. My first suggestion is if you can drop the course, do it, and do it now. Take whatever penalty (if there is one) that comes with it - dropping this will be better for you in the long run.
If dropping the course isn't an option, then you have a decision to make. If the professor is a decent person (your call), then you could try to make an appointment with them. This would normally be during their office hours, but from what it sounds like, they've given up on that. Therefore, I would counsel you to take option B: contact the department chair. If you are periodically on campus, make an appointment to meet with him/her; in-person meetings are always better for things like this. If you are never on campus (for whatever reason) or the chair isn't, then a clear, polite, and succinct email is 100% appropriate. Make sure you keep a copy of the email (don't copy yourself though; just make sure you either have a copy in your "sent" mailbox or you printed a copy or something).
Hope and pray that the chair does something. Remember, however, that hope and prayer do not constitute a strategy. Be prepared to go to the dean if need be (which is why you always, ALWAYS keep copies of ALL emails).
Yes, COVID. Yes, circumstances. That doesn't mean that you get to show up in boxer shorts (or whatever) - you still have to do your job well like a professional. There are (or at least there should be) limits to the "latitude" people are given. I'm 100% sure they wouldn't appreciate it if the situation were reversed.
Best of luck to you. I used to tell my students that they should remember and use the good things from every teacher they have, implementing them however they can. Similarly, they should also remember all of the bad examples they saw and make sure they don't repeat any of those. Here's an excellent "negative example" for you to keep in your hip pocket.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/10
| 1,190
| 5,023
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am interviewing for a faculty position at R1 university. I get to the process of scheduling on-site visit but all of the sudden, the department told me they canceled the position I am interviewing for. How common is this (canceling a faculty position during an interview)? Or is it just a "polite" way for turning me down instead of saying that they decided not to interview me?<issue_comment>username_1: The most polite thing to do when an open position is no longer open is to inform any candidates for that position immediately, such that they no longer exert effort towards it. Sounds like that's what happened to you.
I can't say how *common* this sort of thing is, but it could be caused by all sorts of factors outside of your influence and outside the influence of the hiring committee: it could be that funds for the position no longer exist, it could be that the position was created as part of a venture that is no longer happening (such as a new course/set of courses; a new research program; a specific industry collaboration), it could be part of a broader freeze on hiring not associated with the specific position, it could be that steps to open the position were not correctly followed according to some internal procedures.
Overall, it's likely better for everyone that this happened no later than it did.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Or is it just a "polite" way for turning me down instead of saying that they decided not to interview me?
>
>
>
Assume that people say what they mean, and that they mean what they say. You were told that the position no longer exists and that they are canceling the interviews. There is no reason to assume that the interview was canceled for any other reason—assume good faith, and move on.
>
> How common is this (canceling a faculty position during an interview)?
>
>
>
That is a very hard question to answer, and I cannot (in 10 minutes of Googling) find any scholarly work on the subject (but I'm a mathematician, not an economist or sociologist or whoever studies these kinds of things, so my Google-fu is weak). However, there are *a lot* of reasons why a position might be canceled anywhere along the way:
1. The funding might vanish (e.g. the position is funded through an outside grant which dries up; the budget might have been tanked by COVID; and so on).
2. The position might *change* (e.g. a department might start off looking for a "faculty of instruction", then determine that they really need to be hiring research faculty; the requirements of the funding grant might change).
3. The position might be filled (e.g. it sometimes happens that a position will be advertised internally first, then advertised more broadly; an internal candidate might rise to the top *after* the search for an outside candidate gets going).
4. The bureaucracy might fail (e.g. the hiring department is gung-ho, but the relevant division or college fails to sign-off on the position, but paperwork gets lost in the shuffle).
5. Not enough candidates agree to an interview (e.g. an institution might schedule interview for three candidates, then have two of those candidates decline—in this case, the hiring committee might choose to cancel the search).
6. And so on...
A faculty search is a long and complicated process. There are a lot of places where things can go "wrong", and a search might fail at any step in the process for any one of a huge number of reasons. I don't know how *common* an occurrence this is, but it *definitely* happens.
Again, your best bet is to assume good faith, operate with the understanding that the search was canceled for some reason having nothing to do with you, and move on.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In my (limited) experience, nobody I know would feel the need to be dishonest about why a faculty search is ended. If the search is cancelled then they'd tell the candidates that. If the search is ended because the position is filled, then they'd tell the candidates that. If you have a burning desire to know, you can always ask why the search was ended.
Everybody in the process understands how messy the academic matchmaking process is. Everyone on the market has their own hidden motivations and preferences, and every search is run by a committee of people who have their own hidden motivations and preferences. Then you throw in time pressures, "gettability," and the normal unpredictability of life. That's just the system we have. The result of any search is at best only a partial reflection on the candidates- just as important is just being in the right place at the right time.
Being dishonest about a search would be a fool's errand anyway. Academic hiring decisions are inherently public knowledge, because if you end up hiring someone then they're pretty quickly going to show up on the school's faculty list. Being caught in a lie would look worse for the department than whatever they'd hope to gain by being misleading.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/10
| 248
| 1,115
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm submitting to a conference, and in the part where you're supposed to indicate conflict of interest, they indicate that same affiliation is a conflict of interest.
So I've declared affiliation CoI for those program committee members with the same affiliation as me.
My question is: will this preclude them from reviewing my submission?<issue_comment>username_1: It is unlikely that you would be precluded in any way. More likely is that some committee members might have to recuse from any decisions if the conflict is deemed serious. Not all "same affiliation" relationships are conflicts, of course.
But it is a committee management issue, not a sorting one.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it will almost certainly preclude them from being involved in any way with handling your submission. That is the whole point of flagging someone as having a conflict of interest, so if they were not precluded you would not be asked to indicate those committee members.
Source: personal experience, including as recent program committee co-chair of a large conference.
Upvotes: 4
|
2022/02/10
| 2,827
| 11,558
|
<issue_start>username_0: This has happened a few times. The university is an average, good university in UK. One professor said lately "I'm so sick of this f\*\*\*\*\*\* pandemic." Another time another lecturer said "When you find yourself in a situation when you feel like: how do I solve this f\*\*\*\*\*\* problem? You should just relax and...". These are verbatim quotes. In each case it had a humorous tone to it and the students laughed. Is this acceptable behaviour? Because I was confused.
I find it very inappropriate but that might be because I come from a more conservative country where you'd be embarrassing yourself if you used vulgarities in a situation like this.
There were other examples over the years but I can't remember them exactly. So it's fairly common. Do universities in general allow that?
EDIT:
Thank you for all your input. I just wanted to add that it was never my intention to report anything. I just found it unusual and was curious if this is common.<issue_comment>username_1: You're in a place where swearing, especially when not directed at another person or used as abuse/slur/bullying/etc, just isn't that big of a deal among adults, so I do think this is mostly a cultural difference between you and the professor.
I don't think anything should be done to confront this professor (or report them to administration or anything), as long as the language is not directed at another person, used as a slur, etc, in which case it also doesn't particularly matter if the word itself was profane, as many non-profane words are used in those circumstances. It doesn't seem to me like they've done anything wrong.
It's a bit less than the strictest standards of professionalism to swear, though, and I'd generally recommend against it. I think it's a bit cheap as humor. So I'd answer your title question "no" if you were a professor asking me and were truly uncertain. However, I do think most of us are in some way or another quite \*\*\*\*ing sick of this pandemic, and I can't find fault with anyone who chooses to use sufficiently strong language to express that sentiment.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To answer your question "Do universities in general allow that?": I am not aware of any university in Europe which has rules about the use of swear words in teaching, or any other form of communication, except for general rules about non-discriminatory, harrassement-free etc. language and behavior.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The behaviour you describe sounds rather unprofessional, but will likely be tolerated since most students and staff will not have a problem with it these days. Those who do not approve of such language will, as a result, feel out of place objecting.
My experience of this from studying at three different Russell Group universities in the UK has ranged from small workshops where the organiser asked in advance if anyone 'has any serious objection to swearing' (no-one did) to one of my lecturers apparently telling 'dirty jokes' to an audience of about 300 first-year undergraduates.
They know that they are being unprofessional and would likely stop if someone objected, but then start again the moment that person is out of the room. Most people just don't care though.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: For a university in the UK, this isn't a big deal. The assumption at a university is that you are dealing exclusively with adults, and they are capable of hearing profanity while learning. Professionalism generally entails limiting profanity to a lower level than might be appropriate while at the pub, but it is considered acceptable to use it sparingly. I've dropped an occasional S-bomb or F-bomb while lecturing, just to stress an important point or add a bit of humour. Profanity should not be used as a means of deriding or bullying a person, but it is acceptable for a lecturer to use if for emphasis of important points, so long as they don't go overboard. (Academics have a great deal of freedom and discretion in setting the tone of their own lectures, so even if some go overboard with profanity, this might be considered to be part of their "academic freedom".) This is probably a cultural difference between Western countries and certain more conservative countries; you'll get used to it. I'm in Australia, where profanity in professional settings is probably even more common than in the UK, and certain conversations in professional settings are indistinguishable from banter at the pub.
In relation to this issue, you might also be interested to note that we've had some questions on this site about whether or not lecturers should use racial slurs when quoting texts (or censor these slurs), either in scholarly research or while lecturing (see e.g., [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/169946/) and [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/118428/)). Even in this case there is a fairly large contingent of academics who think it is appropriate to state the racial slurs verbatim in discussion (there is also a fairly large contingent who don't like this). So even when dealing with some pretty nasty racial slurs, there is an expectation that adult students can hear these words in class in an appropriate context and remain composed. (Obviously the distinction here is that your lecturer is adding "fuck" to the conversation organically to emphasise a point, instead of quoting it from a relevant text under discussion; it would not be acceptable to use racial slurs for the same purpose.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: It's not exactly workplace-professional conduct, but it's not unusual, and it's not particularly frowned upon in my experience.
In my own university course, several of my lecturers were quite comfortable with the use of swearing in their conversations.
No more than is normal in day-to-day life, but they didn't filter themselves.
There was a basic assumption that "we're all adults here" and normal adult rules apply.
The general attitude of not coddling children was pretty pervasive in fact, one lecturer went out of his way to tell us that he wasn't required to pass anybody. If someone was here to goof off, or wasn't going to take it seriously, he'd rather they just left.
I think the unfiltered language was a deliberate choice to hammer home that we're not in school anymore.
University is for adults who chose to be there and choose to learn, and if we can't handle things like an adult, we don't belong there.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Interesting question. I myself generally refrain from profanities and use moderated and controlled vocabulary in class to try and maintain a professional environment.
However when teaching comparative computer languages and esoteric languages in particular it becomes difficult. The esoteric language designed by Urban Müller in 1993\* can cause one to pause. Being professional, one just uses the language's name without blinking, but it can shock some of the more delicate students in the room.
So, in some subjects, profane words are part of the subject and are included in the course; but I would not use them for shock effect unless it was needed for pedagogic purposes.
---
\* You can look it up yourself. However my favourite variants are Ook! and Whitespace....
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: This is just British culture for you. Consider it part of your learning experience.
British people are generally polite and patient, sometimes even exceedingly so, but will from time to time emphasise their feelings of frustration through swearing. It really isn't a big deal, typically it is just a way of showing that, under all that veneer of repressed civility, they are, indeed, human, and have their limits.
In a way, it is a form of self-deprecatory humour (something British people love to indulge in). They are aware that using swear words "lowers" them a bit (makes them look less perfect and in control), and **they do it on purpose**, to emphasise their own weakness, as a form of ice-breaking.
It's actually (when used in the way you describe) an attempt at creating a closer bond with their interlocutor, in a "we're all in the same sh\*t together, aren't we?" kind of way.
However, the same word used aggressively against another human being (e.g. "wipe that f\*cking smile off your face!") would be entirely inappropriate in a work context, University or otherwise.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_8: This is an interesting situation and has never happened to me although I have attended hundreds and hundreds of hours of mathematics lectures.
It did happen once that a lecturer swore under his breath once or twice because the software for giving virtual talks was so useless, but it was more of a humorous moment and everyone understood his frustration. In that case, it was more out of frustration, and not for actual deliberate emphasis, which seems unprofessional and which I have not encountered even after attending several hundreds of hours of lectures.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: I think that some of these answers are probably missing some subtleties. The first thing to realize, is that when it comes to things like this, there isn't really a single homogenous "British Culture", and attitudes to swearing will differ from local to local, between social classes, backgrounds, political groupings etc. It can be difficult for even a British person to work out the correct acceptable language is in any given situation.
The second thing is that not all swear words are equal. This is fairly obvious, but what is less obvious is that the relative offensiveness of a given word varies from country to country, and sometimes between groups within a country. So s\*\*t is generally regarded as mild, f\*\*k is stronger, and will shock some, but not that many, where as c\*\*t is generally reserved for situations where offense is intended. Unless you are in Scotland, when c\*\*t is far more acceptable.
In the UK, blasphemy is not really even regarded as swearing. Words that refer to bodily functions are somewhere in-between, and then words that refer to a persons innate characteristics are the worst. If a lecturer is using the N word, or any other racist epithet, words that refer dismissively to homosexuals, words that refer to phyiscally or mentally disabled people etc, then I probably would complain, unless they themselves possessed that characteristic (A gay person is allowed to use the term p\*\*f, but others aren't).
All this makes for a very complex situation. Our jobs as educators is to give people the best chance of learning. Sometimes emphasis and humor can help with this, but it can just as easily impede it. So while I swear frequently in the pub, I generally avoid swearing in a lecture or other formal didactic instruction situation. However, one-on-one or in small groups where I am able to assess how people might respond, I will tailor my speech to what I think the other person believes to be appropriate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Unlike many swear words, the F-word is sexual. A case could be made for saying that its use constitutes sexual harassment. The primary meaning of the F-word is sexual, so blurting it out in a lecture hall -- which presumably contains a handful of young women -- is not appropriate. If any of them feel uncomfortable, they could make the prof's life pretty miserable: "I really can't attend class where the professor is continually talking about sex!!"
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/02/11
| 603
| 2,367
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a direct quote in my academic work that is from another academic work. It's something like
>
> "We can analyze the execution time as follows."
>
>
>
I had a reviewer say that, since it's now in my work, I shouldn't use "We". What should I use instead? "They"?<issue_comment>username_1: Try something like this: if the authors of the direct quote are <NAME>, then
>
> [Smith and Jones] analyze the execution time as follows.
>
>
>
The square brackets indicate you have changed the direct quote.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You should not change a direct quote. How about changing it into the following?
>
> XYZ et al. analyzed the execution time as follows.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a bit of a frame challenge. Why are you using a direct quote for this? Direct quotes are typically used very sparingly in academic writing, essentially only appearing when the exact wording being used is relevant to what you are trying to say. In STEM fields (where the use of the academic "we" is typically common) this is very rarely the case. I would even posit that pretty much any sentence that contains the academic "we" is going to be a poor candidate for a direct quote.
So, as a first step reconsider if you really need a direct quote here at all, otherwise switch to an indirect description of the claim you are referencing (as in username_2's answer). If after reconsidering, you are still convinced you need a direct quote, then the solution using square brackets suggested by username_1 is standard journalistic practice.
However, do note that this change does not quite cover the full meaning of the academic "we", which typically is closer to "the author and the reader". In cases where the academic we leans more to this usage it might be better to replace it by [One].
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I believe your reviewer wants you to drop the quote from someone else and say it yourself.
This is the perfect place for the passive voice in academic writing:
>
> Before: *"We can analyze the execution time as follows."*
>
>
> After: *The execution time can be analyzed as follows.*
>
>
>
Further reading: [Walden University — Scholarly Voice: Active and Passive Voice](https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/scholarlyvoice/activepassive)
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/11
| 792
| 3,263
|
<issue_start>username_0: My company is currently struggling and I might get fired because of it (throught no fault of mine). I did my Ph.D. in this company a few years ago, which they financed (in part), and during which I produced unpublished research work. This work is mostly unfinished, but I still did write up some notes at the time, even though they are not as well-written as an actual published article. They mostly consist in more or less well organised thoughts, small theorems, ideas etc ... I did try to give them enough of a structure so that they might be read by someone other than me.
Now that the company has financial problems, my boss, who was my adviser at the time of my Ph.D., suggests I upload all of my work to platforms like researchgate or arxiv, including preprints of published work, and any unpublished work as well. There is no copyright problem in doing so. His motivation is that he thinks this will look better on my CV.
My question is the following: Are arxiv / researchgate really the right place for this kind of work? Should I upload my unfinished work to those platforms?
Thanks for sharing any kind of thoughts / input / relevant personal experience.<issue_comment>username_1: Try something like this: if the authors of the direct quote are <NAME> Jones, then
>
> [Smith and Jones] analyze the execution time as follows.
>
>
>
The square brackets indicate you have changed the direct quote.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You should not change a direct quote. How about changing it into the following?
>
> XYZ et al. analyzed the execution time as follows.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a bit of a frame challenge. Why are you using a direct quote for this? Direct quotes are typically used very sparingly in academic writing, essentially only appearing when the exact wording being used is relevant to what you are trying to say. In STEM fields (where the use of the academic "we" is typically common) this is very rarely the case. I would even posit that pretty much any sentence that contains the academic "we" is going to be a poor candidate for a direct quote.
So, as a first step reconsider if you really need a direct quote here at all, otherwise switch to an indirect description of the claim you are referencing (as in username_2's answer). If after reconsidering, you are still convinced you need a direct quote, then the solution using square brackets suggested by username_1 is standard journalistic practice.
However, do note that this change does not quite cover the full meaning of the academic "we", which typically is closer to "the author and the reader". In cases where the academic we leans more to this usage it might be better to replace it by [One].
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I believe your reviewer wants you to drop the quote from someone else and say it yourself.
This is the perfect place for the passive voice in academic writing:
>
> Before: *"We can analyze the execution time as follows."*
>
>
> After: *The execution time can be analyzed as follows.*
>
>
>
Further reading: [Walden University — Scholarly Voice: Active and Passive Voice](https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/scholarlyvoice/activepassive)
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/11
| 1,624
| 6,425
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a phd student in mathematics in US. Basically, I worked hard throughout the first two years because of the qualifying exam. After that, I kind of lost steam when I was supposed to start doing actual research and slacked off for my 3rd year (I was also dealing with anxiety and depression issues at the time). I finally managed to pull myself together after my 4th year and the first semester mostly goes to learning just the introductory literature---I'm in algebraic geometry so the learning curve is deep. I had almost nothing going on in terms of original research. At this point, I have technically a year left before I need to submit my thesis for graduation. My program does not allow extension beyond the 5th year and due to my visa status it is not possible for me to pause my study.
My advisor has always been hands-off to the point where we rarely talks. Last week, when I finally saw him, he told me he has no suitable problem for me at this point given my level of study. Instead, he referred me to a couple papers to read first. I can't even understand the main problem those papers are studying and I feel it may take me years to read them. So I brought up the time constraint to my advisor. His answer is basically that he's not sure what I should do and said it is up to me if I want to try to finish. So it comes down to finishing my phd in a year, or drop out outright. Do you have experience with similar situation? What should I do.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think there is an easy answer to this. I thought US PhDs could drag on forever. I know professors who took 8 years to finish the PhD - one of them is a Nobel Prize winner.
First, you need to check with someone like the graduate adviser or whoever is in charge of the PhD math program, if you could extend you PhD duration. This has to be done first.
If not, you should start thinking of other options. You could cut your losses and get a masters degree. That can be finished in one year. Most universities would allow if you don't already have one from them.
You could also try to transfer your credits to another or to another program at the same university. Having already passed the qualifier will come in handy. I'm not going to say this is a good advise, because you sign up for another 5 years of the same thing, only with a wiser you.
Whatever you do, try not to think of it as a do or die situation. Your mental health will take a big hit if you do and you'll go back to anxiety and depression. Think of it as a setback. Also, I don't know where you're from, if getting back home is trivial, or not. In my case, it was the last thing I wanted, but, in the end, I had to live with it, since my folks never wanted to move to US.
If you end up deciding to quit without a degree don't do it immediately. Better focus your efforts in preparing your next step: getting back to the job market or moving to a different school.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say that it is important to have lots of conversations at this point, not just the one with your advisor. I am not in math, so perhaps this idea doesn’t hold in the same way as in my discipline (economics) but consider that you are trolling for ideas here, so put as many lines in as possible (to use a fishing metaphor).
Talk to every faculty member whose work is tangential to yours. Talk to any PhD students who went to industry… what would they have worked on next from their PhD if they didn’t go that route? Talk to visiting faculty (even if they are visiting via zoom) about where the interesting problems are. Heck, talk to your advisor again in a week when they have a chance to come at the question “fresh” or perhaps with a different prompt by you based on something from one of those papers. (Even if you don’t follow everything, can you see something interesting there?)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Not really an answer, but this was getting too long for a comment.
In addition to what @Magicsowon's just posted answer suggested, you might also try find a topic that requires relatively little background study and has a strong potential for a lot of [low-hanging fruit](https://www.google.com/search?q=low+hanging+fruit+math), without worrying about how significant or respected the topic is, as long as it's sufficient to get you your degree in the time you have. Unfortunately algebraic geometry is probably one of the least likely subjects (at the current time) to find such a topic.
Examples of what I'm talking about are [topic 1](https://www.google.com/search?q=lineability+vector+space) (although it's been getting "milked dry" quickly in recent years) and [topic 2](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22porous+set%22+%22cluster+set%22) (in the 1970s) and [topic 3](https://www.google.com/search?q=consistency+forcing+%22general+topology%22) (in the late 1960s to early 1970s) and [topic 4](https://mathoverflow.net/a/301401/15780) (especially 1990s, but still might work today). However, none of these are remotely connected to algebraic geometry, and I only used them as examples because I know next to nothing about algebraic geometry other than what I said above about not having much low-hanging fruit. Well, there might be some pathological behavior in algebraic geometry that you could use the "topic 1" [hammer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_the_instrument) on, I don't know.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The correct and long answers are "ask your supervisor", "do what needs to be done", and so on.
But there is a short and almost ubiquitous, generic answer. It is especially suitable for the last PhD year. Maybe not in your case, but in may others. What should you do in your last PhD year?
Write.
======
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: My advice would be to find a new advisor as quickly as possible. It doesn't sound like you have much actual time invested in algebraic geometry, so feel free to switch fields.
To find a new advisor I recommend attending lots of talks by professors. Attend seminars. Somewhere in one of these talks there will be a problem which is intelligible to you, interesting, and has the ability for you to start computing examples immediately. Approach the professor about writing your thesis on this problem. Your thesis will consist of whatever progress you can make on the problem (perhaps solving it in a special case).
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/12
| 2,361
| 9,111
|
<issue_start>username_0: So long story short is that, while I was doing my masters I have worked with a PhD candidate on a paper. I basically developed half of the system and did all the experiments while I was doing my masters. During my masters they tried to publish the results at different venues, but did not get selected. After one year, the PhD candidate got accepted into a venue and did not give me any authorship, they are just mentioning me in the acknowledgement section.
It is frustrating to see that I am not getting the well earned credit that I deserve.
What are some actions that I can take?<issue_comment>username_1: [You can sue anyone for any reason](https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/77171/can-someone-just-sue-anyone-for-anything). But being able to sue is not the same as being able to win.
You are probably better off talking to your advisor and making your case for why you should be included as an author. You'll need to demonstrate you had sufficient involvement to warrant authorship. If you did "[develop] half of the system and did all the experiment", and can prove it, then this shouldn't be a problem.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Can I sue my advisor due to not giving me authorship?
>
>
>
Yes, but uncommon. Such lawsuits are sometimes successful from a legal standpoint, e.g. see the quote below. However I'd recommend to first try to mediate with your co-authors' university and the journal where the article was published. Bridges may be burned in the process but if one was unfairly treated, defending oneself is a respectable option and not all bridges in life deserved to be taken.
From {1}:
>
> Using courts to resolve on authorship credit on scientific papers is rare [[54](https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0057-z#ref-CR54 "Charrow RP. Lawless in the laboratory. J NIH Res. 1995;7:87–9."), [79](https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0057-z#ref-CR79 "Abbott A. Dispute over first authorship lands researchers in dock. Nature. 2002;419:4.")]. The law is often neutral on questions of authorship, which is exacerbated by the lack of clarity about professional practices and ambiguous damages from denied authorship credit. Lawsuits are costly and lengthy [[54](https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0057-z#ref-CR54 "Charrow RP. Lawless in the laboratory. J NIH Res. 1995;7:87–9.")]. In one case where an authorship dispute did go to court [[79](https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0057-z#ref-CR79 "<NAME>. Dispute over first authorship lands researchers in dock. Nature. 2002;419:4.")], the ruling favored the plaintiff who claimed first authorship, but the manuscript was apparently never published. No paper matching the description can be found in databases of scientific publications. Like the old joke, “The surgery was a success, but the patient died,” the plaintiff won the case, but science lost.
>
>
>
---
References:
* {1} <NAME>. Resolving authorship disputes by mediation and arbitration. Res Integr Peer Rev 3, 12 (2018). <https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0057-z>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: While it is frustrating, if you really want to build an academic career and a record of publications, concentrate on creating new results. Let this one go and learn from it for future collaborations. If you are involved in trouble, this will resonate in the community and might stick negatively to you. You should work towards being perceived as positive, productive, and trying to get things done. Suing or arguing over authorship after publication is the opposite.
As you are named in the acknowledges, you still might put it into your CV and list it as minor contributions to the paper. Once you have enough (co-)authored articles collected, you can drop the paper from your CV.
Most master students are not interested in publishing and are gone after they hand in their thesis. That does not make the actions from your supervisor right, it is just to give you some background.
If you are in a similar position to decide authorship, handle it better!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Best bet would be to raise your case and ask advice with the necessary people at your university, present the case explaining as to why you merit co-authorship and write some letters if necessary.
Talk to your advisor and calmly explain why your contribution is that of a co-author, and that to relegate your contribution to the acknowledgments is very unfair. Maybe write this up as a formal letter in writing if you feel you are likely to get emotional or confrontational when you speak to the advisor in person.
After that, you could message the editor and see if an erratum can be published for the article which is to state that you were mistakenly omitted as a co-author from the first version of the article.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't know where you are located at, but let me give you a German perspective:
I would raise this to the professor of the phd student. In case this doesn't work the next step is the universities ombudsman for conflicts with university supervisors or the ombudsman for scientific integrity.
You should also check your legal options by taking advantage of the free legal counseling provided from the student union. Be careful not to make any false accusations about anybody involved, they might sue you for defamation.
As always: Some professors feel like their little research group is their kingdom. But there are actually a lot more checks and balances in place nowadays than many realize: An investigation of the universities ombudsman into this can get very embarrassing and even the threat that you consider involving the committee can make wonders.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Starting with legal action is almost always the wrong thing to do in a civil dispute. In many countries the mere fact that you didn't try to resolve the issue amicably will make your case fall apart in court, and even if there's no such requirement in your country, suing without a honest attempt to resolve the issue will work against you. In the worst case, the professor might counter-sue you for legal bullying.
You don't mention anywhere in your question that you have raised the point with the professor and/or your colleague PhD candidate. This is where you should start, and this first step ideally should not involve any third party, it should be a discussion between the co-authors.
If the professor refuses to put your name on the paper (hopefully explaining their reasoning to you), you might decide that you still disagree with them and get an independent third party involved.
If the paper is already published, it will be much more difficult to get your name on it now. It would have been much easier to do when the paper was prepared for submission. You say you worked on this paper, so you should have been aware when it was submitted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: You can sue anyone for any reason. Whether you win or not, that's another issue/problem.
You would have to prove that you have some legally-enforceable agreement (or a reasonable expectation according to the law) that you would get authorship in general, and on this research in particular.
Chances are, you do not have that.
When we work as assistants in grad school, one of our jobs is to labor and provide support for work done by PhD students and researchers.
You might have developed half of the system and carried out all the experiments, but there's a very good chance that *the original line of research* was not yours.
I did similar kind of work under the supervision of PhD candidates and researchers. A lot of leg work done in setting up systems and even conducting all the experiments.
Nevertheless, the original lines of research were not mine, nor I was capable (at that time) to even think on how to formulate or express the problems that lead to the research.
If *we* don't have direct influence over the topic under investigation, *we* do not get authorship (and we shouldn't.)
I never got (nor asked) for authorship on things I did not initiate, regardless of how much support I gave. I only got authorship on research or topics that I had a job of leading.
The way I see it is that you are looking at your experience the wrong way (and in a very horrible way.)
What I did not get in authorship, I got in experience, hands-on experience under people more experienced than me. And that has served me through life far more than my name in some papers (which are not obsolete because of the inevitability of technical advances.)
This is truly a glass-half-full vs glass-half-empty situation, and you need to decide what kind of professional you are or want to be. How you approach this will determine that (and your future job prospects.)
After all, sue your superiors, but don't expect job references over that burned bridge.
Please think and choose wisely.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/12
| 430
| 1,874
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm wondering how researchers would keep up with all the new works if they're in a fast moving area like machine learning. There's significantly more research being published, so it would seem to be a major disadvantage to continue working in that area because you need to read so many paper that you wouldn't even have time to think up an idea and work on it.<issue_comment>username_1: A lot of the work even in a fast-moving area like ML is pretty derivative and incremental. If that's your area of expertise, you can probably scan and dismiss a lot of it pretty quickly as not that special.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Frankly, you just accept your limitations at some point and find a healthy pace. It is utterly impossible to keep up with everything. Personally, I have found that having a schedule for reading literature routinely helps: do it, say, after breakfast and then move on unless you need to look up something specific.
In pre-Internet era, people independently discovered ideas all the time. Guess what? They still do. There is no shame in that as long as you put a reasonable amount of effort in. But the "reasonable amount" varies person to person. Find an amount of literature absorbed daily at which *you* are productive and try to keep it up.
Furthermore, consider doing it in stages: there is some research in well-known venues which helps you stay tuned and connected, skim that. There are some of your own ideas: pursuing them costs time and money, so look them up to see if someone has had the same idea before. It is essentially a cost-efficiency analysis: sometimes you might spend a week chasing something you could read about if you could find it before, and that is fine. After all, you have probably gained something from doing it yourself, after all. Spending a few months the same way? Ouch.
Upvotes: 4
|
2022/02/12
| 684
| 3,203
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a TA. Recently a few students (good students) approached me, because they are having a hard time retaining the information from the main professor's lectures. (They think he is putting too much information on the powerpoints, which makes it impossible to take notes).
Is there a good way to pass along this information, without telling the professor how to teach his own class? I'm in a country where anonymous teacher evaluations do not exist...<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps the feedback would be best coming from the students themselves who are struggling. In my experience, anonymous feedback throughout an undergraduate course can be really helpful to improve it. It is common (in Canada) to offer course experience surveys at the end of a class. However, students can be more likely to put effort into the feedback when it has the potential to benefit them.
In this case, you could mention the benefit of in-course anonymous feedback to the professor that you are working with, and suggest that trying this might be a great way to find out how the students are currently doing. You could even suggest some general questions that could be asked and would allow your students' concerns to be heard.
Alternatively, you could recommend that the students voice their concerns to the professor themselves during office hours or via email if they are comfortable. Being able to talk with professors and get help can be a valuable skill for undergraduate students to develop.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Without being confrontational or expressing your own opinions, just mention to the professor that some good students are having difficulty keeping up with the pace of the lectures. You can suggest that the professor make the slides available in some way. The best solution is to make them available prior to a lecture and the students then have the opportunity to annotate them in the lecture itself.
If you meet regularly with the students then perhaps the professor would give the slides to you, if not to the students, as the basis of questions from the students.
Some professors prepare their slides from certain specific materials, such as a textbook. In that case, the book likely contains everything that is important. If they have access to the source materials, then the slides themselves become less important.
Another solution, not involving the professor is to suggest that the students record the audio of the class.
On the other hand, it is a skill worth having to be able to abstract/summarize detailed information in a few sentences. The students in question may not have such a skill and, if not other solution is available, suggest that to them.
I used to ask students at the end of a lecture to tell me the most important idea(s) of the lecture and would ask volunteers to suggest one of them. I also encouraged them to take notes on index cards capturing key ideas rather than detail and then to make a single card from their notes summarizing the lecture. I would sometimes open a lecture asking for the key ideas from the previous lecture. They didn't have this skill when the course started but began to develop it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/12
| 418
| 1,966
|
<issue_start>username_0: For Non-STEM backgrounds like Media/Film Studies, is it possible to get a master's degree in Data Analytics/ Data science to go for the desired field? I feel extremely need for a transition into a data analyst role with strong scientific research methodologies, computational and quantitative skills. As I am looking forward to working within my expected environment, I have a strong dedication to this field. Currently, I am working independently on different projects using data and coding, some sort of skills of math(linear algebra, probability, matrix) and statistics (as classical inferences, Bayesian, Regression, Hypothesis Testing, ANOVA). But after all, I want to learn more critical and overwhelming concepts of computational processes, statistical methods and . I have an affinity for Technology and IoT very much.<issue_comment>username_1: Some universities offer Master's degrees designed for students who are changing discipline; they are called *conversion* Master's. These are offered alongside a Master's degree for students who are coming from the same subject area; these are considered an *advanced* Master's.
In either case there will be some kind of admission qualification to achieve so that applicants need to demonstrate they have some of the qualities necessary to succeed. If you are admitted it will because of the potential demonstrated in your application. For example, mathematical and statistical experience together with using data and coding in a non-academic context would be that kind of appropriate background.
However such conversion Master's degrees are not a walk in the park as they compress several years of undergraduate study into a few intense trimesters.
I know this because I teach on one.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Some universities allow this provided you have real good GPA in BS. But you will need to take some bachelor course in new discipline as pre-requisite.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/12
| 500
| 2,263
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a tutor for a university course that has just had a midterm exam marked and returned to the students. One of the students emailed me asking for summary statistics of the midterm exam: the maximum score, minimum score, and average score of the class. He says that in previous classes this information had been available, though I'm not exactly sure how he got it.
Is it normal for students to have this information? Am I obliged to give out this sort of summary data, or should I seek permission from the course coordinator first?<issue_comment>username_1: As a tutor, yes, you should ask the course coordinator before releasing such information. And yes, it is pretty common for students to have access to limited statistical measures of exams. It isn't universal, but common enough.
Some professors would even post grades for exams, though not with the names of students attached. One prof in my memory would post them outside his office.
But, rules vary. You shouldn't post enough information that the grades of individuals can be found out, but summary statistics are fairly benign. Some students will get a sad, of course.
Whether you are obligated or not depends on the rules in place at your institution. So, yes, ask.
---
In my opinion, students should have access to their relative performance, but relative to the course standard, not relative to the grades of others. Grading, IMO, isn't a competitive game, but a measure of learning. I'm aware that others will contest that idea.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You are probably not required, although it is usual practice *if* statistics are meaningful and anonymity can be maintained: there is no sense of reporting statistics if you are teaching 5 students who all know each another well.
In my larger classes, I would also distribute a histogram for the grade distribution so that students could assess the general performance of the class: the disappointment of an underperformance or the elation of an overperformance is soften or sharpened when you can place your performance on the histogram.
Such reporting is something the instructor should do, not the tutor, although I realize that might be dependent on the culture of the institution.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/12
| 732
| 2,892
|
<issue_start>username_0: My masters program is in physics. I already have quite some research experience, but almost exclusively in the R&D department of two well known companies. Therefore neither my bachelor thesis nor my internship reports are publicly available.
I have one research paper I published with one of the companies during my internship that I can openly talk about and one related patent, but everything else is off limits. And this publication is not really just my work but the work of an entire department and has multiple authors.
I'm now thinking about doing my master thesis also at a company, but my (new) supervising professor warned me, that it might be bad for me not to be able to talk about the contents of my master/bachelor thesis when applying for a phd. He suggested to ask the company to allow me to split my thesis in a non-confidential and a confidential part, but that is not really feasible.
How serious of a concern is this? Do phd advisors really read the master theses of their applicants?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I have one research paper I published with one of the companies during my internship that I can openly talk about and one related patent, but everything else is off limits.
>
>
>
That is sufficient.
>
> this publication is not really just my work but the work of an entire department
>
>
>
That is normal.
>
> my (new) supervising professor warned me, that it might be bad for me not to be able to talk about the contents of my master/bachelor thesis when applying for a phd.
>
>
>
He is right.
>
> How serious of a concern is this?
>
>
>
A PhD is an apprenticeship in academic research, and proper academic research is public. If you do research and you want academic recognition for it, you need to plan for it to be disclosed. If you plan on applying for a PhD, I would recommend not doing confidential work.
>
> Do phd advisors really read the master theses of their applicants?
>
>
>
They are likely to at least verify that it exists.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Your advisor is giving good advice and is likely positioned to know. Take the advice.
I doubt that all advisors read the masters theses of their students, but they will be curious enough about the quality to have questions. They need assurance that you are capable of taking on doctoral level research and so it is difficult if you can't discuss it with them.
I doubt that it is an absolute block, but think your advisor has it right in your case.
In the US it might be less of an issue than some other places since less is expected of newly entering doctoral students in most cases (not all).
It may even be that your masters thesis isn't especially relevant (or helpful) if it is overly focused on product development. Doctoral research isn't likely to have similar focus or methodology.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/13
| 2,309
| 9,564
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently asked to be tangentially involved in writing a review paper as part of a research group I am involved in. Originally, I was just supposed to review some sections I have particular expertise in once they had been written.
With the time of year, many people moved positions and I was asked to write said paragraphs. With some sickness absences, etc., I ended up writing the entire paper. Recently, a draft was sent to me to review, with only minor changes made from the version I had written from scratch but without my name on it.
This has obviously upset me as I feel that my name should at least be mentioned on a paper I wrote entirely. From a purely ethical standpoint I think that is quite clear. What am I wondering is, is this commonly accepted practice? Or is this something I can take issue with?
For context, I am an undergraduate student working in a research group. I have been part of this group for quite a time, and the people in it have done a lot for my career to date. This is the field I want to pursue after graduation and I am apprehensive of causing a fuss and hurting my career, but at the same time I feel this is a complete abuse of my time and effort.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> author
>
>
> /ˈɔːθə/
>
>
> noun
>
>
> a writer of a book, article, or document.
>
>
>
If you wrote the paper you almost by definition should be listed as an author. So yes, it's something you can take issue with, and you can/should tell the principal investigator that you want to be listed as an author.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I ended up writing the entire paper.
>
>
>
This issue is not something specific to academia. If your responsibilities are about to change, you should negotiate new conditions before plunging into work.
To put it more directly, you should not "end up" doing something like "writing the entire paper". Your role had changed de-facto halfway through the project, so you should have discussed this change with the rest of the team right away. Just hoping for the best outcome is not a good plan.
If I were you, I'd express your disappointment, but it might or might not work.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It sounds like you are essentially the primary author of the paper, in which case the person who removed your name from the draft is acting in a highly unethical manner. That is really bad. You can certainly raise it as an issue. Start by raising it with the PI and then consider your options. In my view that behaviour would even warrant proceeding to a formal complaint to the ethics board at your university (and then watching the person quirm as they try to pass off the removal of your authorship as an error). Such action would most likely breach academic honesty requirements for faculty and could be considered misconduct.
Whilst it is not reasonable to remove your name from the paper when you are the primary author, in future you should always negotiate authorship *prior to beginning work* on a project, and you should renegotiate if the scope of your work increases.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Based on your account, **it sounds clear that you have a very strong claim for co-authorship; I would recommend asserting it tactfully but firmly**.
As ever, when there’s a halfway-plausible good-faith interpretation, I recommend assuming that in your initial approach. You could write something like
>
> Dear A, B, and C, Thank you for the review copy; I’ll follow up with detailed comments shortly. May I just check upfront before continuing — is it intentional that I’m not listed as an author, or just an oversight? When I was asked to write the section on XYZ, I understood this as an invitation to join as a co-author, and had been working with that understanding — especially considering the amount of the present version that I ended up writing.
>
>
>
Whether or not the omission was *actually* accidental (which seems unlikely but not impossible), this gives an easy and face-saving way for the other authors to accept your claim and add you as co-author. By not accusing anyone, you lower the chance of anyone getting defensive and confrontational, and maximise the chances of settling it amicably with all relationships intact and no feathers ruffled. And if someone *does* choose to push back, then they have to set out their own case explicitly, and it’s clearer to others that that person is actively excluding you.
Your claim here sounds strong enough that if the other authors don’t accept it, you have good grounds to take the matter to an higher authority — depending on your setting that could be a head of department, a university ombudsman, or similar (and you can contact the editor of any journal they submit to). And before that, of course, you can tell the other authors that you intend to do this, and hope that they may back down to this “threat”. But taking it to this level will burn bridges with people whose support can be helpful for your career — so I’d consider this as a worst-case fallback scenario, and hope to avoid it if possible.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with the first point of [@username_4's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182336/7319), and would take it even a bit further:
* You are a co-author of the paper.
* I would recommend asserting this tactfully but firmly.
However, I disagree with his concrete suggestion on two points:
1. Don't *ask why* your name was removed. *Assume* it was a mistake, and when returning the draft, put your name back, and mention – not even at the top of the email – that your name had been removed by mistake. Otherwise you are recognizing in advance that it is conceivable that you should not be listed as an author, which is not the case.
2. Before sending out an email, consider talking to a more senior researcher involved with the paper informally. That's when I would consider mentioning the fact that your name was removed, and seeing how s/he reacts. That's because email is a medium of record, especially if there are multiple recipients; so it might be better to maximize the amount of information you have before you "commit" to a response.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: If you really only modified the paper, you’re not supposed to be listed as a co-author. If you created (added new ideas that were used in the research project,) your name should be listed.
However, being that you worked a lot on the paper and, this is the field you’d like to pursue in the future, even if you were not part of the “real authors” you could ask the head of the group if by any chance, is there a way to “include or mention your help in the paper” to be able to use it in the future as part of your resume.
It might help you to get your name listed. If it doesn’t work, remember that your effort won’t be forgotten. You can always mention it when writing an application or use that experience to open doors for other projects.
Another recommendation is to ask the main author if he/she would be oK to recommend you in the future when you apply for xxx ( your chosen field,) etc.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: It looks like you were initially asked just to proofread and/or review the paper, which is not enough to list you as author. Later, the circumstances changed and you were tricked into ghostwriting the entire paper -- well, too bad, but that's on you. Now, you technically can argue about having your name on the paper, but I'd advise against it because that would be at least a bit arrogant because writing the whole paper was not what you were officially asked for. Therefore, you should not be officially featured as a co-author.
>
> I feel this is a complete abuse of my time and effort.
>
>
>
Negative mentality. What you did was a favor: you helped your friends and therefore strengthened the network of allies who would, in turn, help you if you face any problem in the future. Well, as far as I understand they technically were not yet your friends, just your acquaintances from a research group -- but they are surely closer to being your actual friends now than before you have helped them. Who knows: maybe due to some unforeseen circumstances you run short on time some day, and your friends will end up writing the whole paper for you!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: If you already wrote a piece, there is nothing you can do about it. My advice would be to not push about your authorship. It would not give you anything except making powerful and idiotic enemies. There is nothing worse then Fools and Power combined together, and most probably you just stepped onto such exemplar in your life. You won't change anything. If your desire is to become scientist, you cannot waste your life on morons. Just remember - science is full of morons, and it won't be your last time.
PS. Copypaste your parts and send it to few other respectable scientists, saying you wrote it yourself and asking opinions. It will be your *protection* in a chance in future something will go wrong.
PPS. Get yourself familiar with encryption for adding signatures to emails etc. It won't be the last time. Emails can be modified to fake your incompetence.
Afterword. Cut off your pride, there is no other way. Physicists in poor countries are digging electronic garbage for parts. You are not alone, bro! I am not saying, that science is permanent struggle, but surely it is for people who are unlucky enough. And you can't let luck to influence your outcomes.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/13
| 1,806
| 7,698
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some people summarize the content of a lecture to deepen their understanding, but I am thinking about using Wikipedia instead. Specifically, I mean finding the Wikipedia article (in my primary, non-English language) that covers the lecture material and adding any suitable content that the article does not already have. In some cases, this may mean making a new article from scratch.
I thought of several reasons that writing and editing a Wikipedia article on what you learned would be beneficial not only to other readers, but to yourself as well:
* It will be more durable to write on Wikipedia than to keep it in a paper notebook. Even more, it could be get even better by someone adding to it, or correcting errors.
* Wikipedia is usually found at the top of a google search, so it's easy to find. You don't have to flip through your notes to find it.
* Wikipedia requires references, but you can use the textbook you used in the lecture as a reference.
Of course, I will be careful not to reprint the textbook or lectures as is.
While it has all these advantages, I think the only disadvantage is that it takes a lot of time. Or is there some other reason for not recommending it?<issue_comment>username_1: No, this is not a good idea. Wikipedia articles and the kind of notes you'd write while following a lecture are very different types of text.
Audience: A Wikipedia article should be written for a general public, your notes are written for future-you.
Context: A Wikipedia article would start much more with a blank slate for context, your notes fit into the surrounding lecture materials.
Level of detail: Your notes may often be so specific that the corresponding Wikipedia article would get deleted/heavily abridged for lack of notability.
Expert-level of the author: You write notes at the beginning of your journey through new material. The appropriate time to consider writing a Wikipedia article would be once you have actually mastered it.
This is not to say that writing/editing Wikipedia articles cannot be a great way to solidify your topic-mastery in a university course while simultaneously doing some good for the general public. But this cannot replace the role of note-taking.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This is not what Wikipedia is for but you can use a [*personal* Wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_wiki).
There are several ways to do this. You can actually run a personal webserver on your own machine and access it like any Wiki. There are several open source projects that provide source code for such websites.
You can also use applications that are standalone. Lots and lots available out there. I sometimes use [Zim](https://zim-wiki.org/) for this kind of thing (everyone has different ways of working and it's worth trying out all the options to get what works best for their own needs).
>
> I thought of several reasons that writing and editing a Wikipedia article on what you learned would be beneficial not only to other readers, but to yourself as well.
>
>
>
Wikipedia aims to be an *authoritative* source of information just like any major encyclopedia. Whether you consider it successful in that regard is neither here nor there. You have to be writing articles that you have a good faith reason to think your material is accurate and precise. Your notes will unlikely to be that. You could even end up banned as the site is moderated and they don't like people abusing the site.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Other have already pointed out many valid reasons why to not abuse Wikipedia for personal note making.
However, one more reason comes to mind:
*You have no guarantee that someday somebody will alter your notes.*
Wikipedia is written by everybody.
Granted, there is a review process,
which incidentely might also prevent you yourself from making you notes. Reviewers might question the relevant/quality/ and opt to delete your notes
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The lecture material was provided for you and your classmates. You haven't been authorized to share it with the world.
Until you have permission to do so, you should not post your notes on Wikipedia.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: **tl;dr**: In theory this could be useful for all concerned. If you have bags of time and patience, including patience with people, you are more likely to succeed, but there's no guarantee.
Is it "advisable"? Well I wouldn't *advise* it, for several reasons, which I will come to in a moment. But there is benefit if done properly.
* Firstly in ensuring that the content is covered you are improving Wikipedia.
* Secondly in the process you are revising your knowledge from the lectures and getting supporting information from both Wikipedia, and the references you need (which won't be *just* the course text book) - and other reading you will do to make your edits good.
As to the negative reasons:
* It's important that each article is reasonably balanced, your professor may have an idiosyncratic approach, or be on one side of an academic dispute, or just be plain biased
* You may have to deal with gatekeeping behaviour from Wikipedians. In particular you may need to go through the [Articles For Creation process](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation) which was designed to make it easier (or at least less traumatic) for new users to create articles, but arguably sometimes has the opposite effect
* You may risk being drawn off into side-tracks that are not relevant to your course
* The articles you edit or create may change (or even be deleted) leaving you without your "notes" (though you can keep copies, or links to specific versions of pages that still exist)
* Wikipedia is not keen on single-source articles, so you would need to spend time on other sources (which is a good idea anyway).
* Special sourcing requirements apply to [medical claims](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(medicine)), essentially requiring recent high-standard review articles as sources where feasible.
Another comment, somewhat neutral, perhaps: if a section of an article expands out of proportion this is called [undue weight](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Due_and_undue_weight) - provided the matter is sufficiently well sourced it should be split off into a separate article, leaving a summary behind. There is, however, no guarantee that this will happen.
Good luck, whichever path you take.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I used to do this to some extent, that is, adding new things I learned from books and articles to the relevant wikipedia entries (the [Schur polynomial entry](https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Schur_polynomial) is perhaps my main victim).
However, I quickly realized that I wanted to add information which is of interest for people in my field, but is perhaps somewhat too specific for wikipedia. Moreover, I wanted to be able to use LaTeX syntax for more general things (tables, etc).
So, I did what StephenG suggested, and made [my own web-page about symmetric functions](https://www.symmetricfunctions.com/) which is publicly available (but not editable by anyone but me). I occasionally get emails from researchers suggesting edits (where I have made some typo), or other inquiries.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Please, no. I spend so much time fixing things that students believe that they heard in lectures on the German Wikipedia. Excellent points have been made above. I suggest installing <https://bitnami.com/stack/mediawiki> on a machine under your control and keep your notes there.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/13
| 1,073
| 4,410
|
<issue_start>username_0: What would be the status of a [distance-learning Master's program](https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/subjects/tesol/tesol-msc-distance/#d.en.85695) in academia? Would it fulfill the requirement of an on-campus Ph.D. program?
What would be the status of a [distantce-learning doctoral program](https://www.york.ac.uk/education/postgraduate/phd/phd-tesol/) in academia? Would it be considered on par with an on-campus Ph.D. program?<issue_comment>username_1: "Fully online masters/doctoral program" is too broad to make a general statement. It would depend on who runs the program and how it is run.
And the formal answer to the topline question is yes, you can enroll if you are admitted, but the judgements of others will be required to make it possible, just as in any other case. One doesn't just "enroll". One must be admitted.
Moreover, it is individuals who make such decisions and there are no general rules about the equivalence or non-equivalence. But, I think most people would be skeptical, as I would be, and would want to see some details about any such program.
Certainly there are reputable universities running reputable programs. In UK, I'm only familiar with Open University, which I believe does a very good job and has a history of success.
But the issue that many would have is how much actual learning has taken place in online programs and how much can claims be depended on in making decisions such as employment and further education.
Personally, I worry about such programs due to the possible reduced interaction, especially personal feedback, between students and faculty. I'd be especially skeptical of anything of a *massive* nature. It is possible to run such programs with a student faculty ratio of 1000/1, of course and my trust in such a program is about 1/1000. It is also possible to serve a large number of students in a "class" but with a ratio of 20/1 as is done in some Harvard programs (800 students, 40 staff, though only one professor). This is hugely different.
The "status" is actually undefined and will be judged by whoever is in a position to have to make a judgement. This will probably remain true for some years until there is better overall information about the long term outcomes of students who have done these programs.
Certainly one can learn in an online program, but it is harder to judge whether someone actually has, given the possibility of much-reduced interaction and evaluation.
If you intend to do such a program, look first at the student-staff ratio and at how much feedback you are likely to get in the program and how easy or difficult it will be to get good answers to your questions along the way. Of course, the same can be true of face to face programs. The second thing I would look at is whether the program has found a way to encourage active learning. If the system is too passive (videos and exams primarily) then I would personally judge it to be of low quality. If it requires fairly extensive writing or other exercises and personalized feedback then it is (IMO) likely to be of higher quality.
Note that I've taught both ways. Nothing massive in the online world, but small groups who met face to face only rarely and who had essentially constant opportunity for internet mediated group conversations and contact with faculty. That can work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the question literally: Yes, I know for sure that it is possible, because I have done it. I've studied Computer Science at the FernUniversitaet Hagen (<https://www.fernuni-hagen.de/>), the leading German distance-learning university. I got my BSc and MSc from them, before being admitted for a PhD at the University of Cambridge. At no point during the admissions process to Cambridge (nor when it came to later job applications) did I feel that the distance-learning nature of my prior degrees was held against me.
Whether it would all work out just fine for you is subject to two caveats: First, whenever you are doing something in an unusual way there is a certain risk that the specific decision makers you encounter are put off by this, and have it count against you. Second, I'd reckon that there are more "bad apples" amongst distance-learning universities than amongst in-person ones. So you'd want to be sure that you are dealing with a reputable programme/university.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/13
| 786
| 3,440
|
<issue_start>username_0: My partner was born outside the U.S. and received their degree from a foreign university. My partner is now living and working in the United States. They have begun to apply to various Ph.D. programs, which all require letters of recommendation from previous professors.
The problem that has been occurring is that it is not common in their culture for universities to ask for letters of recommendation or for professors to write them which has resulted in poorly written letters because of a misunderstanding from the professors on why it's needed or its purpose, as well as the language barrier. This problem is exacerbated when you take into account that it's common to apply to multiple universities. In this case, my partner has attempted to apply to 7 schools.
So now my partner has not only struggled to get in contact and have them write a letter, which they don't normally do, but my partner also has to hound their professors to upload the letters themselves into university systems 7 times over.
This has resulted in multiple applications not being able to be completed before the deadline even though they have been started many months prior.
I feel frustrated for my partner and I am wondering if other foreigners have had similar issues and any suggestions to overcome this.<issue_comment>username_1: I have seen two approaches:
Draft the letter yourself, or have it drafted by someone familiar with the system you are applying to, and get the professor to sign, or in these days upload, it. If there is an admin team, try to involve the secretary. Basically minimise the amount of work for the professor providing the reference.
The other approach is to get a masters or some other one year degree in the local system, so you can get local references. This might be unavoidable if the two systems are too far apart or if one regards the other as unreliable. (I'm not saying it's fair.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have good relationships with the foreign professors, the right way to handle this is to let them know what the requirements are when you ask for help. Hopefully they will accommodate you in some way. But if they aren't familiar with doing this then they need a bit of an education about why it is important and how it might look.
One way is to explain the expectations and importance of the letters in the system to which you are applying. In the US they are quite important. You could also provide them with a sample letter or two that describes some fictional candidate so that they get a feel for it. Something too "gushy" or too "boilerplate" will not be helpful.
The might just appreciate the information you give them.
You can also give them a list of what you think your accomplishments are that they assisted you in to give them a head start. Some professors will ask you for a draft, but I'd suggest not suggesting that as it is a bit pushy. Some people will let you review the letter before it is sent or give you a copy afterwards, though note that some systems forbid this explicitly.
You can even, perhaps, beg a bit; "I know this is an imposition and a bit of a pain, but those dirty, rotten, scoundrels in the US require this sort of nonsense." (Well no, not so far over the top.)
User AnonyPostdoc has also suggested in a comment that inter folio.com can make multiple submissions easier. Perhaps they will expand that to an answer.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/13
| 1,128
| 4,637
|
<issue_start>username_0: My doctoral project required me to learn a whole new method from zero. My advisor had another student who mastered the technique since his BA studies, and so was much more advanced than me. I asked this student several times to share his code with me, but he claimed that his research was "classified" (No, it was not), so he is not allowed to share it.
Now his papers are published in open access journals under the statement
>
> Scripts using the R and MATLAB programming language are provided to produce figures and extract data from external databases. Additional code and related files are available from the corresponding author (him) upon request.
>
>
>
Only that now he is ignoring my emails.
Is there anything I can do? The truth is I want to use his codes simply because I want to learn from him.<issue_comment>username_1: I interpret the question as "I need code to do `stuff`, how?".
* The classic option, the one that you are doomed to use if everything fails, and the way things were before open code repositories, is: just hire / take a BSc student. They would need to implement that thing from scratch using papers / books on the topic as a part of their job / BSc thesis.
* Ask the PI on the project / the corresponding author of the paper, if they would share the code with you. They might not agree. I am sure, other answers will detail on the open access and availability bit, I suspect some internal shenanigans.
Basically asking for code is not the best way to do it in my opinion. You do not want to study the code, you want to do `stuff`, right? Then ask about it. There are multiple options.
* "I need your code, because I want to understand how it works / reproduce the results in the paper." That's what the availability thing is for, officially.
* "I want to build upon your code to produce new research results." This is the most favourable version. Mostly implied with it (but it does not hurt to state it explicitly) is: "you get to be a coauthor on the new paper".
* "I want to apply your method to my data and to use the results in my paper." It is a milder version of the above. Some authors are not inclined / not allowed to give the code to anyone. (This behaviour becomes less frequent, for good, but is still present.) Still, they might be interested in a collaboration. A possibility is to give them your data (if you, on your end, are comfortable with it), let them process it, obtain the results. Again, it implies "you get to be a coauthor", as they do work for your new paper.
* "I want to compare your method to mine." It is a valid concern, in most of the cases it produces just a citation of the others' paper.
* "I want to do some statistics / automatic code analysis on your code." That's a citation, I'd say.
I'd say that people are in generic more inclined to provide data or to collaborate on one of the above terms that are more exact and clear than just "let me see your code".
I would assume that the most frequent "fears" that lead to *not* giving code to other people are: "they might 'steal' it" – i.e., an idea that someone would build upon your code and not acknowledge you; and "legal" limitations, ranging from "I have transferred the copyright to my research unit and they don't share" to "my supervisor said 'no'". (Again, I am not discussing here, how the data availability statement of the publication agrees with those.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Here are the typical steps to follow until you got the code:
1. Email the student who has the code. Send a reminder after a few days.
2. Email the student who has the code and CC the student's advisor and/or co-authors. Send a reminder after a few days.
3. If you can meet either student or better the student's advisor face-to-face, try it.
4. If none of the co-authors is your advisor or close to you, email the journal to raise a formal complaint that the author didn't send you the code. Attach your previous emails to the student who has the code as a proof. If one of the co-authors is your advisor or close to you, explain the situation and get them to put pressure on the student who has the code, to comply with the open access requirement of the journal.
That should resolve the issue in most cases.
---
PS:
>
> His papers are published in open access journals.
>
>
>
Note that "open access journal" doesn't entail open source code. Neither the journal nor the student who has the code has any legal obligation to share their code (unless some special cases, e.g. if the student's funding agency forces them to do so in their funding clauses).
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/13
| 1,432
| 6,065
|
<issue_start>username_0: I heard some postdocs discussing at a meeting that if assistant professors get denied tenure their students usually can’t find jobs. I think by this they meant academic jobs i.e., postdocs. This seems like an unfair situation since tenure denial seldom has much to do with the student. Is there any truth to this? Are non academic jobs similarly out of reach for such students?<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt anyone looks at post doc applications and sorts them according to the tenure status of their mentors.
However, there are secondary ways that an advisor's productivity can influence their student.
If a student comes from a high-productivity lab, they are likely to have (co)authored more papers, possibly in better journals. Surely that's not a given for every student, but if someone has failed to get tenure then that suggests they've struggled with productivity and that likely means their students have struggled, too. While it might be possible to account for "advisor bias" and judge students based on what they've done "adjusting for their environment", I think it's far more common to look at output at face value.
A second influence of advisor would be in letters of recommendation. A strong letter from an advisor who is well-known and successful may carry more weight than one from an advisor who has struggled. Again, this is not a direct penalty for having an advisor fail to make tenure, only a side effect.
When positions are scarce compared to applicants, I think it's important to recognize that successful job applications do not come from merely being qualified or capable of doing the job, but rather from competition in comparison against the other applicants. Many qualified candidates may find themselves with no position if their peers outcompete them. There isn't any solution for this if the number of positions cannot be increased and the number of applicants remains high. Different fields have different limitations on available positions and therefore vary widely in competitiveness.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Having been in precisely this situation, I'd worry--but not give up hope!
I concur with both parts of @<NAME>'s answer. Your applications are unlikely to be ignored *because* your advisor did not get tenure, but factors that often lead to your advisor's denial of tenure, like not publishing much/well, may be reflected your CV too. Moreover, the failed tenure process can certainly strain or break relationships, and thus weaken any recommendation that your advisor might provide.
This is not necessarily the case: some places have astonishingly high standards and some profs just don't fit in, personally or intellectually, with their first department. However, even if it is, all isn't lost but you have your work cut out for you.
The Good News
-------------
The good news is that even if it is, **postdocs are often hired *both* for their past output and their future potential**. You therefore need to convince someone you will be successful in the right environment. If your CV alone doesn't do this, you need to find another way to make the case.
This is easiest to do with people who know you already, so I would focus on them, rather than "cold" applications. Collaborators or acquaintances from conferences are good starting points. Hosting a seminar speaker with whom you'd like to work is also a tried-and-true technique. Asking people in your network to introduce you may also help. "He was on track for some great work until the funding ran out" is uselessly gauche coming from you, but can allay some initial skepticism if it comes from a third party.
In a similar vein, I would focus on groups that have recently gotten a large influx of funding, especially if it comes with tight timelines (e.g., DARPA contracts). These groups may be more disposed to hire someone ASAP rather than holding out for the perfect candidate. You can often find about these things from the funders' websites (e.g., [NIH RePORTER](https://reporter.nih.gov) or [CIHR Funding Results](https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/49817.html)).
The rest of your application needs to be top-notch as well. The cover letter needs to clearly and quickly explain why you're applying to *this particular lab*. Your presentation should be polished, and you should have summaries--in various lengths--of your past work and futures ideas. You need a pat and not-too-negative explanation of anything that "went wrong" in your PhD ("I've learned how important it is to *finish* projects"). Brush up on past work from the group members so you can ask intelligent questions. Send thank yous, etc.
### The Bad News
So armed, I don't think it will be impossible to find a postdoc. The bad news is that **academia is cumulative** and even if your postdoc is successful, your subsequent applications (e.g., for faculty jobs) probably will not be "curved" to account for a less-successful PhD experience.
So, you will need to hustle. If your PhD lab did not lead to many/strong publications, you will already be on the back foot for funding opportunities, maybe of which are only available for a short time post-PhD. All else being equal, I would pick the faster-moving project: modeling vs. data collection, *in vitro* vs. *in vivo* experiments, etc. You will need to collaborate and network: future funding and job applications will need 3-5 references who are both well-regarded in the field and have seen you succeed. You will need to think about a Plan B and C for your career (indeed, everyone should, and I find that not feeling trapped leads to better work).
Most critically, you will need to make peace with the fact that it will be a longer and harder road for than for others who, mostly by chance, landed in a "better" environment. It is unfair, but anger can only get you so far. I try to channel it by lobbying against things that make it so (e.g., time-since-degree windows) and try to ensure the students around me have a better time than I did.
Good luck and get to work!
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/13
| 2,095
| 8,857
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper presenting a mathematical theorem I recently proved. However, while reading one of the papers that I am citing, I found out that the same result (or something very similar) might be present in the author's Ph.D. thesis.
To be more precise, the author only alludes to the existence of such result, adding a reference to his thesis. The problem is that such thesis is not available online and is written in Russian; moreover, it appears that the author has left academia, given that his last publication dates back to year 2000.
In this context, I am not sure what to do. To be honest, I am tempted to simply ignore the author's claim, as I have no means of verifying it, omitting any mention of it in my paper. Could this be considered unethical or harm my reputation in any way?<issue_comment>username_1: You do have means of verifying it - for example write to the author and ask him for more information or a copy of his thesis, contact any coauthors on the paper you have read, find someone who speaks Russian who can help you, contact the library of his university to get the thesis, ask your university or national library if they can help you.
If you try those things and still cannot find or verify his proof, then you can publish your paper, but you should mention that the other person alluded to an earlier proof of it and explain that you were unable to find or verify it.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes, concealing information from the reader in order to make your work appear more novel or to avoid doing more work is unethical. Whether it would harm your reputation depends on whether readers of your paper will be able to deduce that you did this on purpose, which is anyone's guess.
In any case, just because a proof of some result exists in some obscure, hard to access Russian source doesn't mean that you cannot publish the theorem. It merely means that you cannot claim priority.
Ideally, you should invest a reasonable effort into trying to find this proof (to establish your priority or lack thereof) and if it exists, to compare it to your own (to determine whether the merit of your proof lies only in being more accessible to the reader, or if the proof is substantially different).
A less ideal but somewhat understandable course of action would be to state that, in effect, a proof might exist but you didn't feel like investing the effort into digging up an obscure Russian thesis and having it translated into English.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: What you are contemplating is a major ethical violation.
First, it's unclear why you mention that the thesis is in Russian; it's completely irrelevant. The obligation to acknowledge prior work and give due credit exists independently of its language. As an author, you must honestly figure out and explain what new you are adding to the literature, if any. If your result is not new, you cannot publish it in a journal of original research, at least not as the only/main content of the paper. In this case, you may consider putting your paper on arXiv, making it completely clear that it is an exposition of known results.
To be honest, in the age of Google translate, with a math paper, and being an expert on the topic (so more-or-less expecting what's there), it's not so difficult either.
Second, as soon as a published work is concerned, its availability is your problem - and most certainly, non-availability online does not nullify any of the above-mentioned obligations. But in practice, **most Russian dissertations are not so hard to obtain.** First, every dissertation has a 20p. summary, called "автореферат", that is published in about 100 copies and in many cases can be freely downloaded from the [website of the Russian State Library](https://diss.rsl.ru/?lang=en). If that is not enough for your purpose, Russian state library also has a physical copy of every dissertation, and there are [services](https://www.dissercat.com/) that will scan it and send you a copy for about 10 euro. Disclaimer: the legality of this service seems to be OK, at least in practical terms, but I cannot vouch.
On top of that, there are obvious solutions, such as contacting the author or e.g. their department/collaborators in Russia for a copy of the dissertation or the "автореферат".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Other answers describe how you can find more information on the thesis in question. I agree with others that you should mention the possible predecessor. However, Russian theses are considered unpublished (at least that was the situation in the past), although the requirement was that main results of a Russian thesis had to be published. On the other hand, if the predecessor quotes his thesis and nothing else, maybe the result was only in the thesis and thus unpublished. This may be a basis for you to publish the result and its proof.
I was in your situation some time ago. I derived a pretty important result and found a similar claim in a book. I issued an arxiv preprint quoting their claim and mentioning that I had not been able to find the proof. After that I contacted the authors of the book. It was not easy to sort out, but eventually they explained that they had in mind something quite different from what I derived.
EDIT (Feb 14, 2022): By the way, I find it amusing that, technically, Wiles was in a situation similar to that of the OP, as Fermat had claimed having a proof of his Last Theorem :-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It was getting too big in the comments, so I recast this as an answer.
Mention the other claimed proof, and offer your own proof.
I had a similar problem with my thesis. When I tried to publish a paper, the main result was rejected on the basis that it was a well known old result. On examination of the literature I found that a related but incomplete result had been published.
My supervisor said that I should not worry too much because everyone does things their own way. If you honestly did it yourself, the chances are that you will have something new to say.
My paper as a whole was my own work. On the other hand, it took an international flight and visiting the other academics institute to chat with them for a week before they agreed to back off. It was a successful trip as they even became a reviewer for my thesis.
If you did not copy the result, if it was genuinely your own work, then I do not see that you are committing any moral outrage. If the result happens to be well published and you can add nothing new, then the paper should be rejected for lack of originality.
The moral problem would be if you read the person's work, copied the idea, and claimed it yourself.
But, you should definitely note that you became aware of a CLAIM that there is a proof - a claim that you tried to but failed to validate.
At the very least, the result appears not to be well known in the literature. And that is important. Bringing attention to something not well known is useful, as is (potentially) giving a new proof.
The moral problem here is that now that you know that someone claims an earlier proof - as much as you might be tempted - you should not ignore that you now know. You might wish that you never found out. But, that is not for us to decide. What is for us to decide is what shall we do with that information.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: Talk to your library. They usually have a service to scout things which are difficult to find (long distance lending), also some of the better libraries have a translation service; but usually a professor needs to sign off on that request.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: In addition to what has been mentioned in other answers:
You may find that your proof is substantially different from the existing proof. If so, this is still a potentially valuable contribution to the literature. This is especially true if your proof contains a "new idea" which could be applied in other situations. Comparing and contrasting your approach with the other approach should be part of your paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: It’s a rough situation to be in.
My honest opinion: Is it Unethical? Yes. Very unethical to ignore the Russian author’s claims. Think if the situation was reversed and, you were the first author..
Plus, you were able to find the truth. Count on others being capable of finding out. You don’t want to risk ruining your career for it.
I agree with others, try your best to contact the author or Department via a library and on your own.
If not possible to contact, make a note explaining that you found x and y information tried to get a hold of it via ABCD methods, but you couldn’t verify or review it in depth. For this reason you decided to continue your research project.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/14
| 749
| 3,221
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a newly admitted grad student for computer science. I've always had an extremely difficult time with taking notes, reading, and retaining information from reading. I find that I'm only able to read a few paragraphs or so before I start to unintentionally skip words or get distracted by my thoughts. Even while reading these paragraphs it does not really feel like I'm "reading". During my undergrad I was able to get by without reading and taking notes since there was a lot of video content. Unfortunately the topics being covered are only in book / paper form. I'm finding it extremely hard to keep up since it can take me up to a week to fully read a chapter.
So far I've tried making linked notes with obsidian. This has helped a lot with retaining information since the notes are in a short form. I've also tried skimming and looking at headers, subtext, and etc but, any time I try to really read on the topic it really becomes hard to focus. I've been trying to make some kind of framework to systematically read but, I've yet to find anything that really helps. I've always wanted to be a good reader so, I have tried to consistently read things daily but, I have not really improved. Any advice would be wonderful.<issue_comment>username_1: Underline, highlight or circle the important passages and, even more helpful, write notes to yourself in the margins summarizing the important points.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> up to a week to fully read a chapter
>
>
>
That's actually a pretty good rate. Reading textbooks is hard, and you just have to struggle with it.
A few pieces of advice:
* To stay afloat in fast paced graduate courses, learn in a "big picture first" manner. Look at a map of the earth before studying a particular neighborhood in great detail. You have the rest of your life to master the details.
* Try focusing on the problems or on programming projects that you can do that will force you to learn the relevant material.
* Try reproducing the important ideas on paper with the book closed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Some of what you say suggests the possibility of a form of attention deficit disorder. I'm not a medical professional, so don't treat this as any sort of diagnosis, but it would be useful to talk to a medical professional and get advice, if only to rule it out. Some universities will provide a way for you to get such advice.
Absent that (or maybe even if that is the case), taking notes as you read is a good way to capture things. In fact, writing them out by hand on paper (or index cards) is efficient and helpful. With index cards it is possible to carry around a a few, including a few blank cards. They are easy to reorganize, discard, update, etc. Don't write too much on any one card since you might want to add to them in the future.
See *The Art of Changing the Brain* by <NAME> for how such reinforcement is helpful.
Also, textbooks often come with exercises. The more such exercises you do, the more likely it is that the information in the book will be settled into your mind. Try to get feedback on your solutions also. Reinforcement and feedback are important to learning.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/14
| 331
| 1,220
|
<issue_start>username_0: Ph.D. Candidate in Social Work. When should I start applying for Tenure Track positions, if I plan to complete my degree by December 2023?
I'm Canadian. And yes, there are Social Work researchers in my country.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally (within the US), new faculty begin at the start of an academic year. So if you graduate in Dec 2023 you would be planning to start a faculty position in August 2024. You would apply to positions in the fall 2023 cycle. These may be posted starting in the summer or fall of 2023 and would be due in the fall of 2023 or winter of 2024.
You mention research specifically in your comments. Industry jobs (here I mean research jobs at university centers and think tanks) with little to no teaching can be posted at any time. They would be unlikely to be considered TT.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Get organized for 2023 competitions. These will have start dates in 2023/24.
You might have an outside shot in the 2022 cycle. In social sciences you can get hired “just before” (or in some cases of locally known candidates even before) finishing your PhD, especially if you have teaching experience (*v.g.* as a contract lecturer).
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/14
| 1,509
| 6,291
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a resident of Asia and I have done my master's in mathematics last year(2021) from a university ranked 400 in mathematics in the world. and I am applying for PhD positions in Europe. I didn't applied to USA because instead of preparing for GRE and TOEFL , I wanted to spent that time self-studying more specialized courses in mathematics.
But, as I applied to UK, I came to know that unlike USA, UK has very less funding for international students. I had also planned to apply to Germany, France, Sweden, Australia but quite a number of professors whose interests align with mine are not taking PhD students for the next year.
Now, I thought that maybe I should write to professors in China as in QS ranking there are about 10-15 universities in top 100 universities in math. I am thinking of applying if I can get admission in top 50-100 universities and will only apply to universities in the range 50-100.
I don't have any knowledge of Chinese( spoken or written) but I am good in English. I don't want to do a PhD in India because research and teaching quality is not good in my country.
I did my masters in India from a prestigious university of the country and was involved in a couple of internships in India at other prestigious institutes. It seemed that instead of even guiding and spending time teaching their courses with quality a lot of Prof. were interested in their own research and flattering with bosses, not even keeping with what they promised while agreeing to supervise for a project/ internship. Some of the profs were bullies.
My question: I know China is communist and authoritarian but that certainly doesn't matter to me because I am an introvert person who was never interested in politics and making new friends or co-curricular activities. I don't speak Chinese or can write in it but if selected I can learn it as much as I can, before joining the course.
>
> What matter to me the most is that the research quality of Chinese Universities and is the environment good enough to for a foreign students to thrive? and what is the commitment of the Prof's to students? Although, a lot of Chinese universities excel in QS ranking but not so much information is available regarding above of my question on Internet. So, can you please let me know about it, if you are aware of it?
>
>
>
Before applying I thought to ask here as although I have searched on Internet a lot regarding it, but still I don't have enough information and I will spent my 4-5 very important years in PhD. So, I don't want to be at a place where I can't thrive in research as I already know how it feels due to some experiences in my country.
Certainly, one of my prof. suggested me to apply to Europe and he doesn't knows anything about china as looking at his CV I can see he never collaborated with anyone in China or gave any talk in china.
Thank you very much!<issue_comment>username_1: I will give a positive answer as to if it is *possible* for you to thrive in a Chinese university studying PhD level pure maths -- China's graduate-level mathematics education, while often considered to be inferior to that of Japan, is "good enough", and certainly people learn to become good maths researchers at the likes of USTC or Zhejiang University. Some people will even argue that you get an *excellent* mathematical education at Peking University (the hiring bar for new faculty is on par with UCSB last time I heard). You can encounter bad advisors, but I am sure that with strategic choosing they are avoidable. For the quality of education, I do not think you have that much to worry about, but of course I do not know the academic culture of India, and your baseline of bad advisors.
Now, I vaguely fear that you have much more to worry about than what you wrote on cultural differences. I don't know how much experience you have studying abroad, but learning a new language is hard, and you might just find that time for learning Chinese more worthwhile in actually padding your research experience and reapply next year to Europe. Living in a new country is also hard -- cultural differences show much before political differences. You might have no interest in blending in with the society or making any friends, and that might be entirely fine for your PhD years, but it might also end up being very damaging to your mental health. This is more so for China than for Europe in my opinion. American college kids that are on short exchange programs who have to be "rescued" back to the states due to mental health are not rare occurrences, just to really exaggerate the point. I personally do not know how difficult the logistics of applying are, but you might want to also factor that in.
Finally, while your advisor might not have any experiences with China, there might be someone relatively close to you from India who actually went to China for their graduate education. I really think that you will benefit from an exchange with them who had experienced both sides.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have worked in China as a postdoc some years ago. I am not very familiar with the field of Mathematics.
Mainly, my advice is that you should consider going to China, but know it will be a life-changing experience, in several ways. China is thriving, and they have a tradition at students being good with crunching numbers. It is fairly easy to find jobs and opportunity in China, if you know how to play their games. Learning their language and culture is bound to help you in the future.
Now, it will not be easy. Chinese culture is complex and very unique. I understand Indian culture is also profound. I think there may be many incompatibilities you will have to bridge. Also, not many Indians around in China, though I think Pakistani are more common and fairly familiar. There are some growing political disputes. Nobody knows how academia could be affected in the advent of war, hot or cold.
Personal advices if you take the leap of faith. Arrange beforehand how you can transfer money between countries. Get along with the Chinese, invest in relationships. Find who you can trust, and always show respect. Appreciate the food, find a hobby, don't let them get to you.
Good luck, be brave.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/14
| 2,311
| 9,029
|
<issue_start>username_0: I completed my masters in mathematics in 2021 and took a break to study more topics in Math before applying for PhD positions.
In december, I wrote to a prof of pure math at the Aix-Marseille University whose interests align with mine asking if he has an open PhD position available.
His reply was the following:
>
> Dear X,
>
>
> In Marseilles the chances of obtaining a fellowship from the local institute (ED 184) are very small due to local situation.
> Being funded is a compulsory requirement for doing a PhD here.
> The CNRS periodically has funding for collaboration with specific countries, but there currently no call involving India that I could find.
> Some information can be found on the websites:<https://campusbourses.campusfrance.org/#/catalog,https://www.inde.campusfrance.org/>
> but I haven't been able to find any relevant projects.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Y
>
>
>
Edit 1: He also asked me to send him my master's thesis and CV in the same above e-mail.
I checked the two websites mentioned in the mail again in detail but I couldn't find a fellowship call that would help me.
So, can you please tell how exactly funding opportunities work for foreign students for PhD fellowships in France?
From a charitable institute in India (Inlaks Foundation), a certain number of fellowships exist, but competition is very high for them.
Also, [Cofund math in Paris](https://sciencesmaths-paris.fr/nos-programmes/mathinparis2020) has some funding but it's not for Aix- Marsaille University (it's only for universities in Paris).<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you are strong in French, I suggest you to skip completely the funding through the french system and look elsewhere.
Since France is in the European Union, you will have better luck looking into european fundings, for example <https://erc.europa.eu/news/new-agreement-india> or even ask the consulate and similar institutions (for example [https://www.inde.campusfrance.org/scholarships-for-indian-students#:~:text=The%20Embassy%20of%20France%20in%20India%20offers%20a%20scholarship%20for,France%2C%20medical%20insurance%20coverage%20etc](https://www.inde.campusfrance.org/scholarships-for-indian-students#:%7E:text=The%20Embassy%20of%20France%20in%20India%20offers%20a%20scholarship%20for,France%2C%20medical%20insurance%20coverage%20etc). ).
If you want to have success in working with said professor and you are keen to get a compromise, I really suggest you to try to get funding to pursue a PhD in *any* european country, keep this professor from Marseille as reference for your project, once you get in Europe you will have the chance to work with him, even when based somewhere else, with a visa from an EU country you will get some freedom of movement (and possibly access to additional fundings).
Final note: please remember that to external world, mathemathics is a minuscule world, so try to draw your situation as much abstract as possible, look for scholarships/fundings affiliated with technology (STEM and even applied engineering).
Good luck!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Here’s the bad news upfront: **it is unlikely that you will be able to start a PhD in that particular lab, at least before September**. ~~*By far*, the most common way of funding a PhD in France is that the lab secures funding before the student is found. If the professor thinks it is not possible, they probably are right.~~ *EDIT: this might be domain-dependent. That is the case at least in physics, see comments.*
I *believe* there is no specific funding for Indian students in mathematics. That belief is based from my quick search on [that website](https://campusbourses.campusfrance.org/#/catalog), but I have not read carefully all the hits for the relevant filters (Indian nationality, PhD level, mathematics). Campus France is the PR agency / embassy of FR higher ed for foreign students, so their website is probably the best place to start any search.
The rest of the answer is more about generalities for the way PhDs are funded in France.
Legal rules
===========
In STEM at least, *École Doctorales* (aka ED, the administrative structures in charge of PhD students) require a proof of funding for three years before they register a PhD student. The exact minimum level of funding required varies across EDs, but it is typically around €1000/month - for ED184, it is [€800/month as of February 2022](https://doctorat.campusfrance.org/ED184).
Therefore, grants that cover only one year of study, or only some minimal costs, are insufficient, unless you can stack enough of them.
Timeline
========
You need to decide at which point of time you would accept to start your PhD. Most PhD positions are filled between September and December (September is in sync with the school calendar of finishing master’s students, but having interviews and finding the good candidate etc. can delay a bit). Asking in December usually means most of the spots are already taken.
If you are OK with a start in September 2022, and you did not mention that in your initial email, you should probably follow-up on your email with that information, asking the professor if they expect some funding to pop up by then. *(Even if they answer positively, the usual job-search advice applies - keep looking for positions until you actually have one, do not fixate on getting a position in this particular lab; certainly do not waste six months of job-hunting just waiting to see if that position gets funded.)*
The "local situation" part seems intentionally vague, so I would not press on what that situation exactly is.
Funding: the most common scheme
===============================
*EDIT: a large part of this section comes from my experience, which may not be representative of all STEM fields. In particular, the assertion that >90% of position open before the candidate is sought is probably incorrect in non-physics fields.*
Usually, the lab secures funding prior to the PhD student arrival. This funding can come from a plethora of sources, but how strong you are as a candidate has zero influence over whether the lab can get them.
In contrast, there are many funding sources that are reserved to specific applicants, or require a joint application from the lab and prospective student. Those are rare, and usually very specific (students from some particular schools, military personnel, CNRS technician staff etc.). I would say those are <10% of PhD positions, probably <5%, though I could not find actual figures.
Of the pre-funded positions, some are filled from the master’s student pool from internship/classes, the rest are advertised and filled similarly to a non-academia job. I would think most of the positions that are advertised on the internet are actually open, because there is no requirement (that I know of) to publicize those (OTOH, tenured jobs must be publicized due to "open competition" rules, but will often be pre-filled by a local candidate, in which case applying is a waste of time). The job posting will have a fairly detailed outline of the research program (bibliographies and figures are not uncommon).
Unfortunately, I am not aware of an exhaustive central repository of open PhD positions (or open positions in math). [Campus France has some](https://doctorat.campusfrance.org/en/phd/offers), but it does not contain *all* positions. An exhaustive search requires to look for those on the university/lab websites, one by one - for instance, [here are the postings](https://pprime.fr/en/employment/?typologie_emploi=434) at the place I did mine.
I am not sure every university website has English postings, and even among those that do, I would not trust every English translation to be correct, so I would advise to browse in French if you can and/or retranslate via machine tools the French original of whatever English posting seems interesting to you.
Impact of funding source on your day-to-day duties
==================================================
I would not care much about the funding source while searching, but you may want to ask questions before accepting an offer. A few generalities from my limited experience:
* university/ED contracts usually mean significant teaching duties (might be a positive or a negative depending on how you see it); if you need a couple more months to finish the PhD beyond the official 3 years there is a decent chance to extend the contract in some fashion
* grant contracts (ERC or ANR *[agence nationale de la recherche]*) usually mean less or no teaching, but (from what I heard) are more red-tape-heavy
* CIFRE contracts (university/industry collab) usually mean better salary (compared to university contracts) and little to no teaching duties, but often entail rigid adherence to the research program (at the university, your professor cares that you publish good-quality science, but they will not care much if the topic is entirely different from what they thought it would be).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/14
| 1,828
| 7,574
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my Ph.D. thesis. The thesis is in computer science specifically the data science domain. The thesis will be based on my 8 first-authored publications in IEEE, ACM and springer. The final thesis will be eventually available online for public by the university library.
Can I use the text and figures I created and published in the conferences papers? to what extent can I copy from them? will it be considered self-plagiarism if I do so?
Looking into some of my previous colleagues' Ph.D. published thesis, I found that they have used the same exact text and figures without even citing their original IEEE papers(they mentioned in the introduction a list of papers references that are used in the thesis) while some created complete new figures to represent the results and some just included the figures while citing their papers in the captain.
PS1: I Wrote the <EMAIL> and will update the question if I get a reply.
PS2: The answer from IEEE is (That is indeed acceptable, as IEEE allows authors to use everything short of their entire paper for thesis reuse without requiring permission, provided that everything is cited. If you need to use an entire paper however, you will need to contact our permissions department (<EMAIL>). The following URLs may be of use to your for this and future post-publication work, and the first link specifically deals with thesis reuse.
<https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/choose-a-publishing-agreement/avoid-infringement-upon-ieee-copyright/>
<https://journals.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/become-an-ieee-journal-author/publishing-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/>
<https://conferences.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/author-ethics/guidelines-and-policies/post-publication-policies/> )<issue_comment>username_1: I think you can include figures or text from IEEE papers **with citation**. To be on the safe side, ask the editors of the journal, if you need a permission.
For more explanation, please read [here](https://libraryguides.vu.edu.au/ieeereferencing/figurestablesequations).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Although many things related to intellectual properties are a grey area, the only certain thing is that copyrights do not cover the pixel of a figure, or the wording in a sentence, copyrights cover the intellectual property.
>
> I found that they have used the same exact text and figures without
> even citing their original IEEE papers while some created complete new
> figures to represent the results
>
>
>
While the first group that used same text and figures without citing IEEE papers probably broke the copyright (maybe they submitted the thesis before IEEE papers?), the second group definitely broke the copyright, because they knew they were representing the same intellectual content!
Stay away from shortcuts, ask the permission for reproducing the figures/plots/etc. or simply cite your own work with something like "see Figure 7 from Krebto (2020d)" without including the figure.
>
> The final thesis will be eventually available online for public by the
> university library.
>
>
>
Yes, but I am 99.9999% sure that when you upload the final PDf to the library for publication, you will sign some document stating that you have all the rights and you obtained permission to reproduce any contents included in the thesis. Since you are asking the question, it seems you do not want to declare something you know is false.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are actually two issues, copyright and self-plagiarism.
The latter is easy to avoid if you quote and cite the earlier work in the thesis. Cite it as you would cite the work of another. This holds for both the text and the images.
The copyright issue can be a bit more involved, but likely is not. When you give copyright to a publisher you normally get back a license for certain uses. Among the typical permitted uses is for a dissertation. You may have the specific wording of your license for reuse somewhere in you email (or paper mail), but both IEEE and ACM will have them online if you look. This license for reuse is typical of all reputable publishers, not just those that are also professional societies. But, you should quote and cite even here. But longer quotations than are typically allowed (work of others) is almost certainly ok but not unlimited.
Your colleagues should have done this also.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: You need to consult your institutional regulations with regard to the self-plagiarism question. Nobody here can help you with that.
Requirements for doctoral theses vary, and span the full range of
* The thesis work must not have been published previously in any way.
* You can reuse all the text, but have to edit it into a coherent whole.
* You literally staple three papers together and hand it in.
and many points in between. You may not be allowed to do this at all, or it may be the standard way a thesis is written where you are.
While [everybody thinks that what they're used to is universal](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4471/academia-varies-more-than-you-think-it-does-the-movie), **only someone who knows your actual institution's rules can answer that question usefully** for you. If you've been seeing it happen plenty, presumably it's fine - but you want to know where the line is.
---
On the copyright issue, **both the [IEEE](https://conferences.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/get-published/about-transferring-copyright-to-ieee/#thesis) and the [ACM](https://authors.acm.org/author-services/author-rights) permit anywhere up to total reuse of the contents of accepted papers within a thesis or dissertation**, including figures, as long as a citation to the version of record of the paper is included. This is an explicit part of the copyright agreement that you make when publishing the work for virtually all legitimate publishers in one form or another (sometimes by reference to a published policy).
For the [ACM](https://authors.acm.org/author-services/author-rights):
>
> Authors can include partial or complete papers of their own (and no fee is expected) in a dissertation as long as citations and DOI pointers to the Versions of Record in the ACM Digital Library are included.
>
>
>
For the [IEEE](https://conferences.ieeeauthorcenter.ieee.org/get-published/about-transferring-copyright-to-ieee/#thesis):
>
> You may reuse your published article in your thesis or dissertation without requesting permission, provided that you fulfill the following requirements ... [fine-grained citation format rules for text and figures follow]
>
>
>
(You can infer from the existence of this blanket licence term that such theses are common, but they're not universal)
If "they mentioned in the introduction a list of papers references that are used in the thesis" and inside captions, your colleagues have likely satisfied that requirement. The IEEE also requests copyright symbol markers virtually everywhere, though to-the-letter observance of that is limited in my experience.
---
Generating new figures from previous data sets may well be outside of the copyright transferred to the publisher and not require their permission at all, but it will depend on the nature of the figures. It's not required in order to reuse them within your thesis, but you might prefer to have them a consistent style throughout anyway. You can cite them with "adapted from ..." if it's derivative.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/14
| 1,472
| 6,235
|
<issue_start>username_0: Apologies if this is a loaded question, the closest thing I can find is [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65938/how-to-publish-algorithm) post and while some of the answers were helpful, I feel I'm not close to solving my problem, hopefully this thread can become a guide for people like me in the future.
Let me start by saying I'm not an academic, at least not traditionally speaking...
I'm a self-taught, hobbyist programmer, I've been working with cellular-automata for a while now, and in my quest to improve performance, I developed an algorithm that in short, minimizes the number of cells that require iteration every step, greatly reducing overhead, instead of iterating over the entire grid cell-by-cell as it's done traditionally.
What I want to do is document the algorithm in a paper and publish it, my reasons for wanting to do this are:
* Because I genuinely believe it can be useful to other people working with cellular automata.
* To get credit for it.
* Because I think it'll look good on my résumé and help me with job hunting.
So, I've been learning about how papers written, formatted and published, as well as studying other papers as examples and frankly the whole process seems daunting.
Let's start with the writing, this is something that's brought up here a lot, but research papers use complex language in their writing, to my understanding, the reasons for that are conciseness, and because the papers are written by researchers, for other researchers...
First of all, I want my paper to be accessible to the average Joe like me, and I know I can concisely communicate my idea using (mostly) plain English, but I'm still worried about whether or not that will acceptable.
Secondly, what of the contents of my paper? I understand the general structure of a paper, starting with an abstract, keywords and an introduction, and ending with conclusions and references, but what about the actual body of the paper? I mean, I have a general idea of what I'll talk about (Briefly go over the general structure of a CA, provide pseudo-code, flowcharts, algorithm analysis of HOW performance is actually improved, talk about additional nuances like chunk size, neighborhoods and which values to prioritize as input, etc...), but how do I order all of that? And what other points should I address?
And finally, where do I go to publish? ResearchGate might be a bit too ambitious, plus the process of submission and review seems to be quite lengthy, I got my eye on arXiv, which does require you to either be a registered author or be endorsed by one, but I do have hope I can get endorsed if my paper is good enough, plus according to [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/63048/153274) answer, I can submit to arXiv and then submit to ResearchGate at a later date, one concern I have is I've seen people (mostly on ResearchGate) mistrusting arXiv moderators for megalomania and even plagiarism, I guess I can protect myself against the latter by either uploading a preprint to my personal portfolio or even documenting the algorithm on Youtube before anything else, to prove it's my original idea.
So to summarize: I'm a hobbyist who developed an algorithm, I want to document it in a paper and publish it somewhere reputable, how do I go about doing that?<issue_comment>username_1: Where you publish will depend on a lot of things.
* Are you prepared to pay publication charges? These can be substantial for some journals.
* Are you associated with any university or research institute? Could you lean on contacts to get an "in" at one?
* Do you guess you might have more to publish on a similar line?
* How much leg work are you prepared to put into this?
If you can get accesss to a university library you can probably find a lot of journals to investigate. You could contact the university department most closely associated with your work.
To pick a journal to put in the "possible" pile, you should go look at the kind of papers that get published there. If you can, browse a few issues and at least look at the titles. If you see useful titles, read some of the abstracts. Consider whether your work would look "at home" with that work. If they look like they are in the same general subject area as your work, that journal is a posisble.
That will also give you some examples of the makeup of articles that the journal publishes. You can get an idea about how terse they need to be, how long they can be, what they like about tables and figures and so on. The journal probably prints some advice on these issues. Also probably has a web site you should take a look at.
The librarians should be able to help you with possible journals to try first. They can probably suggest profs who work in the area in that university, if there are any.
Then you can investigate things like their page charges for publication. If the costs are just not possible, you can put that journal in the "oh well, maybe not" pile. You can also look for things like their policy on who can submit articles, and what the process is.
If you can get an associate in the university they can often guide you as to the best practices for publication. If you might have several papers to publish then it is conceivable you could get some kind of official connection to the university and so be able to put that on your submitted article. Just make sure they really do agree with that plan first.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Before you can publish you need to be sure you have something to publish.
In your case I think that means at least two more steps in your research.
First, you say
>
> iterating over the entire grid cell-by-cell as it's done
> traditionally.
>
>
>
People have been programming cellular automata for a long time. You must find a way to check the literature to make sure you know the current state of the art.
Second, the only way to convincingly demonstrate that your algorithm is significantly better than existing ones is to run benchmarks on seriously large examples comparing your algorithm's performance with standard ones.
When you have done both of these things then you can think about where and how to publish.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/14
| 3,016
| 12,148
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started working as a part time researcher in a company during my master degree as part of my graduate studies. I published a paper 2.5-3 years ago based on the data and my work at school.
Last month, I noticed that a competing company patented the idea that was presented in my paper in 2019 with minor twisting.
Can anyone patent my idea from my published research paper? I integrated a new idea an AI system 3 years ago. When I discussed this with the company that I work with, they said that:
>
> Firstly they claim that they are surprised that it is patentable. They said even we did the work, they might get the patent on that particular aspect because we did not publish anything or we did not apply so whoever applies first gets the patent.
> We do not know if it is stolen or came up with it independently. We will talk about it in the next little while. We need to spend some time on, we do not see any urgency for taking action. We can not supply information to the patent examiner that will invalidate their patent. We need to be careful of how we do that because we can go through a bunch of work and provide them with some information. If the patent examiner still gives them a patent, we have done some work to makes them strengthen their position. We want to be careful of how we approach it.
>
>
>
I am not happy about this and got very disappointed on how they did not protect my work and my research. Do you think does it worth to do further research in this company? Or should I focus my academic aspects of work outside of this company? For example asking for help from my university? I just graduated 5 months ago and working at the same place.
My supervisor also claims that he did not know it would be a patent. He says that he would like to follow company's approach.
But my view is that the company is not taking the right action as they only care about the sale and profits rather than research. Please advise! What is the best action for me?
I am not looking for a legal advice, what I would like to know" if I should keep doing research here or I move on?"<issue_comment>username_1: There are a few points to consider here.
1. Prior art does not necessarily invalidate a patent. It may invalidate some claims, but other elements of the patent may still stand.
2. Your thesis may or may not constitute prior art. This is particularly true if your thesis was published at the same time as the patent.
3. Litigating a specific patent doesn't necessarily do anyone any benefit, and will possibly involve non-trivial costs.
4. Your point about "care about sale and profits rather than research" somewhat contradicts your entire post; if they cared only about research, then they almost *definitely* wouldn't care about the patent.
All that said, the answer to the question, "what should I do?" is likely "nothing". Unless you specifically want to pursue an idea that revolves around having patent rights to this idea—which is really something that only a patent attorney can address—you should probably just move on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm mostly responding to your comment that you are interested in the future, not the past.
First, I think the company's response was pretty accurate if they didn't think it was patentable and you didn't convince them otherwise. The advice about the difficulty of a challenge and the likely outcome seems accurate.
I don't know what sort of "patent sharing" agreement you have with the company. If it is ad-hoc, then you have a problem. But many companies will bear the expense of a patent and the possible expense of a challenge, contracting to pass some of the financial benefits to the people who did the work. If you did the work on "company time" it is unlikely that you can patent things on your own. So, in the end, you need to convince management that the cost/risk is worth bearing.
But, make sure you have a written agreement in advance and that the company has, in the past, behaved properly in such situations.
If you move on, and continue to do the same kind of research elsewhere, then you will have exactly the same issues. You and the company need to agree on the risk-value equation since the financial risk is mostly theirs.
And, patenting as an independent researcher can be very expensive, not just for the initial filing, but for the legal cost involved if you get challenged.
But, in the end, I think, everything flowed from their initial reluctance about the patentability of the "device" and the financial risks and rewards. If you had solved that, this wouldn't have been as likely to happen, unless the other company was doing parallel research (or industrial espionage).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What is the best action for me?
>
>
>
I know this can be frustrating, but most likely, nothing can be done realistically, except from being extra careful for the future inventions. The intellectual property one creates as a part-time researcher in a company is typically owned by the company. Therefore, it's up to the company to decide what to do with it. If someone patents your paper, then it can be [invalidated](https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/matters/matters-9007.html#:%7E:text=If%20one%20can%20prove%20that,be%20useful%2C%20novel%20and%20unobvious.) ([mirror](https://web.archive.org/web/20210308123524/https://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/matters/matters-9007.html#:%257E:text=If%2520one%2520can%2520prove%2520that,be%2520useful%252C%2520novel%2520and%2520unobvious.)) if one can prove the following, but your company seems uninterested to spend time and money it:
>
> Another approach to invalidating a patent is to prove that the invention was in public use or on sale in the U.S. more than a year prior to the date of the application. If one can prove that the invention was known or used by others in the U.S. or patented or described in a publication in any country before the invention thereof by the applicant, the patent is invalid. In order to obtain a patent, the invention must be useful, novel and unobvious.
>
>
>
You could try yourself but it'll likely be time-consuming. The quote above is for the US, each country has their own patent system/rules.
Note that publishing patentable work is referred to as a [defensive publication](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_publication):
>
> A defensive publication, or defensive disclosure, is an intellectual property strategy used to prevent another party from obtaining a patent on a product, apparatus or method for instance.
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: There are estimates that in the software realm, five out of six patents are not actually enforceable because there is prior art that mean that the patent should not have been granted in the first place. (I will assume that your artificial intelligence work falls in the "software realm" of patents.) Indeed, it is exceedingly rare that companies have successfully used software patents to force a competitor to stop making a product, or to force them to pay royalties for a patent the suing company owns. The usual strategy is simply to *intimidate* a competitor by *threatening to sue* over a whole portfolio that may contain thousands or tens of thousands of software patents; that will cost competitors years of money and uncertainty, but the validity of the patents will never actually be put to the test. It is commonly believed that if companies ever tried to really use their patents, most of these patents would probably be invalidated because the sued party could show that there is ample prior art.
For you, this really just means that you could spend a lot of money trying to challenge the granting of the patent, or try to get it invalidated retroactively. Or you could say "who cares; they can't do anything with the patent anyway". The latter option costs you nothing, and it doesn't even cost you any opportunities: You can continue to use your work as if there was no patent, because the only entity that could sue you would be the company owning the patent, and they will retract any threat of a law suite once you show them that you produced prior art that would invalidate their patent if they tried to enforce it. That is also the reason why the company you worked for doesn't care: They, too, know that that patent is easily invalidated, but it's not worth anyone's effort to do so.
In other words: Move on with your life. It's not worth anyone's effort to deal with it.
(I will add that you can not patent the work yourself either because you published on it. You cannot patent something you have already published. You would have had to patent it first, but that train has left the station.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Other answers correctly point out what you, yourself, should do to invalidate the patent (nothing).
Your question also asks (paraphrased) "should I quit over the company’s (lack of) action?". Only you can answer that; I will try to help your decision-making by explaining why, at this point in time, the company’s decision to do nothing seems entirely reasonable.
*The following is written by someone whose entire legal education is a boring 20h training in patent law, and who does not know the specifics of your case. If you rely on this for legal action, you deserve whatever happens to you.*
The procedure for patents in most Western jurisdictions (US/EU) is as follows: once you file an application, the patent office will examine it, and make their own search for prior art. After some delay (18 months in Europe), the patent application as well as the prior art search report are *published* (visible to everybody). After some more delay, during which competitors may object, the patent is granted (maybe partially, if some claims were invalidated by prior art etc.). For more details, Wikipedia has an article about [patent prosecution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_prosecution).
(Notice also that stuff you published *yourself* can be part of prior art and invalidate a patent that is filed later. If you wanted a patent for yourself, the time to act was before you published an article, not now.)
A competitor may attempt to invalidate a patent after it has been granted. It is not uncommon to gather prior art evidence as soon as a competitor’s patent is granted, so that the legal department has a better idea of the risk of litigation, but wait until an infringement procedure is launched to actually do anything with it. Some legal proceedings require you to put up objections as soon as you are aware you can make them, but patent application is not one of them.
From what you say, I assume the patent was just published, and is not granted yet; that you published your paper before the filing date of the patent application (18 months back in time); and that you want your company to object to the patent while at the patent office stage.
Objections at the patent office are (much) cheaper than litigation at court. However, no litigation whatsoever is yet cheaper than objections at the patent office. If your company does try to sell stuff that falls within the patent claims, and the competitor tries to enforce the patent (via a lawsuit), the opening move from your company’s patent attorney will likely be to write a letter saying "here’s the prior art, are you sure you wanna do this?" (paraphrased). If your publication is crystal-clear prior art, such a letter may be enough. That letter may still be somewhat expensive (because the lawyer will have to interview you and check records before writing it), but it will still be orders of magnitude cheaper than actual litigation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Sorry this happened. But, you’re the one and only who really knows the project.
I would start looking for how to modify it in a way that it would be even better and patent it in a hurry, before the others do it.
The improvements must be significant to be valid. You have now the advantage of being able to see the results of the first device that was produced and, you can look for it’s flaws.
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/02/15
| 292
| 1,174
|
<issue_start>username_0: I started my PhD in solid state physics in 2019 here in US. Due to covid, our labs were closed for about 8months. After that, I could not get any results in 2021 and its been more than 2.5 years into my PhD with no publications.
I wanted to ask the community how concerned should I be. I do freak out sometimes when I think about it. Have other people gone through/going through similar situations? If yes, how did you cope with it?<issue_comment>username_1: The last few years were difficult for everyone and you shouldn't put pressure on yourself by comparing your work/outputs to what you could have done before the pandemic. I am not sure whether how universal this is, but in my field (marine science) you can graduate without peer-reviewed publications. So I would first investigate what the rules of your university are regarding graduation and keep working away at your own pace.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It's perfectly normal for a solid state physics research project to take 4-5 years from start to publication.
>
> I do freak out sometimes
>
>
>
You should talk to a mental health professional about that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/15
| 2,334
| 10,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a new professor and am writing my first letters of recommendation. I have an undergrad student that is truly quite good applying to a summer research program at an institution where I have people I know. I don't think these colleagues are on the selection committee of the internship program and would not see my letter of reference and notice it's from me.
Would it be a faux pas to send a personal email to the people I know and make sure they know about my good student applying? Maybe they can help make sure my student's application is noticed in the pile. I can't decide if this is strategic networking of a mentor or pushing nepotism...
Have you done this or encountered this before? What's common? Note this is in the USA in biology field.<issue_comment>username_1: I suppose that opinions can differ, but I find it entirely appropriate to send a supporting letter to people you know. You are putting your own reputation on the line, of course.
I've done something similar for a couple of students, though related to graduate admissions. One was excellent in all dimensions except, being an immigrant brought up in a different culture, did rather poorly on standardized exams. The letter was to someone at a top school. His is now a professor in CS at a top school. My letter just caused them to take a second look and they were happy they did.
The other case was sad. I personally recommended another student to a different top school and he was accepted but did terribly. None of us knew at the time that he was dying of AIDS. My own reputation there was in question until we learned the truth of it.
In the US, letters are taken seriously. The committee may only be able to look at official communications and needs to be fair to all applicants. So it isn't a case of "I'd like you to do me a favor, though.". It is more like "There is more to see with this student than you might expect." It can have an effect or not.
How the letter is received and any ethical decisions are up to the recipient and the committee. But sending a supportive letter is fine.
Sending a letter to sabotage a student is another matter entirely, of course.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Given that this is an undergraduate research program, it's totally possible that your friends have absolutely nothing to do with the selection process or the actual running of this research program. A lot of these programs essentially run completely orthogonal to their home institutions (and are more passion projects for the couple of professors actually involved). That being said, there's nothing to lose by sending a letter, and if your friend is not willing to tell their colleagues about your student, then that is OK.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> I can't decide if this is strategic networking of a mentor or pushing nepotism...
>
>
>
There's a slight duplicity inherent in the ethics of these questions, namely that we have an exaggerated notion of fairness and still want to tip the scales towards a favorable outcome.
The entire point of networking is to gain some advantage that would not exist by being outside the network. In that sense, strategic networking is already oriented towards some inequity. So is almost every action we do to gain a competitive edge. Nepotism just shifts the inequity from a win-win to a win-lose (candidate-university).
It doesn't seem like there should be any ethical dilemma here. That is to say, sending the email is unfair to all the candidates who don't have an advisor like you, but that isn't your burden to bear. This would be self-evident if we accept that a large number of our daily actions are unfair, and that the exalted notion of fairness is an idealism that we don't live up to.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: **TLDR:** not a faux pas, *if done with appropriate tact and consideration of the ethical issues underlying this situation*.
Long answer:
We should distinguish between sending an informal email outside the official LOR channel that says “please look at my student’s application file, it will be worth your time” and sending an email that says “please accept my student as a favor to me”. There is a big ethical difference between those two actions IMO. The latter action is definitely unethical. But the former action can be viewed as ethical when viewed from certain perspectives.
Here’s my analysis of the “please look at this student” email. The issue in the background here is that we all want application processes to be as meritocratic as possible, but at the same time, a true meritocracy can’t actually be achieved when there are so many application files and the people looking at them have so little time to do their work that the end result is that not all applications actually get seriously looked at.
In such an environment, even the mere “benefit” of having one’s application file looked at feels like getting an unfair advantage. And indeed, an application process that doesn’t even *look* at all applications is definitely unfair, since it seems quite likely that it will miss some worthy candidates (maybe even the best candidate). But to me that unfairness seems intrinsic to the time- and resource-constrained environment in the department running the program, and will exist whether or not you send the informal email asking for your student’s file to be looked at. The only thing that might change is which students end up being the victims of that unfairness. So we have a “[trolley problem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolley_problem)”-type situation in which your email might divert the department’s attention towards your student (whom you deem very worthy indeed), at the possible cost of “sacrificing” another — statistically, less worthy on average, I’ll assume — applicant whose file won’t get looked at as closely.
Is this action ethical? Well, that depends on your views about trolley problems — these are ethical dilemmas on which people tend to have a broad range of views. But one can reasonably argue that you are simply helping the department use its scarce attention more efficiently, and in this way are helping it get a better admission outcome overall. This is the utilitarian view commonly taken in many trolley-type situations.
To summarize, I personally think sending the email is ethically reasonable and not a faux pas as long as you truly believe in your student being a highly meritorious candidate, and don’t suggest that the decision regarding whether the student is accepted should factor in your personal friendship with the people you’re sending the email to.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: I’d be extremely careful with any email you send. The current environment in the US is hunting for any tiny downfall to make people’s heads roll.
If I were you, I’d call the friend ( at work) and recommend directly your student. A short and direct conversation asking to please take a look at his resume and be assured that he/she is great.
Nothing in writing.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: That solely depends on your relationship with the recipient. Send personal emails to people whom you normally would send personal emails to. The field i worked in was quite small and cozy back then - it may have been even some kind of affront not to communicate personally.
Otherwise i would imagine that increasing the email load of some busy person whom you don't know and who maybe even doesn't deal personally with what you sent (i.e. Assistant may forward the letter to the postdoc) it may be inappropriate.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> I don't think these colleagues are on the selection committee of the internship program
>
>
>
If they are not, then personally I would not send an email to them about the student, not necessarily out of ethical considerations, but because I would expect sending an email to make no difference to the student's outcome.
If I were on such a committee, and a colleague not on the committee approached me to ask that I give different treatment to one applicant whom they know of via a professional contact, I would be inclined to ignore that request completely. I would expect that if their professional contact has anything relevant to say about the applicant, it should be said in their application, especially if the professional contact is the one who wrote the reference letter. So even if your email *does* result in your contact approaching somebody on the committee about your student, I doubt it will have any consequences for your student.
Now consider it from the contact's perspective. If I got an email from a professional contact asking me to make sure that a committee in my institution gave careful consideration to one particular applicant who is their student, and I was not on that committee, I would respond with a polite email saying something like: *"Hello Professor X, hope you're well. I am not a member of the committee so I will not be involved in considering applications; if there is something you left out of your reference letter then you could try contacting the committee to send an updated reference letter. Best wishes to your student."* I would not approach anyone on the committee about it.
On the other hand, there is a risk that your contact will *think* you are asking for some unfair advantage for your student, because an email asking for an unfair advantage looks exactly the same as an email that might be considered a legitimate request. A nepotist would never outright say "please lobby the committee to accept my student", they would write the same email you would plan to write, because that's plausibly deniable and if the contact is on board with it then they will read between the lines. So I am not sure there *is* a way of wording such an email which, from the recipient's perspective, totally eliminates the idea that you *might be* asking for nepotism.
Of course, you may know your contact well enough to know they would not think that, in which case there is probably no downside to sending the email, but I would still expect there to be no upside either.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/16
| 1,558
| 6,841
|
<issue_start>username_0: In cases where new professors at universities or research institutes are given laboratory space and budgets for new equipment, graduate students and postdocs, but assistance in *recruiting* those graduate students and postdocs is not provided, what are techniques that they use to populate their labs with students and postdocs?
I'm interested in nonstandard, novel and innovative techniques beyond advertising in applicable academic newsletters and conferences.
Experimental physical sciences would be a good context for me (note: I'm literally "asking for a friend") but answers that address this more generally might be more valuable for future readers. So for the purposes of this question I won't be getting into any specifics so as not to unnecessarily constrain answers.<issue_comment>username_1: I think all ways already have been found. Any HR work is time-consuming. So the best for a professor is not making it all only his job. Hand out a big chunk of it away. Make a net of trusted helpers - PhD students, students who already finished their Masters and so on. Make a *Net of trustees*. Send trustees to missions: schools, universities, conferences. Not just to present you, but look out for people to catch. Continuous and distributed search is the only option.
Also, people who qualify, already probably doing something else. Which does not mean that they will reject your projects. People often decline money bump for additional intensity in their life, so they can go with you for the freedom science can give.
Also, people who qualify, often have less then ideal papers. It does not mean they can't grow more to overcome themselves. You should be careful about looking into papers and citation numbers. It is just a number, nothing more. Humans are not numbers. Einstein had effectively zero citations because he was not a scientist at all, he was worker at patent office and was declined a chance to work in all major universities.
Also, don't look at formal side. Ramanujan had no formal education at all. And nobody could ever vouch for him, at all. Same with hundreds of thousands of people who were declined a few times because of formal documents they were lacking, and it halted their progress.
What to look at, then?
Initiative. People who initiatively nest in specific places, who make their move first. If somebody writes to you, and you never even heard of, ask the person's name and what he is interested in. People who are interested in your works, will continiously generate ideas and constantly handle at least a few at any given moment. At the very least if person is interested in other areas, you can redirect him to other professionals.
Self-sufficient. Sufficiency is the very basic stage of scientific person.
Language-rich. People who speak at least four languages are better choices. And you cannot know how much a person can speak until somebody actually speaks with him. For physics field, it would be: 1 computer language, 1 mathematical language (ability to work with CAS), English (for writing papers, obviously), some other language (Russian, French, German etc etc).
Positive-feedback *versus* Negative-feedback personalities.
Look for positive-feedbacked personalities for scientific works. These people are generators, able to bootstrap themselves, their ideas and their equipment from the given initial conditions. Emotionally unstable, often depressed, positive-feedback personalities require careful handling and additional work on polishing their personality. Most of them are rejects by the society, including scientific society. <NAME> and <NAME>, most likely both did NOT recieve Nobel prize, just because they did hate each other.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I guess you are talking from one of the not famous institutions, so that you do not get flooded by applications as soon as you open an internship position of 1 month to perform a task that requires 6 months of qualified work from a professional.
Quite simple: offering funds for a 3 or 6 months stint at the top facilities, leaving to the applicant complete freedom (and burden) to get the contact/advisor at the top facility.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know if the ideas below count as innovative, but they are things that go beyond advertising in applicable academic newsletters and conferences.
1. Social Media. If you have, or can build up, a following on social media, within the community of people interested in your subject area, this can be a good avenue for recruitment. Being active on social media can help create awareness of your lab and what you do and if you have an active, interesting and well-followed account then when you post a job ad, relevant people will see it. Building up a following takes time, of course, so if you need to attract applications right now and don't already have a social media presence it won't help much. But over the longer term it could be part of a recruitment strategy.
2. Professional network. Anyone who has got far enough in research to be setting up their own lab will surely have a substantial network of collaborators and former colleagues/bosses. Those people have students and postdocs who want to find their next job. Ask around your network if people know of promising candidates who might be interested.
3. Seminars and conference talks. Try to get invited to give seminars in places with big labs in your specialty. Attend relevant conferences, hopefully with the opportunity to give a talk. Mention, at the start of the talk, while you still have everyone's attention, that you are setting up a lab and hiring and that people who are interested in joining should talk to you afterwards or send you an email. Then, hopefully, give a really engaging talk about your recent work, creating the impression that you are an interesting and inspiring person with lots of good ideas.
4. Head-hunt. Look at recent preprints and papers in your field, and find ones that you really like where the first author is someone you've never heard of. It is likely that that person is a PhD student or junior postdoc who's going to be looking for a job in the not-too-distant future. Invite them for a seminar + discussion. If they make a good impression, offer them a job. Since the question implies a situation where the lab is not at one of the top-reputed institutions (otherwise there would be no need for special effort to find applicants), it probably isn't worth trying this with people who are already at top institutions, or where the paper in question is a very splashy, high-profile one. Those people will have lots of other offers. Instead, seek people from non "top-tier" institutions who've produced high-quality work that isn't necessarily getting the attention it deserves.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/16
| 2,717
| 10,707
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will have a postdoc fellowship in Germany with a stipend contract, not a working contract. Therefore, I won't have the pension or other social benefits. Health insurance is paid by the organization on a reimbursement basis.
The question is, will any deductions be made, like income tax, from the stipend that I will receive? What percentage of deductions should I expect?<issue_comment>username_1: To start, I am not a lawyer, no expert on taxation, or the like, but got a tax-free scholarship in Germany many years back. So if you want to be sure, you will need to check with a professional.
To answer your question: It's complicated (which is not unusual for taxation-related questions, especially in Germany).
Scholarships/stipends are tax-free, provided that they are not too high and come from a source that is considered non-profit. It also really has to be a scholarship and not a relabeled working contract. What exactly "not too high" means depends on the individual case as it seems.
A good source for taxation questions in Germany is the Haufe Verlag, who have a page on scholarships (in German): <https://www.haufe.de/steuern/finanzverwaltung/steuerfreiheit-von-stipendien_164_470978.html>
They cite the respective taxation law, which - roughly translated - states that taxation-freedom of scholarships requires that the scholarship sum does not exceed the amount of money necessary to cover the basic cost of living and the cost you have because you do research (or for your education). I recall that there used to be a fixed upper bound of the monthly stipend for taxation freedom, but according to the source given above there is a new court ruling that makes this more complicated (it looks like if you previously had a high-paying job, any amount lower than your previous income should be fine). To make things interesting, the source given above also has a list of programs that are called "scholarships" but according to the taxation law aren't.
You also mention "Health insurance is paid by the organization on a reimbursement basis." - This sounds like the organisation you will receive a scholarship from has put some thought into making sure that the scholarship will not be accidentally taxable because it happens to be too high. There is surely someone in the organisation who came up with this idea, and possibly had this idea checked - perhaps you can find out who this is to obtain information on taxation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I looked into a PhD stipend I had a while ago and I had the following text in there:
>
> Das Stipendium ist im Rahmen der Bestimmmung des §3 Nr. 44 EStG steuerfrei
>
>
>
This is not a PostDoc stipend, but as far as I understand the rules should be roughly the same. I would look into the text for some clause like this, if it is tax-free it should be mentioned in there. If this is not a stipend adapted to the rules in Germany, you probably need some professional to figure out if it counts as tax-free under these rules. You might want to try asking the tax office "Finanzamt" about this.
This is the text of the paragraph cited in my example:
>
> Stipendien, die aus öffentlichen Mitteln oder von zwischenstaatlichen oder überstaatlichen Einrichtungen, denen die Bundesrepublik Deutschland als Mitglied angehört, zur Förderung der Forschung oder zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen oder künstlerischen Ausbildung oder Fortbildung gewährt werden. Das Gleiche gilt für Stipendien, die zu den in Satz 1 bezeichneten Zwecken von einer Einrichtung, die von einer Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts errichtet ist oder verwaltet wird, oder von einer Körperschaft, Personenvereinigung oder Vermögensmasse im Sinne des § 5 Absatz 1 Nummer 9 des Körperschaftsteuergesetzes gegeben werden. Voraussetzung für die Steuerfreiheit ist, dass
>
>
>
>
> a) die Stipendien einen für die Erfüllung der Forschungsaufgabe oder für die Bestreitung des Lebensunterhalts und die Deckung des Ausbildungsbedarfs erforderlichen Betrag nicht übersteigen und nach den von dem Geber erlassenen Richtlinien vergeben werden,
>
>
>
>
> b) der Empfänger im Zusammenhang mit dem Stipendium nicht zu einer bestimmten wissenschaftlichen oder künstlerischen Gegenleistung oder zu einer bestimmten Arbeitnehmertätigkeit verpflichtet ist;
>
>
>
This roughly states that the the amount must not exceed what is necessary for the research itself and your cost of living. It also states that you must not be obligated to any specific research activity or employee duties.
I'm not a lawyer, but these rules are kinda vague and personally I'd really try to avoid getting into a situation where someone takes a hard look at your situation and applies them somewhat strictly.
You will need to get health insurance yourself, that is not optional in Germany (in your situation) and the university will probably ask for a confirmation that you are insured.
You should also be aware that you don't have any unemployment insurance you would usually have if this were a real employee contract. There are even more differences in other areas like parental leave, most social security systems in Germany work under the assumption that people have regular jobs, not stipends.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A few thoughts in addition to the existing answers:
Social Insurance
----------------
As MadScientist says, social insurance in Germany mostly works along the assumption that everyone is employee. However, some parts allow volountary contributions in order to get some insurance also if you are not in the obligatory social insurance.
* Health insurance: you have to have one. It is your choice whether you go for a private one (if you come from a foreign country, this includes the possibility to have a health insurance from there which covers Germany) or if you go for the *Freiwillige Pflichtversicherung* (literally volountary obligatory insurance :-> ) of one of the compulsory health insurers (*gesetzliche Krankenkasse*)
* Pension cass: accepts volountary contributions, which will earn you a) contribution years (*Beitragsjahre*) and b) pension in proportion to your contribution.
* unemployment insurance: you may be able to enter [Freiwillige Weiterversicherung](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freiwillige_Weiterversicherung_gegen_Arbeitslosigkeit) (volountary continuation of the unemployment insurance). [Relevant court decision about a research scholarships](https://www.juraforum.de/arbeitsrecht/aufnahme-in-arbeitslosenversicherung-kann-durch-stipendium-begruendet-werden-604300). Note though, that the scholarship question is subject to income tax.
However, you need to have been obligatorily insured before.
* Accident insurance: it is obligatory for an employer to have work accident insurance for their employees. I.e., your new university will have it (and thus have to comply with the prevention rules), but it will not cover you since your are not an employee.
Again, you may be able to enter one yourself the way freelancers can (along the lines of the court decision I linked above).
If you do not have work accident insurance, your health insurance will cover medical costs. However, work accident insurance may get you preferential treatment compared to a compulsory health insurance (waiting times, rehabilitation programs, ... Private health insurance will get you even more preferential treatment in terms of waiting time at the doctor's, but I don't know their general reputation in terms of rehabilitation etc.)
Taxation
--------
I'll also second MadScientists advise to talk to the tax office. It is their legal duty to explain to you whether you have file a tax declaration, and also where in their forms to fill in the stipend iff it turns out to be taxable.
Here's a highly relevant [post by a tax advisor](https://www.steuerschroeder.de/stipendium-steuer.html). Roughly speaking, the "home" tax office of the funding agency is the one responsible for finding out whether the scholarship is taxable income or not. They'll issue a *binding* decision to you or to your tax office (binding means: if they write that your scholarship is not subject to income tax, your local tax office has to accept this decision. You may still have to file a tax declaration depending on other circumstances).
*This means: they will very likely be able to tell you immediately.*
The post also says that scholarships from funders in the EU or EWR can also be exempt from income tax. (Your "local" tax office in spe can tell you what tax office you need to ask in that case.)
---
In general, it is *your* legal duty to sign up for tax numbers and submit declarations in time if they are obligatory.
My experience is that German tax offices are very fair and reliable in their explanations.
They will not give advise like a tax advisor (e.g. telling you what kind of business decisions will optimize your tax payload by shifting income and costs between years) - and they'll tell you so if they think you ask such advise of them - as opposed to how to correctly declare taxes for your given situation.
You can certainly also ask a tax advisor. However, if you just ask the same questions that you'd otherwise ask the tax office, the tax advisor is a rather expensive alternative. They are most useful if you want to argue with the tax office that they are wrong about your taxes. And of course, if you think this likely to happen, you'd talk to them first before talking to the tax office.
For employees, there are also the *Lohnsteuerhilfevereine* who help with income tax declaration and are much less expensive than tax advisors/tax lawyers - but their services are only for employees.
*(I've had a scholarship as PhD student, and my local tax office on looking through my paperwork told me it is not subject to income tax, that I can volountarily file a declaration - which would get me some withholdings refunded [wage tax withholding calculations are done on the assumption that the wage goes on throughout the year] - and if I do file, the stipend needs to go into line so-and-so as income that is not subject to income tax. All in a very friendly and professional manner. I've since had various kinds of complicated tax declarations that a scientist moving temporarily into other countries, or a freelancer with part-time employment in science encounters. The tax officers I've dealt with have all been very professional. On several occasions they did not immediately know the answer: in that case, they told me they'd have to look it up and/or ask a colleague and would I please call again next week. When I did so, they did have the answer ready.)*
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/16
| 1,103
| 4,940
|
<issue_start>username_0: I helped a friend with an analysis and this will now be published. The analysis only took me two evenings of work and I saw this as a favour to my friend and told them I didn't need authorship in return. In the past, I have helped several colleagues from my own field with analyses and regularly invested similar amounts of time in this and never got authorship in return, which was fine to me. However, this friend now offered me authorship because the analysis is the core of the paper and other co-authors contributed less than I did. The paper is in a completely different field as I am, so it may not add too much to my CV except that my skillset is transferable to other fields. Do you have any advice on whether I should accept this co-authorship?
Potential cons:
* Hard to take full responsibility of the paper because I don't know anything about the field
* Perhaps it diffuses the focus of my CV/publication list(?)
Potential pro's:
* Extra publication/citations etc.
* Shows that my skillset is transferable and acknowledged and valuable by/to others
For context, I just finished the first year of my postdoc. Do you have any thoughts or advice?<issue_comment>username_1: It would be good for the authors to acknowledge your contribution in an acknowledgements section. All authors should accept full responsibility for the entire paper and you have stated that you can't do that. It is, of course, your decision. But what if other results turned out to be fabricated? What would you want to do then?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In terms of authorship, contributing to the analysis done for a paper does rise to the level of being an author of the paper. You can see some examples of what contributions give rise to authorship in the CRediT statements used by some journals: <https://www.elsevier.com/authors/policies-and-guidelines/credit-author-statement>. Listed in there are things like the formal analysis (applying statistical analysis, etc.) and writing software for the research (which can also be the analysis software). So, from what you say, the offer of authorship is proper. At a minimum though, there should definitely be a mention of your contribution in the acknowledgements section.
As for accepting the authorship, while you say it is hard to take responsibility for the full paper, do you at least know enough in the field to understand its ideas and do you feel the collaborators you worked with have a good understanding of it? In my experience, the expectation for knowing everything and taking full responsibility rests mostly with the corresponding author rather than each individual author (since the corresponding author is usually the one who has been involved the most). The individual authors should be knowledgable and responsible for their areas of contributions.
In my opinion, yes, it would be fine to accept the authorship. You also mention that you had already done work like this in your own field with other colleagues without the authorship credit, and I would encourage you to bring up the topic of authorship with future collaborators you work with during the project (typically it is better to discuss these things when you are starting the project to ensure there are no surprises). I know it can seem tough, especially when some of them may be more senior, but you can make strong cases for being included (and it can definitely help your career by showing you can collaborate and work with other teams).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You have listed the wrong reasons for considering accepting an authorship. **The only consideration should be whether you've put in enough work to qualify as a co-author.** That threshold is field-dependent, and presumably, your friend knows a lot more about the standards in their field than you.
What may be a trivial analysis in one area might not be somewhere else. Actually, I'm worried you were overly conservative in turning down prior authorships.
With regard to taking responsibility for the paper, a comment from [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/63475/bryan-krause):
>
> I have encountered some journals/submission systems that do ask that all coauthors take "full responsibility" for the paper ... That said, I don't take those declarations too seriously, and I'm comfortable declaring I take "full responsibility" as long as I feel comfortable with the aspects of the paper that I've had the ability to influence.
>
>
>
To which I would add that there is always trust between authors. If you're otherwise confident your co-authors did everything correctly, that shouldn't be a barrier to becoming an author. After all, if there's no author that takes responsibility for the "core" analysis that's a serious problem!
Even if it does end up "diluting" your publication list, then you can always not list it, and name the section "selected papers."
Upvotes: 5
|
2022/02/16
| 1,954
| 8,498
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a fourth semester mathematics student. I have obtained great grades in Calculus/Analysis II & III. The first two semesters, I would say top 5%.
Have I cheated myself, as I did not use the notes from the professor, I used the books Calculus II & III from <NAME>, that had many interesting examples. Thanks to this book I was able to ace my calculus exams. Examples give me the courage to solve the exercise sheets and proposed exercises. On the other hand, I have obtained mediocre results on my other modules where solutions where not "available" to me.
Now that more advanced modules are being taught to my cohort, the solutions are harder to come by, and this really demoralizes me, making me procrastinate more often than not, obviously leading to poorer grades.
Are amateur mathematicians that use this study method ie. that learn through examples and solved exercises, doomed to fail their mathematics career? Are we cheating ourselves? Mathematicians are supposed to be problem solvers, not plug and chug machines am I right?
What can I do to improve?
Thank you for your answers.<issue_comment>username_1: You are not cheating.
It is nothing wrong in learning from examples or solved exercises. In fact in some courses like Probability, statistics , vector calculus( applied mathematics course) a student has good chances of learning subject and getting good grades if he has gone through examples and /or exercises. You are just putting your effort and time and there is nothing bad about it.
Also, let me tell you solving exercises and reading examples will always help you even if it is a pure mathematics course. Answers/ Proofs of some courses in Pure mathematics will take more time and effort to come by but that is due to abstractness, I am sure everyone goes through this. Mathematics is learnt by doing. Even if by solving exercises and reading examples you are getting good grades then what is the harm in that?
Probably, in you class there might be students who are able to get same marks as you but by solving less exercises. Don't get discouraged, everyone has different way of catching knowledge. I also learn by solving exercises and examples. But, the problem will certainly arise, if you compare yourself with your peers by the amount of effort which you see they put. What you are doing is not teaching.
Also, your mathematics career can't be judged by this only.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In a lot of ways you seem to be doing the right thing, and if the exams are sufficiently challenging then more so. I'll assume that your goal is learning, and not just grades in the following.
In math, doing a lot of exercises is a good way to learn, and eventually to gain insight into the inner workings of something like analysis. Doing exercises give you reinforcement, but there is always the possibility that you will reinforce the wrong things. That is why feedback is also important to obtain. Normally, instructors should give you that feedback on assignments so that you don't go off the track.
You ask about solution manuals or solved problems online. If you use them for feedback then they are fine, though not perfect. But reading solutions to a difficult problem is a lot less efficient for *learning* than doing it yourself, no matter how hard. You can delude yourself, actually if you take shortcuts to learning. Ask yourself, can you extrapolate your learning to solve other problems that aren't so similar to the one's whose solution you've seen.
You don't say why you don't use the instructor's notes, so it is hard to comment on that. They might be useful or not, and they might be more useful to supplement your thinking before you go to a solution manual.
If you ask the instructor for hints when you get stuck then you might move faster to learning. But a wise instructor will try to give you minimal hints to help you avoid wrong turns, but letting you find the path yourself. Don't ask for answers. Ask for hints. Try to explain your reasoning.
But, do lots of exercises, more than required. And get feedback on your solutions even if you have to ask for it during office hours. Especially when you think you have an insight, talk to the instructor about that.
However, if the exams closely follow the assigned problems and you need help to solve those, then, yes, you might be deluding yourself. It would be a shame to finish a course *only* knowing how to solve some relatively small set of problems that had a structure that you had prompting for. Eventually, problems will arise that don't have simple online analogues. So, while it is useful to have "training wheels" as a kid learning to ride a bike, you need to take them off eventually, even if it means skinned knees for a bit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **You're comparing two different skills**
* On the one hand, you are expected to understand the *nature of mathematics.*
* On the other hand, you are expected to understand *how to research a solution.*
I'm not a mathematician, I'm an engineer - and I do a lot of programming in my work, which I believe is a salient example of what you're talking about.
* On the one hand, I'm very good and knowing how to express my needs in research to rapidly discover *a solution to my programming problem.*
* On the other hand, I occasionally (and if I'm really being honest with myself... frequently) must re-research the same solution multiple times before I remember the solution because I'm not actually learning to better understand programming — I'm just finding a solution to my problem quickly.
**But from a practical point of view, what's the difference?**
These are two different skills: knowing the essential nature of your field of study vs. knowing enough about your field of study combined with great research skills to solve a problem.
If your intended career is in academia, you're probably causing yourself more harm than good because you need to know those gruesome details to effectively teach the subject to someone else. Why? Because the first time a student asks you "why?" you won't be able to derive an answer without depending on research.
But if your intended career is in not in academia, you're probably teaching yourself a more valuable skill — how to get to the correct answer as fast as humanly possible. Because, for example, in the corporate world, speed + correct = paycheck. How you achieve speed is often (perhaps too often...) irrelevant in the corporate world.
So it's important to understand that while your instructor may have a preference as to which skill he/she thinks you should be learning, both skills are valuable, both have their place, both have their pros and cons, and neither one alone will make you a good mathematician.
*And to underscore that last statement: if your test scores are flagging due to a lack of good examples, that suggests you've been depending a bit too much on your research skills and not quite enough on your essential understanding. That's a valuable piece of information! and I'm glad you're learning it now rather than mid-way through your career when you can't do much about it. To be great at what you do, you need to be good at both skills.*
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I think nearly *everyone* does better if there are example-solutions, example-proofs available. Prototypes! So, I'd say that the reason you do better in courses where worked-out examples are available is that you learn the material better and more easily. That's desirable! :)
Yes, there is some traditional viewpoint that math students are supposed to solve lots of problems "in a vacuum", but that is very inefficient. Having examples that one can more-or-less *imitate* is much more efficient, and is a reasonable way of *learning*. The *teaching* component of that is *choosing* and *giving* the worked-out examples.
There is no reason for students to have to figure everything out on their own... Sure, it is very important to *engage* with the material (rather than thinking that it's adequate to "memorize" worked-out examples), but engagement does *not* entail working in a vacuum, trying to re-invent the wheel.
Still, yes, it *can* be interesting to "try to do it yourself", if you have the time and inclination. Even so, success is not guaranteed, and even if you succeed to some degree, your solution may be inferior to the "best" version... which could be learned from someone else.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/16
| 2,451
| 10,398
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m a mature student, starting a part-time MSc. computer science degree after a decade in industry, after previously graduating with a BSc degree. I am out of touch with academia, but I am excited to get into it. I have an open mind to this all and I know it’ll be a bumpy ride.
My first module is on Python programming. The course book covers Python and a bunch of Python libraries. It’s basically just a bunch of documentation assembled in a PDF file with some Python history.
The one and only piece of graded work is a written assignment. The “task” is to take the few CSV datasets provided, matching columns in one to columns in another and matching single “x,y” pairs from another dataset to previously identified columns. The criteria for one part is the lowest mean squared error, and for the other it’s not explained quite so succinctly, but it’s a calculation. It’s not specified in any sort of terminology I can relate to, what kind of problem were solving here. The task specification is written in an imperative style and is not really explaining much of the “why”, just a prescriptive “how”.
Where I’m getting lost is, what we’re being assessed on does not seem to be much about Python. We’re to think of a research question which we should then investigate and in doing so, shoehorn this program into it as if it were our own solution to the problem which has not actually been articulated.
We must write 14 or so pages of research. The source code for the program is to be an appendix. Having seen the assessment guidelines, almost all the marks will come from the main body of text, not the source code.
In the chat with students and the course coordinator, people keep asking the same question: can they do something more related to Python? The answers is always no, because it’d be too “documentary” rather than “research”.
But the only suggested topic is always around the criteria by which one set of data are mapped to another. The coordinator makes no secret of his wanting to see us research maths for 14 pages. We have other modules covering maths and there is zero mention of maths in the module description including the learning outcomes.
Is this unusual? It strikes me as quite odd. The few people I know who have done Masters degrees are baffled to the point of annoyance at this.
NB: So far my questions to the coordinator for clarification have gone unanswered, but I only anticipate the same answers everyone else got already. I’m a student, but I’m a paying customer first, and like any sensible customer I will be sure to get my money’s worth.<issue_comment>username_1: It seems as though you are been asked to use Python to solve a moderately complex problem. There is nothing wrong with that. Programming languages are written to be useful (mostly, at least) and this is just an application.
Also, you are in a masters program in CS and so the application is not that far from the mainstream of data analysis that researchers normally do. So, yes, being asked to do something hard is pretty usual at the masters level (or even undergraduate).
As for the lack of clear definitions, of things, I suspect that you are expected to find them, just as anyone would on a real project. And as you advance, the projects you will need to be able to handle won't all be simple.
I don't know how it is graded, but the structure and correctness of the implementation can/should be an important element.
This is what computer scientists do to apply knowledge to a given domain. Look on it as an opportunity.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I’m being asked to research maths for my Python module
>
>
>
No, you are not. It sounds like you're being asked to do some elementary data analysis or data science. "Researching math" is a different animal altogether...just take a look at the *Annals of Mathematics* to get a sense of what "researching math" looks like.
>
> We’re to think of a research question which we should then investigate...
>
>
>
Sounds like a decent exercise -- here is some data, now do some work to understand/visualize the data and confirm or reject a hypothesis.
>
> ...and in doing so, shoehorn this program into it as if it were our own solution to the problem
>
>
>
This is a little more alarming....I hope the existing program is just a starting place which students will have to greatly modify and expand upon.
>
> people keep asking the same question: can they do something more related to Python? The answers is always no, because it’d be too “documentary” rather than “research”.
>
>
>
Sounds like the instructor and the students have different visions for the course. The instructor sees this as an "introduction to data analysis using Python," while the students see this as an "introduction to Python."
It is hard to judge such matters from the outside, but I suspect the best option is somewhere in between. You are doing a science degree, not a software engineering degree, and so learning to use code to study data and solve problems, rather than just coding for its own sake, is likely appropriate. On the other hand, students with no coding background at all will need to be taught rather a lot, and so I'm a little alarmed that you only have one graded assignment for the entire semester. Coding, like algebra, is one of those things that you learn by doing, and so I would have expected you to have several hours of Python programming homework per week.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **Mine won't be the answer your looking for...**
I'm not a professional programmer. I'm an electrical engineer. But I frequently use programming to solve problems, and the simple reality is that whether as a hobby or as a paid employee, it's my job to figure out how to use the tool to solve the problem. And that's the important point. You're not taking a class just to learn how to use the tool. You're also taking the class to learn how to apply the tool. To use a metaphor, nobody takes a class just to learn how to use a hammer. They take classes to learn how to make cabinets. And it's not unreasonable for the instructor to believe you already know how to use a clamp.
What's unfortunately hurting here is that, as a mature student, you're not taking this class hot on the heels of four years of mathematics courses, such that the instructor can reasonably assume that you have a host of pre-existing skills to immediately draw from. I can feel that pain. It's been 30 years since my last engineering class. If I went back today to get my masters, they'd rightfully expect me to remember all my Calculus courses — and I'd be buried in my old textbooks trying to remember what I once knew but haven't used in decades.
Unfortunately (and here's the part you won't like)... that's not the instructor's problem. No, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect you to do something you should have learned how to do in your undergraduate courses. But I do sympathize.
*Having said that. If your co-students are asking the same questions you are, then there is a problem because that would mean the instructor is asking for skills more-or-less no one has learned. I read your post several times, but I can't come to a clear conclusion. Are the other students having the same trouble you are? Or are they asking their own questions and are only getting the same quality of answer you're receiving to your question? Maybe I should have asked about this before posting an answer... but in the long run, I doubt any argument made here will sway your instructor.*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This assignment seems like an exercise in reverse conceptualization.
In most programming/soft eng courses you are given the everyday problem, then you model the problem situation, do an algorithm for it and finally write code to suitably compute for it.
But here the instructor wants the class to do things the other way around. He/she wants all students to take some code (here, code they wrote themselves so they will be intimately familiar with it) and find everyday situations that would make suitable use of this code.
The question therefore is what sort of situations make use of the sort of dataset manipulations you have been asked to do in the code that you have to write. It may be that the situations you think up would also require additional code modules. But that doesn't matter as you can always either code these up or use existing libraries as suggested by a previous answerer.
In a way, the instructor has made things easy for you in as much as strongly suggesting that you "research" the math involved in your written code . . .
Hey, I like this professor's teaching style !
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I am in a different field, but your professor isn't having you research math. To you, it is researching math because you have never heard of this before. He is making it obscure because there is an entire academic field that does this specific problem. He has disguised it so you cannot google it. If he had used terms that you recognize, this would be a ten minute problem, because you can google the solution.
The irony here is that the code sort of doesn't matter. This is somewhat like a "print{Hello World!}" problem with some sophistication.
He is forcing you to work with a good requirements document that is a bad requirements document for you because you are not a subject matter expert. He is asking you for dihydrogen monoxide instead of water.
You are not researching math, you are researching English. He is forcing you to explore Python. He isn't feeding you Python, he is starving you and making you hunt your own food. While you are hunting the food, you are documenting it.
This is not an undergraduate program where you jump through a set of hoops and a degree comes out on the other side. You are being required to prove independent mastery. You are being required to prove that you no longer need adult supervision.
I have never taught in your field, so my only criticism might be that there should be more work and assignments. However, there may be enough struggle in this for enough students that you would all fail if this were replicated over many assignments. After all, it bothered you enough that you felt you needed to post about it on the internet. It might be doing its job.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/17
| 1,015
| 4,414
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an assistant prof. on a tenure-track in the US, in an institution that was heavily oriented toward teaching when I was hired, but that is gradually gearing toward more intensive research activities.
When I was hired, the faculty in my field were hosted by a department primarily devoted to a different field: think of a Math. department hosting a group of Philosophy teachers interested in Logic.
We since transitioned to our own School, and the guidelines and expectations to obtain tenure were re-written from scratch, and considerably inflated (think going from "*2 papers in good journal per years and some undergraduate students*" to "*10 papers in conferences per year and $1,000,000 grants on a regular basis*").
1. Is there any basis to request that I should be granted or denied tenure based on the guideline of the Department that originally hired me (knowing that those guidelines are not a good fit in my field),
2. Is this actually legal, to change the expectations so close to the deadline (I am suppose to go up for tenure next year, and the new guideline was released only a couple of months ago).
My boss seems to act as if, *naturally*, I should have followed those guidelines all along, since they believe that they are "standard" in our field (they may or may not be, I am not qualified to judge).
*To clarify: I understand that there may or may not be legal courses that need to be taken, but I am more interested in understanding if this is customary among, or forced upon, faculty in academia in the US.*
**EDIT** Hmm, some views and votes, but no answer… Should I try <https://law.stackexchange.com/> ?<issue_comment>username_1: This is, first and foremost, a question for your faculty handbook. I would assume that, yes, there is a provision to request being evaluated under the prior guidelines. However, the degree to which this will help you is likely dependent on the degree of specificity and objectivity in the prior guidelines.
After checking with the handbook, you likely need to start having some conversations with the personnel committee chair, the department chair, and perhaps higher level reps who have experience with tenure and promotion. Some of the key aspects will likely be making sure the old guidelines are sent to external evaluators and are reviewed at any votes internally. This is easier to do if an advocate makes sure (tactfully) that everyone remembers in advance of any critical step that you are to be evaluated under the old guidelines.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Legal questions aside, getting tenure is ultimately about satisfying the expectations of a department, a college, and the university -- and these expectations are not always explicit, but inherent in the opinions of people, and *they change over time*. There is little you can do about this: If a department has recently hired a lot of excellent people, then expectations go up and someone who ten years ago might have gotten tenure, may no longer get tenure simply because *in the opinion of those who vote on the case*, the candidate does not stack up against the recent crop of candidates any more.
This is simply inherent to the game. It is no different to an Olympic athlete who now comes in fifth because the competitors have worked harder during training, even though eight years ago he might have gotten a gold. You can't sue the Olympic committee that you should get a medal anyway. Similarly, departments generally make decisions about candidates *relative to others in similar positions*, and unless a faculty manual explicitly spells out that "X publications, Y dollars of grant funding, and Z teaching awards will get you tenure", you don't really have much of a basis for a lawsuit. Of course, faculty manuals -- at least at good universities -- do not actually spell things out this way, and that's on purpose. Rather, manuals say that a candidate needs to show "excellence in their research area": A term that is both *relative* and *subject to interpretation*, both on purpose.
Whether all of this is something you can challenge in court is a question I'm not prepared to answer. But I *am* prepared to say that you will always be measured relative to your peers, and that that is universally true, not just when it comes time for tenure, but also for pay raises, promotions, etc., both within and outside academia.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/17
| 460
| 1,946
|
<issue_start>username_0: I sent my research work to an sci indexed journal. However, it was under review for 5 months.. So we sent query to the editor. After sending the query, the reviewers' comments came just within 4 days suggesting a minor revision.
We sent the manuscript with minor revision but now it is again under revision for 15 days.
Now, from my earlier experience, I am worried uf they again take 5 months to review a minor revision, or suggest something else (like a major revision after a long time).
I have to leave the institute within 2 months. So, if they suggest anything like that it might not be possible for me to do additional experiments by then.
My questions are-
(i) How many months do reviewers get to review a manuscript with minor revision?
(ii) Do the reviewers get reminders from the editor every week? is it possible that the editor's email go to spam and the reviewer cannot notice it?<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on the journal. For one of the journals I used to handle for example, all revisions (minor or major) had the same reviewer deadline of 21 days.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From the author's perspective, the formal review timelines are not something to count on, because both reviewers and editors can mess up. A rather recent example: We yesterday received the acceptance for a minor revision we submitted 5 1/2 months ago. Apparently our assigned editor was unreliable in their communication to the journal and reviewers, and was finally replaced with the EiC.
For you this means:
>
> I have to leave the institute within 2 months. So, if they suggest anything like that it might not be possible for me to do additional experiments by then.
>
>
>
You should start preparing a contingency plan in any way. Some other person in the lab (potentially some PhD student or post-doc) should be familiar enough with the setup to continue your experiments, if required.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/17
| 1,227
| 5,131
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am doing a 3-year PhD in CS (Probability+Logic) at an average university in Continental Europe. I am currently in my final year (which ends JAN -23). I have one top tier (A\*) AI-conference publication and nothing else to show for my two years. But my first paper has led to multiple new ideas and I will be submitting another paper soon and will start working on the third idea right after (let's say in a month's time). I really think if my third idea is correct, it will have a major impact in my field.
Now, in all this there is this tradition (previously a rule) at my university of spending at least 3 months of research abroad. My advisor is quite motivated to send me to this massive research group in my field. Now, if I would have had another year of PhD or another publication or no idea to work on, then I would have loved to go visit this massive group for 3 months. But I am not sure if, in my situation, I can afford to lose a lot of time. I feel I have the following two choices:
1. Not visit the university, work on my third idea, get it published and I am quite certain it's a good contribution. On the downside, I have no collaborations, no one to talk to for a postdoc, with whom I have talked before (I would like to move from my home uni for postdoc and I could not meet anyone in past two years: COVID)
2. I spend at least 2 weeks slightly distracted trying to move to a new country, maybe not feel focused there, or even if I do, I will dedicate myself mostly to the work I am doing right now. The uni I would like to visit is a massive group of 30 people under one PI, I am not sure how much the PI would be available. On the upside, it could be a massive collaboration avenue and could be a perfect future postdoc destination.
All in all, I am more inclined to not go, but what I don't know is how big is the role of contacts in finding a postdoc in comparison to having good publications?<issue_comment>username_1: What do you want to do after your PhD? Do you plan on staying in academia, doing some postdocs and eventually apply for a permanent position as a lecturer or professor?
If the answer is no, then maybe it's OK just to publish a few papers and prepare to your PhD thesis defence. If your future employer is in industry, they probably will be impressed with the fact that you have a PhD, rather than the full story of your collaborations during the project.
But if you want to stay in academia, the next few years will be critically important for your career. Some academics somewhere will decide whether to offer you a postdoc job, whether to award you your first research grant, whether to extend your contract, etc. Some will evaluate your performance by the number of papers you published, but many also by how much they heard of you from their peers. Getting your papers published is not easy; but making sure that people read these papers and appreciate your contribution is a much, much more difficult task. Some people are blind to any contribution except their own. You really want to make sure that on every fancy Committee or Panel there is at least one person who can say: "Oh, [SagarM](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/126670/sagarm)? I heard them speaking at this event lately -- it was some interesting stuff. I never had time to read their paper, but it's published in a good journal. Shall we invite them for an interview?"
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Spending time elsewhere as a student is usually a very enriching experience. It will provide you with a different perspective and, while it is unlikely you will come back having mastered something you did not know before, it is a chance to learn about things you didn’t even know you did not know.
Remember that your supervisor or indeed your unit do things in a certain way often for historical reasons, use certain tools rather than others, or proceed following departmental habits, so a simple change of scenery and the consequent exposure to a different academic culture can only be beneficial.
Something as simple as contrasting the organization of coffee breaks, or time spent having lunch with colleagues, might turn out to be a different experience elsewhere. If the experience is positive, you get to keep it as an example of good organization. Even if the experience is negative, you will come back to your unit knowing what not to do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Suggest you should go there! After all your research has not yet led to a publication so your opportunity cost of visiting is just a potential publication, not an actual publication. But by going to the big group, you can definitely include this in the CV.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I think the answer seems clear enough: GO. If you can still workon the third idea there, then why not?
Even in the worst case, say you can only be 50% efficient working on the third idea, it is a win. The chance to massively open your networks and see the state of the art is priceless.
Honestly, I would be ok with delaying my degree for 1 year for such a chance if I were you.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/17
| 1,726
| 6,601
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is an extension of my previous question:[How many days should I wait for e-mail of Prospective Supervisor in this condition](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/181456/how-many-days-should-i-wait-for-e-mail-of-prospective-supervisor-in-this-conditi)
I e-mailed a prof in France on Jan 10 asking if he is interested in discussing PhD research opportunities( I am interested in his research work and want to do PhD under his supervision) and he replied me on Jan 24 to send him my master's thesis and CV, which I sent him the same day. He also wrote in the same e-mail :Thank you for writing and please apologize the long delay, which was not related to your CV or skill.
He didn't replied till Feb 7 and as user Buffy suggested in this question: [How many days should I wait for e-mail of Prospective Supervisor in this condition](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/181456/how-many-days-should-i-wait-for-e-mail-of-prospective-supervisor-in-this-conditi) ,
after 2 weeks I wrote following short mail to him:
Dear Dr. X,
I just wanted to ask if you have any additional guidance based on my CV and Master’s Thesis sent to you and what further steps it is appropriate for me to take now.
Y
2 weeks are about to pass and I still got no reply.
>
> What steps I should take now as I really want to work with this Prof. and he has not replied to my previous e-mail till now?
>
>
>
I think I should send him a remainder e-mail but how should I frame it.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: If they haven't replied at all then they are probably not interested. You can follow up or not, but don't expect anything from them.
Your recent follow up with them seems about right, asking for guidance and what further steps you might take. The tone of that is about right.
However, their lack of response is an indication that they might not be very helpful even if they did accept you as a student. Look for other options.
There are a lot of possible reasons for a delay. Many of them are valid. But if the professor isn't sick or away from the office, then a reply within two weeks should be expected.
The person can, of course, be very busy, but they can also just not have a real need or desire to take on another student at the moment. Busy professors may not be the most helpful in advising you.
And you need to be realistic about their desire to work with you. For many reasons they might not be all that excited. Perhaps they don't see a match of interests as you do.
There is no reason why you can't keep following up, and perhaps you can get something positive to happen, but I strongly suggest that you follow up on all viable alternatives. It won't happen just because you want it to happen.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is possible that the professor is very busy. In that case, all you can do is to patiently wait.
It is also possible that the professor lost interest in you after they read your CV and thesis. In that case, sending another e-mail is probably useless.
There is another possibility that you probably didn't think of. What if the professor is infected with Omicron Covid-19 virus? They are probably rest at home until recovered. In that case, don't bother them. Patiently wait until they are okay.
The bottom line, don't send too many e-mails. Just wait.
P.S. This answer is based on the assumption that you "*really want to work with this prof*".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As a master's student myself, I have faced this issue as well. Do not worry as it seems to happen quite often that it appears.
The professors are busy with many tasks and have limited time. It also can mean that Professor might be looking for a different experience than you currently have. I am sorry sometimes it happens.
The case with most of the people I know including my seniors who did their Master Thesis faced this issue. One of the tips my senior mentioned is that if it is really **important** then in the subject it can be mentioned **Urgent**. Then type the issues in the mail clearly and with a good structure for ex: in points. This worked for me.
Second, most people I know mail the professor each day/alternative day. I know it sounds bad, I would not do it myself if it was not absolutely necessary.
If it was me, I would frame it this way :
>
> Dear XXX,
>
>
> I hope you are doing well.
>
>
> I was hoping to hear from you regarding so and so.
>
> \*Add your questions \*
>
>
> I would really appreciate it if we can arrange a meeting and discuss
> this further in person.
>
>
>
Make sure they can still access your documents and emails which you have sent before in the same thread so that it would be convenient for them to have a look.
One more tip: Make sure to ask for a one-to-one meeting next time in an email. It provides a better understanding. It can be just 15 min call.
I must say, start looking for another Professor. Do not put all hopes in this one person. They might not be so much into the same field as you would like but you can meet somewhere in the middle.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: If things are not moving, you should try to move them a bit.
However, you should be proactive, not just "pestering" with reminders, follow-up mails and other request for attention/time.
There are two possibilities:
* the professor did not yet read your CV / thesis;
* the professor read your CV / thesis;
Either way, the professor did not yet make a choice, although if they read your CV/thesis, it is likely there is no interest in you as a future PhD student (otherwise you would have been contacted, no professor leaves interesting profiles. i.e. cheap and smart workforce, falling through). Additionally, there is no explicit funding available for the PhD poistion that you would like to have, so for the professor there are two tasks:
* evaluate your profile;
* evaluate fundings for the PhD position that would be created (and filled by you);
Therefore you can still improve your situation, convincing them you are a motivated and competent PhD candidate: try to get your own funding.
Have a look at the answers given [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/182364/how-do-funding-opportunities-in-france-work-for-foreign-phd-candidates). If you find a relevant funding source XYZ for you, you can write the professor that you are interested in applying for XYZ grant. This way you will force the hand, because the professor will either be supportive (which means your profile was interesting) or not.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/17
| 1,349
| 6,015
|
<issue_start>username_0: I could use some advice from more experienced instructors.
My social science course culminates in a term paper based on independent research.
However, in some cases students end up changing the topic of their term paper because they hit a bottleneck.
In the past, I encouraged them to make the most of it, even report null results. But now I wonder if I can be more inclusive if I allow them to abandon a topic, but report on why and then elaborate how they will course-correct and even begin that new line of research, albeit in a preliminary way (because of time constraints).
What do you think of this approach? It is essentially allowing them to combine two papers into one. Anyone tried something similar? Other ideas?<issue_comment>username_1: This is from experience with a doctoral dissertation in mathematics, so it may not apply exactly, but sometimes it is necessary to change topics. But it should be done with permission so that you get a chance to advise them.
In my doctoral studies I worked on three problems. The first turned out to be too easy and I was able to develop one or more theorems with proofs every day. It was a bit fun, but also trivial. Hence boring.
The second problem was like a perfect diamond and there were no tools that I could find to "crack" it. I worked a few weeks totally unsuccessfully. Nada. Nothing but frustration.
The third problem (are you getting "Three Bears" here?) was just right. It was significant but approachable. The thesis turned out to be a complete theory, not just some minor results. Some of the parts were easy, some hard, but it was possible to attack both with existing and with new tools.
My advisor was involved through all of this, agreeing when it was time to move on and also making suggestions.
I realize that a term paper is much less consequential, but, perhaps the same constraints should apply. Seek permission to change focus. An give advice when permission is sought.
An orthogonal idea is that, depending on the field, a single university term/semester may not be sufficient to tackle some topics and so you may just be forced to make some accommodation in fairness. It is impossible to schedule results when true research in many fields is undertaken, since it is a look into the unknown. In such cases, an explanation of what was done and how and why it may have failed can be as valuable for learning as something more "tidy".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> even report null results
>
>
>
Null results are incredibly important in science. There may be institutional and individual biases against null results, but students should not be encouraged to change course merely because their results are "uninteresting". To the contrary, they should be encouraged to understand the importance of null results and learn how to properly interpret these results, which is often much more challenging than interpreting results that clearly favor a particular hypothesis.
>
> changing the topic of their term paper because they hit a bottleneck
>
>
>
Bottlenecks are the hard part of research; if the term paper is meant to give students exposure to what it means to do research, then they should learn to confront and work with these bottlenecks. Hitting a bottleneck should not, in itself, be sufficient reason to change topic. Bottlenecks are distinct from other obstruction in that there is in fact a path through, even if it is narrow or uncomfortable.
>
> allow them to abandon a topic, but report on why and then elaborate how they will course-correct and even begin that new line of research, albeit in a preliminary way
>
>
>
This has been the standard approach in biology courses I've been involved with that have a research or pseudo-research component: when things go wrong, students explain how they've gone wrong, how the things that went wrong impacted their results, what they've learned, and, since usually there is limited time to take the next steps of redoing things incorporating what they've learned, at least outline a plan for what they would do next if they were able to spend more time.
You should choose the approach that best fits the learning goals of your course, however. There may be certain barriers that prevent a student from achieving those goals, and that may require a change in topic, hopefully as early as possible (and you should try to identify and prevent these issues if at all possible at the initial topic selection phase). For example, if your course has a quantitative component, obstacles to collecting *any* data would preclude a student from doing the quantitative component, so you may consider alternatives such as simulated data. It is certainly true that these types of projects are often *very difficult* for students, though, and they likely need a lot of guidance in navigating through their projects. Some balance should be reached between letting them flounder a bit and giving recommendations. Definitely avoid letting their evaluation be based on things they could not foresee.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: You're starting at the wrong end if you ask "Should X be allowed?". Rather, start with "What do I want me students to (i) learn and (ii) demonstrate?" For example, I assume that you want your students to learn research design, the evaluation of data, drawing conclusions from the data, and then putting these conclusions into the context of the literature. For all of this, it is not necessary to have positive results: One can write a cogent term paper about a research design and the evaluation of data so obtained *even if the data only supports the null hypothesis*.
In other words, if a student can demonstrate what they learned, then the actual form of their paper should not actually matter all that much.
To sum this up: Focus on the "what" questions, rather than the "how" questions. That's because if you know the "what", you often know which "hows" are useful and which are not.
Upvotes: 4
|
2022/02/17
| 1,519
| 6,372
|
<issue_start>username_0: So after a few postdocs in applied math (PhD in pure math), I'm currently outside academia with a part time teaching position in France. I'm in the process of applying to a lab in the South of France for a permanent faculty (Maitre des Conférences) position and I contacted the head of research and upon my request, was invited to a give a talk. Now in the form that I was asked to fill up online, there were two options: i) an online talk and ii) a talk in the presence of the team (**and in this case, the form explicitly asked if I wanted that the lab took charge of the mission, which I'd assume financially: travel, lodging, food...**) Initially I chose the online one, because I thought it'd be strange to visit at the lab's expense if I'd give the talk offline. However, upon I initially submitted the form with ticking/checking the online talk option, I sent a brief email to the the head of the lab stating that if she preferred, I could travel to them and give a talk, to which she replied that both options (online and offline) were okay with her. I didn't reply to that yet.
So now I'm thinking if I could change it to the offline/physical talk and travel to the South of France, because this would give me more opportunity to see what other people in the lab were doing as well, which might not be possible in just an online talk. **But what's bothering me is that if I tick the box that I want the lab to take charge of the mission financially. Will it look strange if I ask for financial support (since I'm the one requesting to give a talk purely for the fact that I'd like to apply to the lab and hence network, isn't it strange if I say I need financial support to travel there?).** I'd be grateful if you could please let me know what I should do - I'd like to pay for my own visit, given my financial budget.<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, though not in France, if you are invited to give an on-site talk the expenses will be covered completely. There is an advantage in that, in that you get to meet people more personally than is possible online.
And, likewise, it is better for the institution to have a chance to meet you in person and to see how you interact with the current people. That is worth some expense to most places. In addition to a formal talk, be prepared for informal meetings over, say, coffee.
Other than COVID, I would personally favor the face to face meeting, with at least a day on campus to meet and talk to people.
But, you can ask if you aren't certain about the coverage of costs. And no, it isn't strange.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I see no reason not to travel, ahead of making a decision, to a place where you might decide to live and work for decades.
An on-site visit will reveal so much more about the collegiality of the work and life environment than just an online talk.
Why would you want to pay out-of-pocket? Allowing your “host” to cover your expenses will also get you insight into their administrative structure.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I am French, I went through the whole application process a few years ago (in maths if that's relevant).
It is extremely common to invite (paying for expenses) applicants for an offline talk at the weekly seminar series of the department. I, along with many other applicants for Maître de Conférences positions, have been invited several times to different departments.
I would say go for it, the online option is here if you cannot travel or would prefer to stay remote for any reason. Otherwise, the offline option is the default (and the online option basically did not exist before Covid).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The other answers already explained all the benefits of going in person, so I won't repeat them.
I want to emphasize the budget aspect: **let them pay**. The interview process is a two-way thing: the lab/uni is not "doing you a favour" by interviewing you, they're also trying to fill a position with a person who is a good fit. Academic positions are highly specialised, the suitable candidates are highly qualified, and *institutions shouldn't expect to get access to the best possible candidate pool if they don't invest into the hiring process*.
Additionally, a lot of applications to entry-level academic positions come from postdocs. Postdoc positions rarely have glamorous pay. And academic positions are quite hard to obtain -- meaning it's likely that a person will interview for more than one. Covering their own interview expenses would likely limit most young researchers to look for local positions only.
**Covering the candidate's expenses is good interview practice** -- it makes these positions more easily accessible to a more diverse pool of candidates and shows the institution's dedication to fit the best fit for the role.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It's **not** just about the talk.
An on-site visit will give them a chance to consider "do I want to work with this guy, for years" or "do I want to have a beer with this guy?". Nobody want to work with a jerk even if they are world class researcher.
You also have the same chance to judge them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Paying the expenses (either through reimbursement or through arranging the services for them) of people who come visit them during the hiring process is the cost of doing buisness if they want to recruit the best talent from a relatively small global pool. You shouldn't feel bad about it.
A whole lot of time and money (both yours and theirs) will be wasted if you take the job and it doesn't work out. It's in their interests to suss out as much about you and whether you will be a good fit, and it is in your interests to suss out as much as possible about whether the place is somewhere you will want to work.
The pandemic has forced us into doing stuff online, that we would previously have done in person. On-paper it certainly seems more efficient to do stuff remotely than to spend many hours travelling.
In practice though, tools like zoom are a poor substitute for real human interaction, it gives you no opertunity to check out the broader aspects of the role and location and gives them no opertunity to see what you are like in a more informal situation.
IMO if you are serious about the role you should go in person.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/18
| 761
| 3,196
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a recent PhD (~7 months since I started my postdoc with my PhD adviser) in plasma physics/engineering with multiple conference presentations and 5 first author papers resulting from my PhD in journals such as *Plasma Sources Science and Technology* and *Geophysical Research Letters*. My letters were written by my PhD adviser, 2 members of my PhD committee and a senior colleague in Europe. They are all professors and have thousands of citations in their field of research and are established colleagues with degrees from US’s top engineering schools. At least 2 of them are associate editors of popular journals on plasma physics. I have applied for 11 R1 institutions in the US with tenure track faculty positions in astronomy, theoretical/computational plasma physics, and mechanical and aerospace engineering. I thought the fact that my background is fundamentally related to research topics pursued in different departments justifies applying for a range of departments. All of the schools have rankings (reputation) better than my own school which itself is a popular public R1 school in the US. Up until now I have received out-right rejections from 4 of them and I was wondering if it's time to move on from my faculty applications and look for available postdocs?<issue_comment>username_1: I am in a similar situation so here's my experience (note that I am in an engineering discipline). Out of around ~40 applications sent out, I've had 4 interviews (over zoom) and 2 rejections. No invitations for any on site interviews as of yet. My advisor says that top schools will want to have offers out by end of march/april, so they want to have all the on site interviews done by the end of march at the latest (so, invitations for on-site interviews need to go out by early to mid march). Of course it's also going to depend on the school and field.
So, at least in my experience, some schools may be in the "early-ish" phase, but it *may* be a bad sign if you haven't heard back from anywhere at this point.
You probably want to also apply for postdocs regardless of the outcome of the faculty searches, so it's definitely not a bad idea to look around in any case.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Apply to every job for which you are not completely unqualified and that you would be willing to take if it was the only job offered to you. You can worry about what decisions you have to make if you get an offer and you are still waiting to hear back from places you prefer.
You should have been looking for available postdocs already, simultaneously with your search for a tenure track job. Of course if a potential postdoc mentor wants to know, you should be open about your tenure-track applications. It's reasonable to back out of a postdoc if you later get a tenure-track offer.
Once you make an application, it's out of your hands. Forget about it until you hear back or have a decision to make.
(I am giving advice from the perspective of a field where many highly qualified people don't get any job, because there are more highly qualified people than jobs.
For us, 11 applications is a laughably small number.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/18
| 818
| 3,721
|
<issue_start>username_0: For transparency, I would like to share my accepted papers' **anonymous** peer reviews, if my coauthors unanimously agree. Some journals partner with websites such as openreview.net (which share reviews even for rejected papers), others may have that included in their process, but in most cases, nothing is said about sharing reviews **by the authors** (though it is sometimes explicitly said that reviews cannot be shared by the reviewers).
Are there any ethical issues with that?
I could perhaps see intellectual property issues (are reviews the property of the journal? of the reviewers?), though in our field, journals at least allow to have the author's version of the paper downloadable from the authors' website (so, why not the accompanying reviews?). More importantly, nothing is explicitly said about that on the websites of editors and journals.<issue_comment>username_1: Unless it is an explicit part of the reviewing process, or there is some rare overriding concern, you musn't publish the referee reports you've received.
This is actually a rare situation where copyright law and academic norms coincide. Basically, you cannot publish stuff other people have written unless there is something that says you may.
Initially, copyright of the report lies with the referee, as they have written it. By submitting it to the editor, there is an implied license to use the report internally and to share it with the authors. Barring other arrangements, there is no basis for assuming that the journal has additional rights to the report. As the author, you don't need any particular rights to do stuff with the report, so there is no implied license here. [Individual parts of the report may come with a very generous license, eg if the referee suggests formulations.]
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the trouble is then that people would rely on the reviews instead of reading the article. These are only in place to allow for formal acceptance or formal rejection, the reviewers can miss very obvious and important mistakes.
An expert reader will not care much about these reviews as they can read the article and come to their own judgment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It is NOT a good idea to do this:
1. you risk identifying referees through their writing or formatting styles. There might be specific turns of phrases or expressions specific to a referee (especially if the referee did not write in their native language) that could be tracable to papers authored by this referee.
2. What do you do if one review is positive but another is not so positive? Do you cherry pick only the positive reviews?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Aside from copyright issues, there is the issue of basic politeness and kindness.
If you're sharing a piece of writing someone wrote privately, you should get agreement **from that person**. Not from your coauthors. If you cannot get agreement from that person, you should not share it.
If a journal partners with openreview.net or a similar website, then the reviewers know ahead of time that their reviews will be visible publicly. That's not the case if you publicize the reviews of your paper unilaterally. The reviewers were writing for an audience of you and your coauthors.
I know I for one would feel very uncomfortable if my reviews of papers were made public. I think very differently about the tone of my writing when I have a much larger potential audience, and I think the result is much better when I only have to ask myself, "How will the authors of the paper (and the editor) understand this?" and not, "How will a random person on the internet understand this?"
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/18
| 705
| 2,875
|
<issue_start>username_0: Currently a full-time senior lecturer in a UK university (post-1992, lower middle-ranking if it matters).
I am thinking of going part-time (0.8 or even 0.6) due to physical or/and mental health. Not sure what I am asking here. Guess I am wondering how I may approach this, as I have never done this before. Nor do I know of any 40 male (no child) having such arrangement around me... Do I need to have "hard evidence" for this? I mean, it's not like I am taking advantage of the university or something... Physical health-wise, I had a successful operation years ago, It's not major at the moment (touch wood), but occasionally gives minor discomfort. Mental health wise, my therapist is happy to confirm for me.
I wonder how I may approach this?<issue_comment>username_1: Talk to HR. Talk to a department head or dean. This is a local problem that you need to work out. Some places (not UK specific) will let you do such things with no salary adjustments for even an extended period. People have accidents. Employers, not just universities, expect to have to make adjustments for such things. They likely have an insurance program to cover the fact that you are effectively part time so that it is reasonable to avoid reductions in salary.
How much you need to reveal depends on local law and custom. Knowing your doctor will back you up if necessary is a plus.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: username_1 explores options to reduce the workload at full pay. This will only work with medical reasoons and for a limited amount of time (it might be a long time though).
If you are considering a reduction in work time and pay this should be a lot more straight forward. Reducing your weekly hours to 80% or 60% and reducing pay in line is probably an option you can take just because you want to. Talk to HR to inquire about the formalities, your dean probably has to give a formal signature but in general I would expect you can just choose to reduce your hours without having to give any justification.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: All UK employees have a statutory right to request "flexible working", which includes part-time. Now, the employer doesn't have to grant your request, but it does have to go through a predefined procedure to make that decision, rather than it just being the informal snap decision of your Head of department/school, pro-vice chancellor or HR bod.
There is a specific form to fill in usually.
See the advice here: <https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/rights-at-work/flexible-working/flexible-working-what-is-it/>
I'd start by approaching your head of department. Its probably worth knowing who your union rep is, although the union will usually only provide individual case work help if you've been in the union for at least 3 months when the problem with which you want help arose.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/19
| 2,410
| 10,708
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a non-native English speaker, I struggle sometimes during my academic writing because of lack of some academic vocabulary.
I have bought many books for academic vocabulary, but I found them to be boring, and even when I memorize a word, I don't remember it when I start writing.
So, what are the other methods that I can improve my academic English vocabulary?<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately, there is no quick way. My main advice is to read lots of good papers, especially by authors who have good academic writing. You learn by osmosis. It may not be obvious now, but you will find academic writing is 'simple', meaning authors tend to use a restricted set of words and write in similar styles. Second, get a teacher or someone who is willing to provide feedback. Third, focus on one rule at a time. For example, I noticed that you wrote 'I struggles', which is not correct. So you may want to focus on singular and plural rules first. Fourth, give yourself time. Becoming proficient in a language takes many years.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my observation, it is very difficult to find a "rule-based" description of writing or speaking language that sounds "natural/correct". Rather, it is by immersion and imitation. Instead of trying to compose a sentence in a somewhat alien language, try to *remember* how a more-or-less native speaker said what you want to say. :)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is a trend amongst academics to assert that scientific communication should be simple, and therefore vocabulary is overrated. In my opinion, this is a little misguided.
Vocabulary doesn't have to mean the use of obscure or complicated words; it is simply the use of the right word in the right place. Scientific literature is littered with imprecisely used words. Native English speakers are not immune to this either.
**My suggestion is to spend more time understanding words and their actual context rather than trying to learn more words. This often involves developing a better appreciation for the scientific concepts that you deal with.**
As example, consider the use of the word 'spectrum' in the physical sciences. It is often used inaccurately when 'variety'/'range' would suffice. A spectrum specifically requires a (usually continuous) range of measurable quantities that vary in one particular aspect. Frequencies of electromagnetic radiation can form a spectrum, but stating that 'the spectrum of chemical reactions is composed of...' is inaccurate, and 'range' is better. (Usage like 'a wide spectrum of people' instead of 'diverse set' is plain silly).
Likewise, authors often write 'chemistry of an alloy' when they mean 'chemical composition of an alloy'. These authors ignore the fact that chemistry encompasses far more than chemical composition.
My central point is that academic vocabulary can only be built in the context of your academic field. Words have different usage across fields (and in everyday use); so it is necessary to truly understand what each technical word conveys in your particular domain.
This can come from a combination of mindful reading of good literature and conscious reflection. Once you've reflected and understood a word, you will use it precisely. Building a habit of precise use will make you seek precise words when a common word won't suffice. That search will lead you to more literature, where you will see how others have tried to express the same ideas. When you reflect on their words/phrases, you will be able to judge whether the context matches yours.
If it is, you have added to your academic vocabulary. If not, the search must continue, but you have still learnt one way not to use those words/phrases.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Make reading scientific literature a habit. Do this regularly and not just before writing a paper, drafting research proposals, etc. Actively reading about things that you enjoy will not only help you get familiar with academic English but also help you identify your area of interest. You can also try writing opinion pieces on a personal blog/social media account to retain what you’ve read and develop a critical point of view.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: This may sound counterintuitive, but try to master regular English first. To be able to write nicely, you don't necessarily need a big topic specific vocabulary, you rather need a natural grasp of the language.
I am not a native speaker myself but have reached quite a good level of English by now, and I still often have a dictionary website open in my browser when writing texts. If I don't know a word, I can look it up. In my experience, don't waste brain capacity on things you can fast and easily look up somewhere - as you said yourself, it is tedious and boring.
I would rather suggest to get immersed in the English language in easier and more enjoyable ways: if you watch a movie or a series, watch it in English instead of your native languag, if possible even with subtitles. Try to read as many things in English as you can. Listen to English language audiobooks. Have conversations with native speakers (that one might not be as easy).
From my experience with peer review, if there was a problem with the language level, it most often was poor grammar and poor grasp of the English language in general that made the text hard to read and not the lack of "academia specific vocabulary".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: #### The best way to learn to write is to *read* the works of good writers
One of the best ways to learn to write well is to **read the works of good writers**. To begin with, just read through these works without worrying too much about the writing technique. Good argument structure and good prose can both be "absorbed" subconsciously to some extent, without explicit instruction. If you regularly read good writing (and avoid reading bad writing that crowds it out) you will find that you start to enunciate your thoughts more clearly and and eloquently without having to think about it. Don't start by reading books on writing technique; these are likely to be boring to you if you read them too early. Instead you should read novels and articles on topics that are of interest to you, written by good writers who have a clear and powerful writing style. Don't confine yourself to academic writing; read widely and include interesting fiction and non-fiction works. Most importantly, if you want to expose yourself to good writing **avoid excessive time on social media and read books instead**. This is likely to raise the average quality of the prose you are reading, expand your vocabulary, and train you to lengthen your attention span, all of which will benefit your reading and writing.
Once you have become "well read" by reading some good books, you should then take the next step of consciously examining some of the techniques that your favourite writers use that make a powerful impression on you. See if you can decipher and explain their technique, and explain how it differs from other writers. See if you can articulate why you find the style or technique to be powerful and persuasive. As you learn the different styles and techniques of different writers, you will expand your own writing "toolkit" and learn to find your own preferred style. In some cases you may be lucky enough to find a favourite writer who has also written explicitly about writing technique. (One of my favourite writers, <NAME>, wrote some useful articles on his writing where he sets out some writing techniques to make your writing more powerful.) When you are at a point where you are ready to practice writing yourself, you will be ready to read books on writing technique without them boring you.
For example, one of my favourite writers is the economist and social theorist <NAME>. One particular technique that Sowell uses ---which makes his writing powerful--- is to gradually build up the case for a particular conclusion in an anti-polemical style, using a steady drum-beat of empirical evidence and historical examples capped off with a significantly understated conclusion. Sowell begins by setting out a hypothesis or question in a neutral manner and then bombards the reader with a mass of empirical evidence pointing to an answer, almost to the point of exhaustion. As he delivers this evidence he maintains a dispassionate and clinical tone and avoids suggesting any inference or conclusion, relying entirely on the reader to draw their own inference from the evidence presented. Once the proper inference is inescapable, he then finishes with an understated statement of this conclusion, which tends to leave the reader *ahead* of him in their normative conclusion. This kind of anti-polemical style is one that is contrary to what you see from many polemicists, who tend to put forward strong normative conclusions before they have convinced their reader, leaving the reader behind the writer. It is an interesting and powerful technique.
I could point to other good writers who each have particular techniques that I've found to be useful in writing. Some strong writers that I've found to have helpful writing styles and techniques are <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, and <NAME>. (There are probably plenty of others that I'm forgetting now.) In any case, the above example is just one writing technique that I have observed amongst the best writers I've read. By reading good writers, absorbing their works, and then learning the techniques they use expliclity, you can expand your "toolkit" for writing and learn to write
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: English is not my first language. It takes time, patience and sometimes years to learn it. I consider myself as fluent speaker/writer, but my English is not perfect yet. The key is constant practice and immersion.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: Academic or scientific writing has a style and patterns different from others. I would argue that it is just as hard to write it in your native language. So I think perhaps your issue is not just vocabulary, but more importantly, the writing style, how do you start, how to articulate what your research is about, why it is important, what questions are still not addressed by other research…etc.
The fastest way for me was reading other research papers for their writing style and format, and find the key phrases, transition patterns that you are comfortable with and use them as a template to work for your own words or terms suited to your research topic.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/19
| 451
| 1,882
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm getting a couple bound copies of my dissertation for myself and my parents. Just like academic regalia has meanings behind the colors of the uniform, I was wondering if there was also some standard colorings for the leather that a dissertation is bound in.
Like maybe PhD dissertations are always bound in black, while red is reserved for MS, etc. etc. :) I was wondering if anyone happened to know if there's some precedent like that which exists.<issue_comment>username_1: If there is such a precedent it is local. Note that the binding is often/usually done by commercial entities, not by the university. I had to arrange for my own bindings and both MA and PhD are in black. All of my doctoral students are in green, but that is just a function of the binder, which was not the university - but a local company.
I imagine that some US universities might prefer the bindings to be in one of the "school colors" (rah, rah, go Mulies).
Eventually though, the color is probably just "dusty".
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have known dozens of Ph.D. students across universities. Never heard of that and no one really cares about the color of the cover, but more about the content. Most of the students in my university prefer green because my university logo is green. But some went with black to be different. Both masters and Ph.D. students follow this.
Just go with what you could afford, and availability with your binder. And whatever looks cool to you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Some universities also have some guidelines on how theses should look like with restrictions on colors, single or double-side printing, what should be printed on the spine of the book, etc.
Usually the doctoral office, study service center or whatever it is called at the local university should be able to help.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/20
| 1,426
| 6,012
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had asked a similar question after six months into my current PhD. Then, the question was too dependent on individual factors and hence the question was closed. I will briefly explain the situation now after almost a year and a half.
Pros:
1. I managed to do a detailed literature review and found my research questions. I passed my one year review.
2. A lot of reading just before the review helped me improve both professionally and personally. I moved through to formulate the narrow scope of research by myself.
3. I have a simplified boiled down model of the questions in hand. Two other researchers also like the idea of the narrow scope and they are positive that I can solve it.
Cons:
1. Discouraging environment. Supervisor doesn't know the topic more. Not supportive of creative ideas. Always wants me to remain under his shoes.
2. The research is so isolated. Buying other researchers' time is not feasible always.
3. Supervisor's history is also bad. More than 60% of the students had left under him. Rest had inter-department projects.
4. Lack of motivation because the research area is deliberately redirected towards something that I don't enjoy.
Summary:
The reason I asked this is because I want to finish my PhD in time (within two and a half years more). I see the research areas and videos of other places (that interest me) and I feel like I should do those things. At the same time, I feel like I should by hook or by crook finish this PhD and get a very good profile and get to the domain I want after two and a half years. This is because I don't have any publications yet. I do have one very good journal paper in the process, which was from my master thesis (Not related to my PhD).<issue_comment>username_1: Normally your supervision situation should call for at the very least some level of concern from your institution. Even if changing supervisor is not possible, I'd say that having at least some form of co-supervision (even informal) could help, even only to avoid being stuck in a toxic relationship with this supervisor. Don't hesitate to go at the level of university ombudsman for advice, because quite often people at the department level are reluctant to go against a colleague they meet every day (and that they will probably keep meeting after you finish your PhD).
That being said, imho your glass is more than half-full:
* Most PhD student discover towards the middle or end of their PhD.that their supervisor is not as knowledgeable as they were imagining. Sometimes it's a worrying realization. You've already reached this stage, so you don't have any false hope and the bad surprise is behind you.
* Many PhD students have some kind of relational difficulties with their supervisor. It's certainly not ideal, but apparently you've managed fairly well with this so far.
* You're clearly capable of doing your work autonomously, and you're progressing your PhD well despite the supervision issues. To me this means that you're significantly more mature than the average PhD student.
Imho the main problem is that you seem a bit (?) depressed, and while this is also common it's not a good idea to let your mental health deteriorate. The usual advice applies: try to take care if it with a professional if possible, and at least don't forget to manage your time so that you keep some real personal time off work.
About the main question, be careful that the grass always look greener elsewhere. From a very distant point of view, I'd say that you're on the right track to achieve a perfectly decent PhD in your current position, but obviously I'm not in your shoes. And let's face it, to you I'm just a stranger on the Internet ;)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Only you can make this decision. But, I think there are two deciding factors that you should definitely reflect on.
**(1) Is it more important to you to have a good thesis, or a done thesis?** Both are valid options! In particular, there are three possible outcomes:
1. You choose the good thesis and end up getting a professorship
2. You choose the good thesis and don't get a professorship -- but you get a permanent, high-paying, interesting job elsewhere
3. You choose the "done thesis" and get the same job as in option #2
Opinions will vary, but I think the only bad outcome here is #2. Yes, you may get some satisfaction and knowledge from your "good thesis"....but the opportunity cost in money and time is very high. Further, you don't stop learning when you get your PhD. So personally, I would only advise choosing the good thesis if you want a faculty position and think you have a very realistic chance at it.
**(2) What are the odds that you can successfully complete your PhD with your current supervisor?**
The above discussion assumes that you can get your "done thesis" in 2.5 years as planned, while a "good thesis" would take 4+ years. But your situation may have deteriorated to the point where you will not be able to produce a satisfactory thesis without transferring, and/or your advisor will not accept a thesis from you even if it is satisfactory. In this case, proceeding with your PhD may require finding a new advisor, regardless of the other considerations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think you have a very common problem.
Many PhD researchers are initially so aglow with the novelty and potentiality of being on an independent research programme that they are fearful of challenging the quirks, wilfulness and, sadly occasionally, the naked narcissism of a supervisor. They often bury themselves in work and reading through the first winter. But the basic problem remains and has to be confronted.
You have to go to your supervisor first - and with a lot more determination this time - and get him to see **and appreciate** the work-plan you have determined. If to your mind he is not sufficiently engaged, then you must go to the Head of Department and seek a change of supervisor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/20
| 2,375
| 9,782
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, I'm reviewing a medical study (open-label trial) that compares the efficacy of different drug doses on a patient population (heart failure). The study is arguably of low-quality, compared to the landmark trials that established the benefit of this drug in this population: low sample size (~100 compared to 2000), short follow-up duration (~3 months compared to 16 months), open-label and without placebo.
The results the authors report are too good to be true - the study arm that can be directly compared with previous trials on this topic (same population, same drug dose) had a 4 times greater reduction in NT-proBNP (heart failure biomarker) than in the original study! And remember! Only in 3 months compared to 16!
Furthermore, during previous peer review, another reviewer suggested that it is a study limitation that no markers of functional capacity were available (6-minute walk test), and the authors just included it, seemingly out of thin air! (It wasn't previously mentioned in the methodology of the study).
Another indication that their data is falsified is that they report that all their measured variables were normally distributed - in my experience with similar variables, they are normally log-normal, not outright normal! (Although there is no proof that's always the case in literature).
The editor is seemingly hell-bent on publishing this paper, as it has undergone 4 rounds of review, and reviewers that reject it are being replaced one-by-one.
I know I can't reject this paper on the strong suspicion of foul play - what is the right way to tackle this?
EDIT: Thank you for your responses and comments. The authors ascribe the discrepancy to a different sample make-up, but it's (subjectively) too great to be simply due to the sample composition. As for anonymity, it didn't occur to me initially - I'll try to maintain enough ambiguity as to prevent a breach of blinding.<issue_comment>username_1: Say to the editor what you say here. You can't prevent the publication, but you can be honest. Even if there is no foul play, if the results are anomalous then there are probably methodological problems, such as sample size.
You can recommend rejection. If the editor publishes anyway and takes you off the list of reviewers, you are probably better off. Tell it like you see it. The responsibility is with the editor.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: ''The editor is seemingly hell-bent on publishing this paper, as it has undergone 4 rounds of review, and reviewers that reject it are being replaced one-by-one.''
That's not your problem. Recommend rejection for the reasons which you give here, and then it's the decision of the editor if they still wish to publish it.
Edit: I should add, try to be tactful with your comments and don't outright accuse the authors of misconduct, at least not in such a blunt way. Even if you suspect foul play, you could be wrong.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Instead of reviewing the paper you can reject it, which seems that you should do, you could try publishing a note somewhere debunking the study, or at least indicating the issues it has. Scientific criticism and responses are not as 'in' today, but there are ways to at least leave a trace--the easiest one being ResearchGate.
Another issue here is that it seems the publisher seems to have wrong incentives, which is a generator of problems such as the one you described here.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: You can indeed
>
> reject this paper on the strong suspicion of foul play
>
>
>
Tell the editors what you suspect and why. You need not prove that what you suspect is true.
If the paper is published you can comment publicly on it in any way you like without violating reviewer anonymity. You might tell the editor that you may (or will) do that, in hopes that they will take your critique seriously.
Unfortunately, once published it may be cited forever even if debunked.
[<NAME>'s blog](https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/?s=peer%20review&submit=Search) has much to say on this subject.
He responded to email saying
>
> Interesting. One thing that I didn't see in the thread is that every
> paper will get published somewhere, if the authors want to get it
> published. So getting it rejected at journal A is no big deal; it
> will still appear in journal B. Or maybe it could make a difference,
> if journal A is an attention-getter such as Jama, but otherwise not.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In a comment on @username_1’s answer, you wrote:
>
> […] my thinking is that it would be wrong to reject these researchers purely on the suspicion of falsified data - after all, I could be wrong.
>
>
>
There is a misconception here that is worth pointing out. The key thing to remember that it is fully the authors’ burden to convince you that the research is correct in order for you to recommend acceptance of their paper; it is not your burden to prove that some suspected flaw you are perceiving is real before you are allowed to recommend rejection. In other words, rejection should be the *default* decision for any research that doesn’t meet high standards of rigor and address any reasonable criticism that might occur to a referee. So for example, if you thought there was a 25% probability the research results were unreliable and a 75% probability they were correct, then recommending rejection (or at least a revise and resubmit to allow the authors to fix the flaws you are pointing out) would be the *correct* decision, even though it would still be the case that “after all, you could be wrong”.
Following this logic, if the results really seem too good to be true, then it’s up to the authors to convince you that they *aren’t* too good to be true, by increasing their sample size, shoring up any methodological deficiencies you point out, and/or rebutting your critique about normal versus log-normal distributions. Consider giving them the chance to do so.
Being skeptical does not mean you are saying the results definitely aren’t correct, you are simply saying you’re unconvinced and that you don’t think the paper should be published until it can more rigorously defend the claims it is making. As @username_1 said, simply state your honest opinion — that is precisely your duty as a reviewer.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: Medical research is not my field as I am from a physical sciences background.
But I do know a bit about statistics.
The dangers of drawing conclusions from small samples are well documented. For the initiated, just run up a simple [R](https://www.r-project.org/) (or [Matlab](https://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html)) program that generates *n* values randomly from some normal distribution with some stated mean and standard deviation. Then let the program calculate the mean and standard deviation based on this randomly generated sample. Print the data table plus its mean and std deviation.
Now run this whole program several times each for *n = 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, 500, 1000, 2000, 5000, 10,000*.
The results should be sobering when you compare mean and standard deviation data based estimates for small *n*. It can change a lot from one generated sample to another.
It might also be useful, given the OP's observation that log-normal statistics is generally regarded as the most appropriate for the phenomenon in question, that the above simulation be re-run with a log-normal distribution.
If uninitiated in statistics, please get some assistance from a colleague in the statistics function of your organization.
You might append your tables to your review comments for your editor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I try to never attribute to malice that which may be explainable through other mechanisms, and I don't think you need to say "I don't believe the data is real" here, especially in context of the point [username_6 made](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182594/20457).
However, you are asserting that there is a well-established literature, using solid methodology showing findings quite different from what the current authors are finding. This places an extremely high burden on the authors to convince the referees that their methodology (statistical and otherwise) is correct, and that they've done all appropriate controls.
There are always serendipitous findings. Perhaps the authors have really found something substantial about the difference between biomarkers at 3 months vs longer term, and that would merit publication.
For me, the discussion section would be key here. How have the authors tried to explain the difference between their findings and earlier studies?? Are there other controls that need to be done? Do they need to extend their findings out to 16 months to demonstrate that the biomarkers return to where the published lit would predict? Why haven't they done that??
As I said, the required level of rigor that should be used when the data doesn't match the expectations of the literature is very, very high. I can't tell you how many times I've seen authors run to the community with surprising findings, rather than trying to hunt down the artifact or confounder that *really* explains their results, and this may be one such case.
If the authors failed to convince you that they've employed the level of rigor required to confirm a result that disagrees with a well established literature, I'd recommend that you recommend rejection solely on that basis. I'd most certainly avoid saying "I think they just made up the data" unless you're very sure that this is the case. That's a charge of academic misconduct, which is very different from saying "I think your science sucks".
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/20
| 2,681
| 11,493
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a PhD student in a computational lab. My supervisor manages a program that is relevant to our field and which is supposed to be better and faster. Our group is mainly focused on application. (No PhD students are here to code. There was one but they left.) Personally, my research project focuses on using "new tools", the software is vaguely mentioned, but it is not the main focus.
I tried to use this software, but after nearly one year of testing, the conclusion is clear: it is not adapted for my project.
My supervisor does not accept that. When I explain the problems to him, I basically get a long monologue of why this is normal, and that research takes time. Also, sometimes he asks me to fix the code myself.
Because I am worried about the quality of my PhD, I started to do work on my own with another open-source software. I got interesting results which I started to write about. He now wants to introduce his software in the paper, basically changing the entire story.
Unfortunately, he seems to be a better diplomat than a scientist, and it is really hard to discuss with him.
Now the question: If I work in a group which develops and represents software *X*, can I publish without using this software (if the paper could be done using it, naturally)?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are sole author of a paper, then yes, you *can* organize it as you wish and use tools you feel appropriate. If you have co-authors then you need to agree.
But the other, unasked, question is whether it is *wise* to ignore a supervisor who has some influence over your future, both for finishing and thereafter. It is a question of finesse that you need to work out.
One thing your supervisor is correct about, is that things take time. But he should not make you suffer for the time it takes to improve his software.
I do suggest that you try to help him as much as reasonable with developing the software, and you may be in a good position to do so if you have alternate (and better) results with other software. If he is wise (perhaps questionable), then he should welcome that.
But, look to your own interests. You need to finish and develop your career. Outright refusal to work with him on this will probably be a negative.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As someone who has seen this arrangement (although with less pushy supervisors) from multiple points of view... Yes, you are not obliged to use the software. Go and publish on your own, learn to be an independent researcher!
That is not to say you have to be at odds with your supervisor about this issue should you choose to use something else. You say he is a good diplomat - learn from that! One example of good diplomacy would be getting a *carte blanche* for using any other software tools for your project by explaining how it would help developing his own software. Be more detailed and helpful with your feedback: if open-source project X worked but not your lab's own thing, why is that? What were the main obstacles and how could you or him improve on that? Could you directly borrow from these external projects?
I would give you a cautionary tale, however.
Having a holistic vision about the product is important. I have been working for about 5 years on a project (product A) which was meant to be a modern replacement for the industry standard thing going for upwards of $2000 per license. We have replicated the entire core functionality and added a couple of features of our own. The problem? No one has an idea of how to market it and the entirety of the development team was pretty much uninterested in doing so. It is used as a free alternative in courses in a couple of affiliated universities and that is it. Now the team has fallen apart and one of the members is working on what he deems a better UX replacement for the product A. It does have some nice touches, but is a huge mess architecturally and massively lacking features compared to the old one: I would expect it to grind to a complete halt in some 3-5 years if he decides to follow this path. But it got a lot more traction because he now has a vision of the product and pitches it more actively to prospective users.
The moral of the story? You might get good results, but they will be buried and forgotten unless they are either absolutely outstanding - which many of us not-so-secretly wish for - or you "sell" them well. Until you convince your supervisor of the value of your work, they will be a hindrance instead of helping you to realize your potential. Turning your assets into liabilities is one easy way to get nowhere at all.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There a are two questions:
1. Regarding your paper:
You should stick to the facts which software was used to produce the
results. You can explain that both would lead to the same result and
explain different approaches, run-times etc. If the results are
different, you can discuss these differences. You also can mention the
software from your advisor in the introduction as similar products.
But you should not stretch the truth - for whatever reason.
2. Regarding your PhD thesis:
With the given situation, I don't think you will graduate under your
advisor with a different software then the one he develops. Either you
find another advisor or figure a way to get used to it and the way
your advisor works. Talk to other lab members how they handle the
situation. Probably you are going to suffer. Decide whether it is better
to through away your last year of work and find a new advisor, or stick for the upcoming years with
an advisor you have difficulties to work with.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: For better or worse, the advisor might consider the software they co-developed as a significant part of their research group's output.
In that context, it is entirely plausible to them that PhD students use this program, and -- as part of their work -- help improving it.
Having a student just dabble with other software is unlikely to result in a thesis that fits the experience and interests of the adviser.
One possible route could be to understand how/why the other software is better and to see how one could use this to improve the software developed by the lab.
If you feel strongly that you simply want to use other software, this research group is likely not be a good fit for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: **Your *main* focus should be on getting results.** If tool A can help you get results that you can’t get using tool B, then there is no question that the scientifically correct thing to do is to use tool A. It is literally your duty as a scientist to use the tool that you think is the correct one that’s adapted to your project and that will maximize the scientific value of your work. To bend to your advisor’s will on this seems to largely defeat the purpose of doing a PhD in the first place. Even if it leads you to a marginally more successful academic career, it will turn you into a cynical academic who believes that everything academics do is motivated by self-interest and pandering to people in positions of power rather than a desire to do good science.
However, it is also the case that…
**a legitimate *secondary* goal is to keep your advisor happy.** We live in the real world, not a Socratic utopia. In the real world, you are doing your work within the confines of academia, where it is expected that you will not just pursue scientific Truth but also show the ability to work as part of a team, and the humility and tact to defer to the wisdom and experience of your superiors (even on some occasions when they may not be quite as wise as they think they are).
The conclusion is that, in pursuit of this secondary goal, it would not be a betrayal of your principles to spend at least a modest amount of time doing things your advisor wants you to do even if you don’t want to do them or they seem pointless.\* So I’d suggest that, in addition to using the scientifically correct tool you’ve identified, you also learn to work with your advisor’s software and try to incorporate some use of it into your thesis and/or papers, to the extent that that can be justified as supporting the science you are doing, even if only marginally so.
\* Assuming your advisor isn’t asking you to do something that’s outright fraudulent or crackpotty, that is.
Finally, keep in mind that…
**another legitimate secondary goal of a PhD is to learn useful skills.** You may not think that your PhD should involve coding, but if you look at it a different way, your advisor is actually giving you a valuable opportunity to acquire some extremely useful and marketable coding skills. When I meet people from industry they tell me things like that software engineers are so much in demand these days that they “can write their own paychecks” (literally a phrase I heard from a senior HR manager at a large Silicon Valley company). So don’t underestimate the value of acquiring coding skills even if they don’t have a direct relevance to (your own personal vision of) what your PhD is about, or if acquiring these skills requires you to get out of your comfort zone. Indeed, it is precisely the things that take us out of our comfort zones that help us develop and grow as academics, researchers, or future [fill in the blank]’s.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: You might want to try to understand why your supervisor prefers that you use his code. Is it because developing this code is part of the grant you're funded from (as mentioned in another answer)? One reason that hasn't been mentioned yet is:
**It's much easier for your supervisor to check the correctness of your work (configuration files, etc) if you use software that they're familiar with.**
One reason that the supervisor might prefer that you use his software is that he understands it well and can therefore adequately check the correctness of your methodology. **A PI is often held responsible for the research that comes out of their lab (especially if they are funding you through a grant) and it is also their responsibility to train in you correct practices.** It might be difficult for them to do this if you are using software that they are not familiar with.
I don't require my students to use only software that I'm familiar with, but I strongly suggest it, since I can provide them with help and examples of working configurations. In some cases, they have wanted to use different codes and I have allowed it with sufficient justification (the code they want to use has features the code I use doesn't have). In these cases, I ask them to explain to me how the code works and sometimes I read the documentation to ensure what they are doing is correct. Beginning students sometimes don't have as good of an understanding of what can go wrong with calculations as I do and I am better able to spot problems even if I don't know the software well. Honestly, I don't always trust my beginning students to set up the calculations correctly because there are so many ways to make mistakes. This is my job as their supervisor.
One idea to get your supervisor to accept you using the new code might be to run some test cases (maybe simple toy models) demonstrating that the software you are using provides similar results to his software. You could also show what is hard to do with his software that you'd like to do, but is easier to do with the software you found.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/21
| 842
| 3,858
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have reached out to a researcher about using their dataset from a paper published 20+ years ago, but they have not responded to my email. There are a variety of reasons why they might have not responded, ranging from being retired, data is destroyed, not trusting unsolicited emails, coveting the data's future research potential, and probably a myriad of other possibilities.
Because their study
* used a constrained scale (Likert [1,5]),
* used a relatively small sample size,
* used a small number of questions,
* reported multiple statistics giving location, scale, and correlations,
* and model fit statistics,
it is possible for me to recreate a dataset that is identical to the original.
The purpose of creating this dataset would be to provide a hypothetical analysis with updated modeling and statistical methods to compare if the conclusions would be similar with new methods. The original dataset would have been preferred, but a reconstruction would provide an equivalent result for the newer methods.
The measurements are survey responses, so on the face of it one might be concerned about privacy. However, the sampled population is large and the survey questions are not specific, so actually identifying individuals would not be possible from this reconstruction.
Assuming that I am transparent with what I am doing in my reporting of the data and analysis, is it ethical to reconstruct a dataset without explicitly obtaining permission?<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes.** This is published work, so you are free to do whatever you want with it, modulo the usual caveats. The fact that you are "reconstructing their dataset" is irrelevant; the key point is that you are building on their prior work using only published, publicly-available information. As you mention, you'll have to be transparent in both directions: give credit for the parts you take but be sure not be imply that you have any "inside information" about the original study.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Talk to your IRB.
The original participants in the study may or may not have had some expectation of privacy w.r.t. their data. This existed as a real, official agreement between the original researchers and the participants, and likely went through some kind of IRB approval process. The authors almost certainly never even considered the possibility that the data could be perfectly reconstructed from the summary stats they provided, and anticipated that not providing the raw data was sufficient to keep the participants' individual responses anonymized. Possibly, the participants were *explicitly told* that the raw data would not be publicly available! You say that determining identities is likely not possible, but this probably depends on various things. Often, small studies are convenience-sampled, and the participants are easily identifiable as the students taking Psych2053 at PolyTech U under professor Study Author the semester before the study was published.
Anyhow, all of this is something you should probably bring up with your own IRB. I'm sure they'll be fine with it if you take the usual precautions of not making the data publicly available, or what have you. Still, it would suck to have the fact that you didn't get approval to come back to haunt you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't see how ethics is involved here, especially as the data set is 20 years old.
How can you be sure that any result (positive or not) is caused by the new method and is not an artifact of your potentially insufficient data set reconstruction?
Why do you cannot create a new data set, use the old methods, check that the result confirms the old paper, and then try modern methods? And publish your new data set. I think that would be the better, more scientific approach.
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/02/21
| 1,420
| 6,028
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Scenario 1:**
Depending on the length of the talk, I'd show the speaker a 10min/5min "warning" sign that their time is about to come to an end. Arguably, 1-2min "overtime" seems tolerable, but 5mins will delay further proceedings (especially if everyone is doing it). What would be a polite way to transition into the question segment?
**Secenario 2:**
In the question segment, people sometimes forget about the rest and a (heated) discussion will erupt. How to politely remind the people that other people might have questions as well or that the next speaker should come up.
Addendum: This also should work in a virtual environment.<issue_comment>username_1: I think both scenarios have the same response:
You need to look for a natural pause from the speaker. When they end a sentence, when there's a moment of silence, when they finish asking a question. Moments like these are where you should slip in and (firmly) state that the time for their presentation/question really has passed.
For a question/discussion mention that they should 'take it offline', i.e. continue the discussion afterwards without the audience so that the session can move on. For a presentation, you can give them one final minute if you're lenient. But if you've already warned them that their time is up, tell them that and move the session further.
This answer is also possibly useful: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/54150/69838>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While this is unlikely to be a broadly useful answer, here goes.
Story time:
Some years ago I attended a focused conference/workshop held in a small town in Italy. The town had a lovely conference center with an auditorium and a nice sound system for the talks. Each day there were sessions with talks, as well as discussion time and activities. The first day's program was a disaster - nobody kept to their allotted time, the session ran late, lunch was late as a result, and so on. One of the more experienced hands said no problem, I'll take care of it tomorrow.
The next morning the first speaker ignored the stop signal and kept on talking. The audience then heard, slowly coming up in volume, a selection from the Three Tenors. The speaker tried talking louder. The music kept swelling. The speaker quit speaking, and the music slowly went away. The audience looked back, and there was the experienced hand at the sound board with his CD player jacked into it to provide the music.
The next speaker also ignored the stop signal and tried to keep talking. Once again, music from the Three Tenors started being added into the sound system. That speaker figured out what was going to happen, and stopped rather abruptly before the music got too loud, and the audience had a good laugh.
Nobody else ran over time through the rest of the week.
So, a sound board and an Ipod to provide lovely classical music is one approach to the issue. It works quite well.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Meet with each speaker prior to the session, perhaps immediately before and perhaps earlier. You may need to find a way to inform them that they need to meet.
Tell them that you will appear on the stage immediately at the scheduled end of the talk, hopefully within their peripheral vision. That is the two minute warning. After two minutes, just step to the podium/mike and say "Let's thank the speaker" and start the applause. If you don't permit two minute "overruns" then just step on the stage a bit earlier, within the five minute window.
Many speakers will actually appreciate this as five minutes (and ten, especially) can seem like a long time for a speaker.
If it is in a Q/A session, there is likely a microphone (or more) on the floor. Have someone step near it at the two minute mark and ask for it when that time expires.
People can carry on any remaining conversations away from the presentation.
It is polite in the sense that the speaker has been given notice, several times with your ten and five minute warnings. It is also polite to following speakers that things don't overrun and to audience members who come for only some of the presentations. The last speaker, especially, will thank you for keeping it moving.
This is a fairly common practice at some large in-person meetings in my experience. It is a bit harder with a virtual meeting unless you have a private channel to a speaker. I think a Zoom host has some power to interrupt and one can send private text via chat.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you'd like to give the speaker 10, 5 and 1-minute warnings, assign someone to hold up cards with those warnings.
If someone goes over and you need them to finish, you will need to be assertive. Stand up, walk to the front of the room, and announce, "Thank you very much, but we are out of time and need to wrap this up. Perhaps our speaker may be willing to answer additional questions offline during our break. Again, many thanks to our speaker for a wonderful presentation and to our attendees for their kind attention."
*Added:* As lalala points out in comments, all it may take is walking to the front of the room. It shouldn't take a genius to realize you did that because time's up. You may not have to say a word. But if you do, be assertive and just say it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: In my somewhat limited experience the best solution to this is the automatic timed "traffic lights" that both the speaker and audience can see. They display a green light during the main bit of the talk, it turns yellow when approaching the end and turns red when the time is up. As the audience can see it they know the speaker is going over, the speaker knows the audience knows and tends to finish soon. It is not a absolute protection, and the chair may need to step in after a while, but it does provide an automated way of delivering the information that avoids the personal uncomfortableness of having to interrupt a potentially senior academic.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/21
| 682
| 2,971
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it normal/acceptable to ask researchers/supervisors you're familiar with (in this case, a professor who supervised me some number of years ago) about other researchers who they've likely to have met? Specifically, I'm having to decide on a researcher to supervise me on a short project, but other than a few emails, I know nothing about their personality/work-style.
I planned to send an email to my old supervisor along the lines of:
"How well do you know Professor X? Would you recommend working with them?" (but with more pleasantries). Could this come across as rude, or is this sort've thing expected (in UK/US academia). Also for reference, I'm currently a PhD student in the UK and the researchers I'm asking about are all at US institutions, so I don't have any chance to meet them personally first. I also understand that this is largely dependent on how close you are with the person you ask, but some other opinions would be useful anyway.<issue_comment>username_1: As long as you are sending the letter to someone you know and who will remember something about you, this should be fine. It may actually be necessary to obtain some such information about potential supervisors in a system in which you need to choose a supervisor as part of the application process. Other places there isn't really a need (the US, for example, in most fields).
I doubt that it is necessary to be "friends" with the person you ask, but there should be some likelihood that the one you ask will have some context for the question.
But the expectation is that you will treat any information in confidence.
Moreover, if the professor recommends another to you, they might also be a good choice to recommend you to them if you actually make application.
The need may be less for general collaboration, since you may have the opportunity to communicate with people before you make any binding decisions and get a sense of how they respond. But still, it should be fine, without issues.
---
Since you mention the US specifically, note that it is fairly rare to need to choose a supervisor as part of the application process. Hiring for TAs and such is mostly (not exclusively) a departmental matter. See [How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/176908/75368), for general information about doctoral applications various places, including UK and US.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Answering the titular question - yes, this kind of information harvesting is completely normal and acceptable.
However, I would exercise caution and opt for a direct contact with the potential supervisor instead if you do not maintain or have maintained a close enough professional relationship with the person you are about to inquire. In other words, if you do not feel comfortable showing up at their door with "hey, I was wondering if you could help me a bit" - do not do that.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/21
| 403
| 1,642
|
<issue_start>username_0: Would it hurt graduate admissions chances if I went to a logic REU or took upper-level philosophy courses? I go to a small school that doesn't offer graduate-level mathematics. What if I applied to masters programs first, would that help?<issue_comment>username_1: Quite the opposite, actually, at least for many of us. I have three math degrees and an undergraduate minor in Philosophy. I studied logic formally a couple of times both as an undergraduate and during my masters (IIRC, though it was long, long ago). A course in ethics is good for anyone, but especially so if you want to be an academic.
Formal logic is interesting and needed in math, but even old Aristotelian logic and logic puzzles stimulate the brain in some of the same ways that math does. And even some CS fields depend heavily on logic.
I can't promise that formally studying it would help more than other things, but it won't be a negative.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the only real answer to 'does X demographic do Y?' is 'it depends on the person'.
I've met a lot of pure mathematicians that would look down on applied mathematicians that do NOT have an interest in logic and philosophy, for seeing maths as a simple tool and not seeing the beauty of it.
I've also met a lot of applied mathematicians that think pure mathematicians are wasting their lives on abstract algebraic subjects that are too abstract to be useful.
I'll admit, as a biomedical data scientist, if I were to hire someone, I'd more likely pick the person with an applied statistics course rather than an upper-level philosophy class.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/22
| 1,568
| 6,409
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated last year from a prestigious university where I was in general a very good student. I am now applying to graduate programs.
The class (upper-level undergraduate mathematics) had moved to an online format due to the pandemic; the first part of the class was in person. (This was 2 years ago.) The exam in question was closed to all aids, such as peer collaboration, the textbook, notes, and the Internet. Moreover, although the exam was available within a 36-hour window as a PDF file, it was stipulated that it be taken within 2 hours. There was no monitoring for compliance with the self-timing or closed-book requirements. These rules were laid out unambiguously, and I signed a declaration of academic honesty, in which I affirmed, falsely, that I had complied with the rules. I consulted the textbook extensively during the exam and took 6 hours to complete the exam (because I was quite literally studying the material during the exam period). I got away with it.
To be honest, at the time, it did not even occur to me that it was morally wrong to do such a thing. I was under pressure from my other classes and I felt that I did not have time to study beforehand. I made the following rationalizations, mostly subconsciously: (1) it was not particularly wrong since I was not copying answers or looking up solutions, but merely "refreshing my memory" with key theorems; (2) I had performed extremely well before, and I could easily have gotten the same grade if I had studied, so I was not obtaining anything that lay beyond my potential (I got a perfect score on this virtual exam just as I had on an earlier in-person exam of similar difficulty); (3) other students would inevitably break the rules; (4) the lack of enforcement was an implicit signal that they were more idealistic guidelines than rules; (5) my other classes had relaxed the closed-book requirement in light of the virtual format.
The incident has begun to weigh heavily on my conscience out of the blue; I had nearly forgotten about it between now and then. In hindsight, it was profoundly wrong for me to have done it. I feel enormously guilty about this incident and can only think of how foolish it was to have minimized it with those self-deceptions. Needless to say, I have no desire to ever again violate the norms of academic honesty. It may sound implausible, but I don't think I realized that what I had done was cheating, and how big a deal it is, until recently.
What should I do? In light of the severity of the infraction and my prospective plans in academia, is it incorrect to remain without raising the issue publicly, as I have until now?<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations on holding such a moral code. It will pay dividends in your life if you surround yourself with honest people. What you did was wrong. And the fact that you regret it and worry about shows that you understand it.
Now do not complicate your life because of the mistake you made. Firstly, you got a grade, more than you deserved. So go back and revisit the course so that your real grades match what you have in your CV. Because this would be bad for your future in multiple ways. This by itself is a penance.
Secondly, there are ways in which you could fix it. You could give free tuition to deserving students. Help them so that they need not teach. This is especially useful as the world is standing back after the pandemic. Or dedicate a part of your savings to an African school. You can come up with many such ideas.
Thirdly, you are too young and you would see many exams in your life, university or otherwise. Much more crucial than this one. So forgive yourself and continue to work on maintaining this moral code. Life is long and mistakes will happen.
Finally, if you are someone who is so obsessed with this that it is mentally having a bad effect on you; then go and confess to your course coordinator. Most probably, he is going to have a laugh and will soothe your feelings and send you off. However, be prepared for any outcome.
Pandemic has shown the world a lot of ugly things. I am sure you can forgive yourself considering these circumstances and the weird openings they provided for such temptations.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Reflect on it and, more particularly, on your justification at the time.
"Everyone else does that so this is the norm" leaves one with either challenging the norm, their own moral code or living on with the guilt. You might not always come up with the most idealistic answer possible to various questions the life poses - unless you are bent on dying a martyr. But do give it due consideration and figure out what is it that really matters to you. Find your core values and shape yourself into the image of what could exist in a world you would actually love to live in. Be that change you want to see in the world around you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> (1) it was not particularly wrong since I was [...] merely "refreshing my memory";
> (3) other students would inevitably break the rules; (4) the lack of
> enforcement was an implicit signal that they were more idealistic
> guidelines than rules;
>
>
>
For all purposes, you could have been the only student taking the exams, so point (3) does not matter at all. Regarding the other points, they are rational externalization of your guilty feelings trying to look for an "easy" way out, since you claimed in the paragraph just above
>
> (because I was quite literally studying the material during the exam period). I got away with it.
> These rules were laid out unambiguously, and I signed a declaration of
> academic honesty, in which I affirmed, falsely, that I had complied
> with the rules.
>
>
>
So you cheated and you are already facing the personal consequences (most of the time we set rules to protect one from oneself, not from the others).
You have three choices:
* you go full honest, and you contact a lawyer (to protect yourself) before writing to the university that you cheated in an exam, leaving them to set the bar about external, independently evaluated consequences;
* you enroll in another but similar graduate program from another institution (you were a good student, so you can expect to complete your degree in much shorter time than), removing your "cheated" degree from your CV;
* ignore your guilty feelings.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/22
| 5,509
| 23,705
|
<issue_start>username_0: [Wikipedia article on Certified Teacher](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certified_teacher)
In most countries one must be licensed to teach at pre-school, primary or secondary level. The process for acquiring the license typically involves taking and passing an exam. Example for the Philippines:
>
> Licensed teachers in the Philippines are required to pass the Licensure Examination for Teacher given by the Professional Regulation Commission. Once the teacher passes the exam, they will be given the title "Licensed Professional Teacher". The title "LPT" is used to append after the licensed teacher's name. However, anyone who is not a licensed teacher but uses "LPT" will be punished by the law.
>
>
>
Why doesn't this apply to university-level lecturers or professors? If it's because we can safely assume that lecturers and professors know how to teach, but not those teaching at more elementary level, why is this assumption safe? The curriculum of the teaching exam ([example](https://web.archive.org/web/20100215033416/http://www.nie.edu.sg/itt_hb/web/2010/general_handbook_Jan-Dec2010.pdf)) says an objective is "to equip teachers and school leaders with the knowledge and professional expertise necessary to teach and manage educational programmes in challenging school environments". Why don't lecturers and professors need these skills too?<issue_comment>username_1: I think the reason could be that at the beginning of education, the methodology and teaching style are much more important than the content: children have to learn how to learn before they can learn specific things.
The further along in their student life, content gets more and more important, and it is assumed that students will have learned how to learn by themselves.
In tertiary education, it is the opposite than in primary education: the content is what matters most. So teachers there rather need to be experts in the topic they teach instead of expert educators (but ideally both).
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: They do. It is just the time cost of acquiring all these skills proper is deemed too high to be applied to the entirety of academia, so instead we rely on learning by doing, somewhat ironically.
There is a simple lack of resources to have enough people with deep understanding of the subject who are also good educators. The knowledge this specific is almost forbidden - one can not simply get it from a neatly dressed providers with diplomas and certificates plastering the cabinet walls. No, one has to venture to the deep end to some complete freak who is apparently a mad genius. This is a role model we all grew up with and all aspire to. /s
On a more serious note, there *are* resources available, and universities do utilize academic development programmes. But they are not compulsory - in a sense, for the same reason professors do not cover all the teaching duties with their highly skilled labor and there are TAs.
Another reason there is such reliance on the teaching experience instead of a formal pedagogical education is that at secondary level and below, there are standard-issued textbooks. One of the big challenges for a tertiary-level educator is creating their own course. Now, I sincerely do not know why the guidelines on that are not provided and are not compulsory material...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know if this is universally true (suspect it is) so this is a US centric answer.
In the US, the governments (state and federal) have decreed, based on general (not universal) consensus, that elementary education and usually secondary education, are universal and mandatory.
Having decreed that students *must* attend schools they take on responsibility to guarantee its quality up to a point, though imperfectly it turns out.
But higher education is voluntary so there is no need to regulate it quite as closely, though there are many regulations even there.
I don't claim the system is perfect and it certainly has holes. At the moment education at all levels has become highly politicized, though the trend has been in place for decades.
For a parent, who must send their children to schools, and don't have a huge number of options about which school, it is necessary to the "common good" that the standards be high.
In the end, though, teacher certification flows pretty naturally from the mandatory nature of universal education. It also reduces cost to some extent at the local level, since individual schools don't need to certify teachers to the same extent that universities do, though many do impose a probationary period on new teachers. Such a probationary period is less formal, however, than the tenure process of universities.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Because, historically, the purpose of universities was not teaching, but scholarship.
The students were more like apprentices who showed up to take part in the research and debates, expected to eventually become scholars as well.
Gradually, over the centuries, this has expanded, but the idea remains that the academics are there primarily to do research and to be experts in their field, and that students go to university not to be "taught" in the same sense as in high school, but to be in the company of some of the world's foremost experts. To be exposed to their ideas, observe how they conduct research, and learn on the way.
This idea is obviously in tension with the current model of having thousands and thousands of students come through, most of them not very interested in scholarship for its own sake. Most students expect to be taught, and many are entirely unaware of the research activity of their professors. There are simply too many for any sort of apprenticeship relationship to be viable.
We end up with two competing models of what a university should be like. Students arrive with one idea of what they are getting into, while academics are trained under a different set of assumptions. This does sound rather like a recipe for disaster, but somehow we keep bumbling along.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: The main reason is that tertiary students are (usually) legal adults. Much of the certification process for a primary or secondary teacher is not pedagogical as much as it is child-care-related, because teachers stand *in loco parentis* for students during school hours. Governments want to be able to reassure parents that it's safe to send their kids to school all day. (This isn't 100% perfect of course, but every check helps.) The purpose of this kind of certification is to ensure a minimum standard of character, legal status, and ability to manage children; not anything specifically to do with teaching. This isn't as much of a concern for tertiary education, in which students are assumed to be adults, competent to judge safety for themselves, and thus no longer require teachers to act *in loco parentis*. (Having known college students, this is of course in the nature of a legal fiction, but... here we are.)
Additionally, pedagogical training is seen as less important for tertiary teachers, because the students are assumed to be adults who actually want to be learning the material, so they are able and willing to struggle through some amount of sub-standard teaching on their own. This is in contrast to primary and secondary students, who may or may not be interested but are not automatically assumed to have the ability to learn things despite a bad teacher. At least in the US, with the steadily decreasing quality of secondary schools and the corresponding increased need for good introductory general education courses at the tertiary level, this is beginning to change (but not fast enough).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: ### Content Knowledge vs Pedagogical Skill
<NAME> (the author of Math with Bad Drawings) wrote fairly eloquently on this a few years ago. His thesis is that instructors are people who (broadly speaking) needs expertise in two somewhat unrelated areas:
1. **Content knowledge:** an instructor must have mastery of the field that they are teaching. An instructor should know the details of the topic that they are teaching, and should be able to reconstruct or recall those details immediately.
2. **Pedagogical/andragogical skill:** an instructor must have an ability to effectively communicate ideas and maintain engagement. An instructor should know how to keep students interested in what they are teaching, and what kinds of experiences are likely to lead to generation and retention of knowledge.
Orlin further argues that the traditional viewpoint of education is that instructors of young students needn't have a great deal of content knowledge, but must be masters of pedagogy; while instructors of older students must have a great deal of content knowledge, but needn't be great pedagogs.
While Orlin tries to dismantle this traditional point of view some, I think that it is an accurate description of the current *status quo*.
With that in mind, licensure requirements for primary and secondary education (but not tertiary) are somewhat explained by what the licensure ensures: (1) that the instructor knows how to work with kids, (2) that they are not dangerous to children, and (3) that they have the minimal content knowledge required to get the job done.
Of these, (1) is probably the most critical. As an undergraduate, I underwent a teacher certification (to teach middle school and high school mathematics). Nearly all of the courses I took for that certification were related to pedagogy. Thus my license certifies that I have the pedagogical knowledge necessary to teach a class.
At higher levels, where content knowledge is more highly prized, an MA or PhD is generally sufficient to act in lieu of a license.
### Children vs Adults
Another compelling argument for licensure is that students in a primary or secondary education setting are not adults, and need to be protected (by the state). This is doubly important in a society where student are *required* by the state to enroll in school (up to a certain age or level of education).
If a government required that students enroll in school, but then did nothing to ensure that the education those students are receiving is adequate, then one can imagine that this requirement would quickly evaporate as a kind of "unfunded mandate".
Children have very little choice about education. *Most* children (in places where licensure is required; or, at least, in the US and western Europe) attend publicly funded schools, where their teachers are employed by the state (i.e. by a municipal government, by a state government, by a provincial government, etc). Because the state is responsible for educating students, and because the students don't have much of a say in the matter, the state takes on the responsibility of ensuring that the instructors can do the job. This is typically done through licensure.
In contrast, adults are generally not required to attend post-secondary institutions, and if they choose to attend, they generally have more choice regarding *which* institution they attend (even a student with poor grades in the US typically has a number of community colleges and state colleges to choose from).
This lack of a requirement combined with the choice of institution puts significantly less pressure on the state to ensure that instructors are adequate (and, as above, it is assumed that they needn't be adequate, anyway), hence licensure is far less common.
### The Role of the Academy
In the American system (and, I presume, elsewhere, as well), primary and secondary education are meant to ensure that the citizenry has a basic foundation of knowledge and skill; and primary and secondary institutions are meant to provide instruction, and have no other role in society. You attend such an institution in order to be taught, and the people teaching you have no job other than providing instruction.
By contrast, university, college, and (even) community college instructors typically have a much broader job description. The *primary* job of a member of the faculty at a university is generally "conduct research and produce papers". These folk are not (usually) hired to teach classes, but do so as part of training others to take their place—higher education is an apprenticeship program for researchers.
Because licensure is largely about ensuring some instructional quality (rather than content area knowledge), there is little call for university faculty to be licensed. Again, an advanced degree is usually enough to ensure that a minimal threshold is hit.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Well it used to be you needed a PhD. In the process of getting a PhD, you will have learned what you need to learn. Unfortunately, now a lot of classes are not taught by PhDs.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: #### This is also affected by a supply and demand issue in the academic labour market
The other answers here do a great job of explaining the reasons for this omission from a purely pedagogical viewpoint. To wit: since tertiary instruction is directed at adults, it requires greater focus on specialised content and less focus on specialised instruction methods. However, in addition to this reason, there is also a complementary reason rooted in the supply and demand dynamics of the academic profession.
Put in simple terms, people who have already spent years earning higher-degrees in specialised fields (Masters, PhD, etc.) generally have greater career options than people just leaving school, so they are less likely to be willing to do a long teaching certification (on top of their existing degrees) in order to obtain a teaching job. There are other attractive options for many higher-degree graduates, and while the academic job market is one attractive option, it would be less so if it required the candidate to do a three or four year teaching degree ---or some similar certification--- prior to starting.
As has been pointed out, there are some European countries that require a short "habilitation" or similar prior either to academic teaching or a senior professorship. These requirements are usually done in a circumstance where the person is already employed and being paid for their time, and they work on their certification while already employed at the university. For example, in Germany, the people working on their "habilitation" are postdocs or junior professors who are already doing paid research work. If they were instead required to attend university as (unpaid) full-time students for several more years, this would be a much less attractive option.
Even if the universities decided they wanted teaching degrees, and even if they could overcome this impediment as a whole (e.g., as higher-degree graduates become overabundant relative to demand), one can imagine that a first-mover issue that would arise for the first university that requires its incoming faculty to get a three to four-year teaching degree prior to teaching. It is likely that such a university would rule out a large proportion of possible applicants for positions, because the prospect of doing another degree is highly burdensome and there are good alternative options. This would probably cause a significant loss of quality staff for the university.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: Many of the answers given are correct, but another point of view that I haven’t seen expressed so far is that **the implied premise behind your question is simply not correct**. That premise being that because university professors are not “licensed teachers” according to some arbitrary technical definition of “passing an exam by some licensing body”, that means the training they undergo on the way to becoming professors is somehow less rigorous than than of licensed teachers.
Professors hold a PhD or other terminal degree. They undergo an extensive training program of 4-7 years beyond their undergraduate degree (which includes passing several exams, although that is the least of it) that prepares them to be successful in many careers including higher education. This is far more training than it takes to become a “licensed teacher”.
It may be reasonable to ask why that training that professors receive does not include a formal induction into the science of teaching but instead usually takes the form of an apprenticeship (being a TA etc), and several of the other answers here give valid arguments explaining that. But your question, if read literally, actually focuses on the licensing aspect and seems to suggest that not being “licensed” means you have somehow undergone a lower level of vetting than someone who is licensed. That suggestion is simply not true; professors undergo a much *stricter* vetting, it’s just that the vetting isn’t by a “licensing body” and is not referred to as “being licensed”. The difference is mostly semantic and does not translate into being less qualified to perform the actual job.
Finally, a comment by @DrakeP, who said that “as a current college student […] I can confirm that assumption [that professors know how to teach] is NOT safe” caught my attention since it seems to imply that what I said above isn’t correct. I would counter that by saying that as a former primary and secondary school student, I can confirm that the assumption that licensed teachers are effective at teaching is also not safe, and frequently incorrect.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: Speaking for Ireland.
Primary teachers need a full 4-year degree in education.
Secondary teachers need a primary degree in the subject(s) being taught plus a Higher Diploma in Education - the latter takes one year.
University lecturers are generally **not** required to have any education training, not even a short communication course - though some will individually choose to undertake the latter at least.
I suppose the reason is "historical", i.e. that has been the way until now and despite several notorious cases of bad lecturers no systemic measures were taken to rectify this.
Why? Bureaucratic laziness, academic resistance and too docile a wider public, be it parents or employers, seem the main reasons.
Personally, I would make clear communication - oral, written, graphic and multi-media - a *mandatory* set of modules for anyone taking a PhD.
Yet that in itself will not bridge the education gap.
I have seen clear communicators and halting communicators teach the same subject yet see that, where the latter are genuinely interested in the subject and even-handed with students, they can have better performance from their class. Especially with assignments and project work. So it's not all about clear communication.
Some people were born to teach: they love to impart knowledge to others and that love rubs off most of their students. Other people become lecturers to have access to state-of-the-art lab equipment, avoid pressures of private sector research, a cosy secure job, long summer holidays, high employer pension contribution, excellent sports facilities, sponsored conference trips to exotic resorts, playful interaction with young people and a not too moralistic human environment.
Academics have quite a strong lobby in today's political airspace. Change is more likely to come here as a result of system breakdown rather than a system defect, even one as damaging to university ethos as bad teaching unfortunately.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_11: First of all it's worth clarifying that generally **you do need to be certified in order to teach at the tertiary level**. That certification is your Ph.D. (or doctorate or whatever your country calls those things).
That certificate includes a test whether you can communicate clearly because you (typically) have to write and defend your thesis to get a doctorate.
Additionally, in many locations a compulsory part of obtaining a Ph.D. degree is to be involved in tertiary education and run tutorials and seminars (or practicals). There usually is no explicit test on how well a job you did but it is part of your supervised work and some training and evaluation typically exists.
You are correct, that there are typically no formal checks on teaching ability and university teachers will typically have received no formal pedagogical training. And that is indeed different from elementary and secondary teaching certificates. Answering why that is the case, might involve historical developments and practical differences between tertiary and secondary teaching as the other answers nicely discuss. But it's also worth considering the following hypothetical question: do you think that instituting a formal pedagogy and teaching check would reduce the number of inept tertiary teachers in a way that works significantly better than the current system? Based on my personal experience I doubt it: I have observed similarly inept 'teaching' on the secondary level as I have on the university level. And I suspect that's exactly the question that a university (or country) would have to ask itself when deciding on changing the current system.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: Others have commented on this, but perhaps not as strongly. I do wonder if this question is an example of the **Bulverism fallacy**; namely asking "Why is X true" without establishing whether X is indeed true in the first place.
However, my knowledge is limited to my own circumstances, which relate to the UK; I admit I don't know the equivalent situation in the US or other countries. So I will give you the benefit of the doubt. :)
But, to answer your question, at least in my specific circumstances, it is simply not true that no qualification is required to teach at university. What *is* true however is that the specific qualification(s) required are not necessarily identical to the qualifications required to teach at primary education (nor should they be).
E.g. in my case, to be appointed lecturer at my current university (and I assume in most UK universities?) you are expected to either "have obtained", or "to have a reasonable expectation of obtaining within your probation period", an 'academic teaching' qualification such as the Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA) or similar. This is a qualification, which, in theory at least, demonstrates your proven ability to teach in a variety of formats and methodologies, documents your experience and track record in doing so, knowledge of up-to-date pedagogical research and theory, and backing from other academics who can vouch for your application/fellowship. Furthermore, as you advance in your career towards becoming a professor, you are similarly expected to obtain 'higher' versions of such qualifications (e.g. 'Senior Fellowship', 'Principal Fellowship' etc).
Secondly, even prior to having obtained a formal qualification, in theory one does not simply walk into ~~Mordor~~ academia and start supervising students with no prior experience! To be considered for a teaching position, you still need to demonstrate in very practical terms that you have engaged in significant teaching and supervision in the past in your CV. For a junior position, this typically involves having engaged in private tutoring / lab practicals / presentations / designed your own modules / etc etc. (but I agree, this is not an argument against the need for a formal qualification, it's simply a more pragmatic way of addressing the issue).
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/22
| 2,008
| 8,340
|
<issue_start>username_0: Tertiary education is very expensive in the USA, UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc.
On the other hand, on average, tuition fees in the EU are 1/5th the cost of that of the USA.
Why don't students from those countries go to the EU for higher education en masse, and how are their higher education industries keeping themselves competitive?
Why do students in those countries still take educational loans rather than going to the EU?<issue_comment>username_1: There are a few explanations here. The first thing to note is there is not much of an addressable market of people who would go to the EU for education. Low income students (<100k income) would not have to pay much in the form of tuition, and high income students (>300k income) likely have enough saved in education plans to afford the education. That would leave only middle income students who might consider going to the EU, but these students would likely favor state flagship schools or schools with scholarships considering career outcomes in the US.
The second point is that most private universities are charging what people are willing to pay. For "admission" into high finance, academia, or medicine where people can garner very high salaries, going to a "prestigious" college is a huge advantage. People are therefore willing to take out a loan with the chance to make it back many times over in their mid to late career.
And finally, the reputation of academia is mostly defined by outlier research academics, not undergrads or tuition pricing. As long as these universities produce outlier intellectuals and intellectual capital stemming from these universities, they will be able to charge much higher rates without losing anything.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The language barrier is a big consideration. Students are required to take a foreign language in high school. On the other hand, even in states that used to be part of Mexico, there are still people here who are on "you're in America, and you need to speak American!" Being bilingual is still quite the afterthought for many.
That said, it'd be a complete culture shock for most Americans to try to get an education in a country speaking a foreign language. There are even some that struggle with just *English*. It's a wrap once they arrive in Europe expecting everyone to accommodate them, and it doesn't work out.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: **Why do people still buy inkjet printers?** On paper, there is no real reason why they should; laser printers are much nicer and have a much lower lifetime cost. But people do not make an entirely rational choice: inkjet printers have a lower sticker price and are "a regular printer like everyone else has," so your average consumer just buys one without thinking too carefully about other options.
I suspect the same answer applies to your question. In many cases (not all), a European degree would be just as good as an American one, and a whole lot cheaper. But students are intimidated:
* Navigating the college admissions bureaucracy is "scary" enough; doing so in another country is a different matter. Keep in mind that the US is huge and isolated; many high school students have never even been to a foreign country.
* Most people apply to domestic universities, and so there are lots of resources (books, counselors, older friends) who can give advice about applying domestically. Very few people can advise about foreign universities. Yes, it's all there on the internet -- but the average 18-year-old (and their family) will really struggle to figure everything out on their own, and mistakes can be costly.
* The language is a factor. Some European degree programs are offered in English, but most American students don't know this.
* There are over 5000 universities in the US alone. Choosing ~5 of these to apply to is a daunting task; many students never even consider expanding the pool even further.
There are also some legitimate concerns:
* The social aspect. In the US, college has a huge social aspect to it; many people make lasting friendships and memories in college, and perhaps even meet their spouses. Doing this in a foreign culture -- where you probably don't speak the local language -- is much more difficult.
* Loans. Even if tuition is cheap/free, students will need on the order of $1000/month to cover their living expenses (rent, meals, etc.) -- and this may have to be prepaid to a bank account in order to get a visa. In the US, students and their parents can easily access tens of thousands of dollars in student loans, often at favorable rates. But Americans studying in Europe will have to find other ways to come up with the money, if the parents don't already have it saved.
* Credentials. US employers rarely see foreign degrees from US citizens, and so they may not be sure how to interpret these credentials.
* Distance. Again, many 18-year-old Americans have never left the country, and never spent more than a few weeks away from their family. Even moving to college an hour away frequently creates serious challenges in terms of mental health. Moving to a foreign country with a different local language 3000+ miles away is not for everyone. This distance also introduces costs; even a single round-trip plane ticket is expensive.
* Academic culture. The EU system is a little bit different -- for example, general education classes don't really exist, so students often go in knowing what their major will be. Grades have more to do with high-stakes exams and less to do with participation or effort. Some fields like medicine and law are obviously quite difficult to do abroad.
That said, I suspect these "legitimate concerns" are actually less important than the psychological factors and biases listed above. A rational cost-benefit analysis (the listed potential disadvantages vs. the enormous costs savings + advantages of studying in another culture) would likely predict a far higher incidence of American students studying in the EU than is observed.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: The main reason is alumni associations and networking. Going abroad, the median american studen will loose all the (possible) connections at home, therefore shooting in their own feet.
If a student graduate as a surgeon from a R1 university, statistically they will have vastly better career outcome than graduating from a R2 university (of course it is all relative to US moral and ethical standards, better career means earning 6 digit salary while enjoying 3 weeks of holiday per year).
Funnily enough, the alumni network strength is still based on the reputation of R1 universities, which in turn is based on their research and closeness to public spending, which is based strongly on the inflow of smart, hard working PhDs from unknown and minor universities from all over the world. Yes, the courses attended by PhD students have a very minor impact on their formation/education.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: **It's good to be at the top of the university rankings**.
US and UK universities dominate the top of all three major university rankings (THE, QS, and ARWU). Students want to study at the top universities (and employers want to hire graduates from the top universities). If students have to pay more to study at these universities, so be it.
Note anglophonic universities that are not at the top of the university rankings have to actively compete for students. If you've attended a university fair in a developing country, you'll have seen it first hand. For example here is a [2018 higher education event by US universities in Malaysia](https://my.usembassy.gov/educationusa_fair_2018_penang_kl-022818/). Note one of the photos features a banner by Sacred Heart University. Have you heard of this university? On the other hand, a university such as MIT will not need to send a delegation.
Couple more factors:
* Language. English is widely taught even in countries that mainly use other languages. The same can't be said of French, Dutch, German, etc.
* Halo effect from the top universities. I've seen many people not even look at EU universities because all their time is spent researching top universities from the US, UK and Australia; they choose backup schools from those countries as well.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/22
| 452
| 1,608
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few months ago I have published my paper in arxiv. Now I came to know that a automatic DOI (digital object identification) number is given to it. Is it ok or normal?
I have no idea about DOI. What is the given DOI?<issue_comment>username_1: A google search will turn up the link to the official site: <https://www.doi.org>.
It will also give a link to the neutral explanations at Wikipedia: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier>.
From Wikipedia:
>
> A digital object identifier (DOI) is a persistent identifier or handle used to identify objects uniquely, standardized by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
>
>
>
See the links for more.
ArXiv has information about automatic assignment of a DOI here: <https://arxiv.org/help/bib_feed>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Since the question of what a DOI is has been answered already by [@username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/buffy), I will only answer the question of whether this is normal or okay.
Since January 2022 arXiv is automatically assigning a DOI to every preprint in addition to the arXiv identifier. This change hase been [announced on the arxiv.org blog](https://blog.arxiv.org/2022/02/17/new-arxiv-articles-are-now-automatically-assigned-dois/).
One of the reasons for this change is the goal to make the preprints easier to discover via different search engines.
**Update May 2022**: Now all existing arXiv preprints have a DOI (thank you [@Jake](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/156103/jake) for this information).
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/22
| 469
| 1,686
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m shortlisted for a campus interview. I am asked if I can do it in few days. I’m nervous because it is very little time to prepare my research talk and teaching lesson. Can I tell them that the proposed date is too soon and would it be possible to do it at a later day? Would it go against me?<issue_comment>username_1: A google search will turn up the link to the official site: <https://www.doi.org>.
It will also give a link to the neutral explanations at Wikipedia: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier>.
From Wikipedia:
>
> A digital object identifier (DOI) is a persistent identifier or handle used to identify objects uniquely, standardized by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).
>
>
>
See the links for more.
ArXiv has information about automatic assignment of a DOI here: <https://arxiv.org/help/bib_feed>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Since the question of what a DOI is has been answered already by [@username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/buffy), I will only answer the question of whether this is normal or okay.
Since January 2022 arXiv is automatically assigning a DOI to every preprint in addition to the arXiv identifier. This change hase been [announced on the arxiv.org blog](https://blog.arxiv.org/2022/02/17/new-arxiv-articles-are-now-automatically-assigned-dois/).
One of the reasons for this change is the goal to make the preprints easier to discover via different search engines.
**Update May 2022**: Now all existing arXiv preprints have a DOI (thank you [@Jake](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/156103/jake) for this information).
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/22
| 1,149
| 5,033
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a PhD student, I am expected to do research on my own, possibly assisted by my supervisor or colleagues. Like any researcher, I sometimes spend days looking for a small piece of information, sometimes just a single sentence, that answers a question whose lack of an answer was preventing me from moving forward. Sometimes, it was enough to stumble upon the right article after several days to get the answer directly, so it didn't require any real research work, except for browsing the internet.
What is absolutely wonderful about Stack Exchange is the ability to simply ask such a question and get the answer, without doing anything. Without doing anything ... That's not really true. It's not even true at all! Asking a question on a specific subject requires quite a lot of work, which in my opinion can be summarised in a few steps:
1. Research to see if the question has a direct answer to be found (a few hours of research via various articles, or even a few days)
2. Establish a developed context so that anyone with basic knowledge can access the question
3. Formulate the question in the most understandable and educational way possible (this step is not so obvious: putting words to a question is not easy and requires serious knowledge of the subject!)
4. Pay attention to the comments and answers to either edit the question and improve it, or to judge whether the feedback offers us a real answer to our question or not. In the latter case, it is then necessary to state how the answer does not answer the question.
5. Once a tangible answer has been received, do some research to verify it and then accept it as the official answer to our question.
All this work is, in my opinion, absolutely necessary, both out of respect for the people who are going to read the question and try to answer it and for oneself in order to obtain the much-desired answer to our question. But despite the work that I believe a serious question should represent, I can't avoid feeling uncomfortable when I ask a question on Stack Exchange and the answer unblocks my research.
**Is it ethical to use Stack Exchange for research, following these steps carefully?**
I would like to make it clear that I have no intention of making the people who answer my questions work for me. When I ask a question on the site, my only goal is to get an answer that helps me get unstuck, not to expect someone to do a scientific research job for me. I see Stack Exchange more like an interactive service that tells you what has already been done.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is ethical to seek, accept, and use help in a dissertation. The only difficulty in accepting help from others, and especially on sites like this, is giving acknowledgement to those who provide critical help (insight) into your work, since many of us are anonymous here.
But students have, since time immemorial, sat around a table (mead, tea, coffee, ...) and chatted about issues in research.
The general issue is one of plagiarism, if you attribute something to yourself that came from another. In mathematics a conversation of a few minutes can be enough to earn an authorship position. The same is likely true in other fields.
But "research" doesn't need to be just archaic texts retrieved from dusty library shelves or the 75th page of a Google search.
Of course your personal contributions to a dissertation need to be sufficient to convince advisors and reviewers of your advance of the art and science of your field.
And, asking the right question can be an important element in research.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think the more general issue is citing a source as supporting evidence when it hasn’t gone through peer review. While the stack overflow process suggests a type of peer review it is not required and referees may have no formal affiliation. So, YMMV.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I would say, yea it’s ethical with acknowledgment. When I was in grad school, we had a large, rolling dry erase board in our “lab” (cubicle area) that I would write equations on about my dissertation subject and sometimes a better mathematician/engineer than me would wander over and ask what was going on. So, I’d have to erase the board and start over and explain. Usually, about halfway though, the lightbulb in my head would turn on and I’d have the solution. I’d continue the explanation until I got past the part where I’d been stuck and applied my new idea. If the watcher agreed, I’d keep going until we got to an end. Then I could go off and start implementing this in code. Sometimes we’d find an error and I’d have to backup and start some part over. The positive moments often led to acknowledgements or coauthorships in a resulting paper. Others in the lab would do the same.
You can think of SE like that whiteboard, but maybe more critical. You can put things here (in the form of a question) and see if it’s a reasonable question and maybe get some guidance on it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/22
| 1,094
| 4,201
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a professor at a university of applied science in Germany, is 600 hours of teaching considered a lot? What does it look like? The job description says:
>
> Die Arbeitszeit beträgt grundsätzlich 40 Stunden pro Woche. Der Mitarbeiter hält in der Vorlesungszeit Lehrveranstaltungen im Umfang von bis zu 600 Lehrveranstaltungsstunden pro Jahr ab.
>
>
> Working hours are generally 40 hours per week. During the lecture period, the employee holds courses amounting to up to 600 hours per year.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: [Here](https://glossar.hs-mittweida.de/Lehrveranstaltungsstunde) (in German), it says that 15 Lehrveranstaltungsstunden are roughly equivalent to 1 Semsterwochenstunde (SWS) (perhaps are more widely known term). Divide 600 by 15, that makes 40 SWS a year, or 20 per semester.
[This table](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehrdeputat) gives the normal amounts of SWS for professors in different federal states in Germany (both for university and university of applied sciences): 8-10 per semester for university professors and 16-18 for those at applied sciences.
So if those hours don't include preaparation (and according to the definition in source 1 they don't), the answer is: **Yes, that is a lot of hours.**
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: ### Counting German teaching load – Semesterwochenstunden
The typical unit of teaching in Germany is SWS (Semesterwochenstunden – hours per week per semester). One SWS corresponds to 45 minutes (German teaching hour) of lectures or similar over 14 or 15 weeks. Other teaching duties such as supervising theses, excursions, practicals etc. have official conversion rates to SWS. Also, professors can partially reduce their teaching loads by taking on certain teaching-related administrative roles such as being on the examination committee or supervising others who teach. However, preparation times, exam correction, etc. do not count as extra SWS.
A professorship at a university of applied science (Fachhochschulprofessur) is considerably different from a professorship at a “normal” university on account of its teaching focus. **The typical teaching load of a professor at a university of applied science is 18 SWS, which corresponds to roughly 540 hours (of 45 minutes) face time per year.** Thus, 600 hours seems somewhat high, but not overly high. The only people with such teaching loads have a position called *Lehrkraft für besondere Aufgaben* (teacher for special tasks), which has a teaching load of up to 24 SWS at universities of applied sciences (depending on the state); these are not professorships.
If you are unsure what a given position entails, I recommend to ask/look for SWS as this is the standard unit. If nothing further is specified, look at the respective state’s laws regarding the specific position. These teaching loads are pretty standardised.
### What is it like?
Professors at universities of applied science typically spend their first few years entirely on building up teaching, i.e., creating material, developing routine, etc. **This is generally considered a very taxing phase** and many work more than 40 hours per week to manage this, often considerably more. However, this depends a lot on the specific position, accommodation by the university, and what material you already have. For example, if you can primarily use existing teaching material and have some repetition in your teaching duties (e.g., doing the same course twice), this can considerably ease the situation. If you are considering taking such a position, I strongly recommend to inquire what kind of support, existing material, etc. you can build upon during the first years.
Once they have done every course once or twice, professors typically can allot some of their time to other projects such as research, industry collaborations, committee work etc. What exactly is possible here depends a lot on the position. Still, teaching remains a primary aspect of such a professorship.
*This second half of the answer stems from my own investigation in such positions including long conversations with people who have recently acquired such a position.*
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/22
| 654
| 2,763
|
<issue_start>username_0: I accepted a pre-doctoral fellowship at University A with the expectation I will pursue a PhD there. After 3 months into the fellowship, I realized that the program doesn't exactly spark my interest and I cannot see myself spending the next 4-5 years doing this type of research.
Unfortunately, it's hard to bring it up with my current potential advisors since my background is a perfect fit for this topic. A professor at another university B reached out for an interview and if I am successful with my application there, I would be more inclined to go to University B as I believe it is a better fit and the research topic there would be much more interesting.
Am I misleading my current advisors by continuing my fellowship at A? Note that at this point, I have not received an offer yet at B, and I'm afraid to leave A in case B doesn't push through. On the other hand, PhD *is* a major commitment, and I'm afraid I might have ended up committing to a PhD that I'm not all that interested in. What are the ethics of staying at fellowship A?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, you can leave a position, even a generous one, as long as you fulfill the requirements. Accepting a fellowship isn't normally signing away all your future choices. It might be problematic if you leave some projects unfinished when others depend on you.
But, it would be wise, just so that you have all options before you, to discuss your plans at some point with current advisors. That need not be immediately unless they need to take some action on projects to assure continuity, but that probably isn't the case.
It isn't the "leaving" per se that has ethical implications, but the other factors around it as noted above.
Ultimately you shouldn't commit to something that you feel isn't in your best interest. In particular, continuing into a PhD there after the fellowship, even if you complete it, is probably not a good idea.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think username_1 answered really well. But just wanted to add that you also want to reflect carefully on how you were attracted to the program at University A in the first place. The grass is always greener on the other side. No matter how exciting the project at University B sounds at the moment, there are always boring and mundane tasks involved in the pursuit of a Ph.D. degree. Just the fun should outweigh the pain somehow. And it is easy to dislike something when you are working on it day in and day out. So it is easy to have a bias towards your current program now. Just make sure that you will not come into the same situation at University B. If you ever want to hop to a University C, people will start questioning why you keep hopping.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/23
| 301
| 1,328
|
<issue_start>username_0: Unfortunately, I recently discovered that my name was removed from a published piece which I contributed substantially to (it is available online). I have already asked my co-authors, and all of them claim that they did not make the attempt to remove me as author.
Should I call the editor to clarify? I've already sent an e-mail but there has been no response so far. I have the relevant phone numbers as they are from my institution. I would note that I had zero notice that my name was removed; I only discovered this when referencing the work for another paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it's appropriate, since it's a pretty major issue.
Something might have gone wrong in typesetting, in which case a corrigendum is probable.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: While a phone call might be needed to jolt them into action, you also need to send an email detailing the problem with appropriate links to the paper, along with its title and other information.
Spell out the problem in detail. Email is better for this than a "call", but an email alone might not be sufficient.
But it is difficult to communicate the detail in a phone call alone. But you could send the email and then follow up in a couple of days with a call.
Be specific and ask for a reply.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/23
| 1,372
| 5,560
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am invited to an interview for a Lecturer (Teaching) position in a (very prestigious both research-and-teaching-based) UK institute. The duty and the responsibilities noted in the job ad clearly target teaching without saying anything about research, say,
>
> Duties and Responsibilities
>
>
> The Department of ... has an exciting opportunity to recruit a
> Lecturer (Teaching) in ... positions to help support the teaching &
> assessment and supervision of projects across both Undergraduate and
> Post Graduate Taught courses with a strong emphasis on developing and
> delivering innovative teaching strategies and enhancing the student
> experience.
>
>
> Teaching duties include organising and running taught modules,
> lecturing, setting up and running laboratory/practical classes,
> holding personal tutorials with tutees, the setting and marking of
> exams and coursework, as well as supervision and marking of project
> work.
>
>
> Key Requirements
>
>
> The post-holder should have a Degree in Computer Science or related
> field, along with a range of teaching experience. They should be able
> to demonstrate a good knowledge and understanding across a range of
> core computer science subjects as well as demonstrate an interest and
> understanding in scientific research.
>
>
>
As a general question, could such a Lecturer (Teaching) be potentially able to get through the same path similarly to a Lecturer to eventually become a tenured personnel who both teach and does research (promoting from lecturer, to senior Lecturer, to reader, and finally to professor)? Or a Lecturer (Teaching) is supposed to always be only involved in teaching stuffs?
You may say that I better ask this question from the panel in the course of interview. However, I am afraid if my question's answer is an obvious NO, they may already tag me as a not-the-best-fit candidate. So, I am essentially seek some advice on the potential career path of a Lecturer (Teaching) in that whether such a path can, at some point, intersect with research.<issue_comment>username_1: The university you are applying for should have promotion guidelines available on their website, where you can check the relevant criteria for being promoted to the various ranks. Keep in mind that *tenure* is not an applicable concept in the UK system. A lecturership would typically be subject to *probation*, which seems shorter and milder than the tenure-track requirements at US universities. After passing probation, your position is permanent, but not nearly as protected as equivalent positions in eg the US or Germany.
At my university, both Lecturer (Research) and Lecturer (Teaching) can get promoted, and criteria for both involve both teaching and research. However, the demands in the focus track are much higher than in the non-focus track (and everyone needs to do some admin). Being promoted does not change you out of the track though - a Lecturer (Teaching) becomes a Senior Lecturer (Teaching), etc.
Changing track is possible, but only if it matches the needs of the department you are hosted in. And of course, for going from Teaching to Research you are subject to the classic Catch-22 that on a teaching position, your teaching load will be so high that demonstrated your research excellence for getting a research position might not really be feasible.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: (paraphrasing)
>
> Is there a standard career path for a *Lecturer (Teaching)* (in the UK) to transition to a Teaching+Research role.
>
>
>
*Short answer*: **No**
*Long answer*: In UK academia, 'lateral movement' is a very common approach to shape one's career. Academics focus not only on securing *more senior positions*, but frequently apply for (subjectively or objectively) *better* positions. *"Better"* in this context could mean a higher-ranked University, less teaching, better lab infrastructure, better alignment of research interests to a team.
While there is no standard path, I would consider applying for *Lecturer (Teaching)* position a legitimate option if your ultimate goal is securing a permanent academic (research + teaching) position.
*Pros:* You will have your "foot in the door" and the opportunity to see the system "from the inside". As teaching is still required in most research positions, you will also get relevant experience in this area. Not sure if the position you are considering is a fixed-term or a permanent contract (some teaching positions are fixed-term I think), but if it is permanent it provides job security and removes the time pressure to "find your next post".
*Cons:* As [Arno](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182693/4249) points out, the teaching load can be very high (even for research+teaching posts, let alone teaching only). This will be especially so in your first year, as you will need to create lecture materials or adapt old ones to your delivery style. It will be difficult to find time for research, and a stale research profile wouldn't be the best thing when applying for research positions.
---
I'd also like to echo what [Arno](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/182693/4249) mentions about "tenure-track" in the UK - it does not exist. Lecturer (research) positions are permanent, and often include an "automatic" promotion to Senior Lecturer. However, further promotions (Reader, Full Prof) do not (only) depend on an academic meeting some criteria, but also on the availability of such positions within your institution.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/23
| 817
| 3,410
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing my master's thesis using LaTeX and am struggling with the citations, specifically when referring to software that I've used. I am mostly unsure of how precise the citations should be.
For example, I used TensorFlow 2.7 for the bulk of my work, but I'm not sure if I should create separate bibliographic entries for individual pages in the documentation or refer to the documentation as a whole.
If I treat each webpage separately I would have to add 20-40 references to my project.
Note: My advisor did not give me any specific feedback regarding citations when I asked.
Edit: I am talking about online software documentation. Each function is described on a different webpage. I am unsure of whether I should treat it as individual webpages or if it is sufficient to say that I referred to the documentation. My thesis is for computer science.
Edit: After some discussion with my advisor, he recommended that I removed any detailed discussion of the implementation. He preferred that I instead discuss any mathematical implications instead.<issue_comment>username_1: If you quote from the documentation then a citation should accompany each quote. For paraphrases of some limited material an overall citation of the work might be fine or not. It depends on how you write the thesis.
But, just because you read some page in the documentation and rely on it for your work doesn't imply citation, but might imply acknowledgement of the help the work provided.
I wonder a bit about how valuable a page-specific citation would be in any case for such things. The documentation might occur in several forms. And, printing an electronic resource in A4 vs 8-1/2 by 11 will give different page numbers for some parts.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Honestly this is a tricky question. I believe I would proceed as follows:
* Look for a "single document" documentation: sometimes, documentation is bundled into a single pdf that you can download, link and archive (think <https://github.com/coq/coq/releases/download/V8.15.0/coq-8.15.0-reference-manual.pdf>, with a version number "embedded" in the link / title of the document). In this case, proceeds as usually by using `\cite[Section 4]{my-ref}`.
* Look for a "one-webpage documentation": if it exists (think <https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html> ), use it, and refer to sections using `\cite[Templates]{my-ref}`. It is not as good as a direct link to <https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#templates> , but it does the job.
* If all the documentation is scattered on multiple pages, then I am afraid that the best course of action is, indeed, to create one reference per link. This assumes that the overall organization of the documentation does not change too frequently, so make sure you look for "permalinks" if they exist.
This is clearly not ideal and tedious, but anyone reading your manuscript (including you!) will be grateful for this low-level of precision, that makes checking the documentation a breeze.
Ideally, there would be some mechanism like `\cite[#templates]{my-ref}` to refer to <https://pandoc.org/MANUAL.html#templates>, but I don't think it exists yet.
If you are wondering about the technical aspect of your question ("*how to handle those citations in bibtex?*"), I would recommend posting to tex.stackexchange.com/ where I think your questions will be favorably received.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/24
| 678
| 2,920
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with my bachelors recently and started working full time for the employer I had while I was a student. My employer has offered to pay for my tuition if I want to go back to school for my masters degree at the local university, but I have a slight dilemma.
I made a fatal mistake as a student by not developing a close relationship with any of my professors. I need to provide 3 letters of recommendation for my application. I'm comfortable with asking several people I work with/for (I've worked with them for about 3 years now), but there are probably only two professors that *might* remember me at all, let alone know enough about me to write anything specific in their letter of recommendation. Would it be best to just provide letters of recommendation from my coworkers/supervisors with graduate degrees in my field, or should I try to ask one of my previous professors as well?
It's just a state university that's not very difficult to get into, and I graduated with a really good GPA in my undergrad at the same university, but I don't know how heavily they weigh the letters of recommendation in their decisions.
Thanks in advance<issue_comment>username_1: Talk to the two professors anyway. I'd ask them if they're comfortable writing a recommendation letter for you, and if not, for suggestions about what to do. If they both don't remember you, approach the head of department. No matter how long ago you graduated, professors at your alma mater can help you apply for graduate studies. In your case as well, 3 years is not that long.
That said, since you need three letters of recommendation I'd be ready to approach your work colleagues. Given they have graduate degrees, they will have some idea what is necessary to succeed and can therefore write effective letters. They might even be able to comment on how your studies will help your work, which would add a dimension to the "why do you want to do graduate studies" question that's almost standard on most applications.
I would expect your eventual application to have one letter from your alma mater, and two from your work colleagues.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Firstly, LORs are hugely important especially if this is a research field. They can make or break an application. Definitely reach out to faculty members at the University you got your degree at. LORs from faculty members often outweigh all other sources, because it is faculty members who will be responsible for advising you. Including LORs from current supervisors isn't a bad idea, but I would avoid co-workers and stick to those who oversee your work and mentor you as a professional. Strongest LORs come from those who have evaluated you by the same metrics that a prospective advisor would. Whether they have a graduate degree is less relevant than their current rank and their relationship to you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/24
| 395
| 1,770
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently our group has submitted a manuscript with me as the leading author. The manuscript is about computation and modeling, which involves lots of data analysis. Right now the manuscript is under review.
Today I just found that my manuscript has some errors and should be corrected, and some key figures should be revised, too. Even if the final conclusion wouldn't be affected, I still believe I should correct these errors. So at this moment, I really don't know how to proceed. Should I notify the journal and ask them to stop reviewing? Or should I wait and revise everything once I hear back from the journal?
I believe research integrity and honesty are critically important, and I hope I can make it up properly!<issue_comment>username_1: Don't worry about it for now. It is not published yet. Fix the problems during revision. It is unlikely your paper will be accepted as is. If so, I would be worried about the journal you are submitting to. Otherwise, during revision, fix the mistakes even if the reviewers did not query them, and inform the reviewers and editor of the changes so that they pay attention to your changes when you resubmit your paper. If the paper is rejected because of your mistakes, then too bad. Go to another journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Tell the journal now. They can cancel the review process and return the manuscript to you for revision.
It's better to make your revisions now than after they have made a formal 'revise' decision, because it sounds like the errors are pretty major, in which case you don't want to waste your reviewers' time. Comparatively, if for example there's a typo somewhere with no material impact on your results, you can fix that during revision.
Upvotes: 5
|
2022/02/25
| 1,644
| 6,622
|
<issue_start>username_0: The professor taught me a course many years ago, while the wife died in a road accident that I learned about in the news.
What should I say at the wake? Can I ask about the professor's research and work, or should I focus on non-academic things?
Edit:
* I don't know the professor's wife.
* The wake is, as far as I can tell, public. An email was circulated among the department with details, and the email did not say "keep within department".
* Country: Singapore<issue_comment>username_1: You should express condolences for the loss of the person... in the time of loss of a partner, academic stuff is not primary. Don't even mention academic stuff. If you say anything at all, just tell your sympathies for your professor's loss of their life partner.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As others have noted, a wake is not a social event. If you have no reason to be there, don't go. It is an event for those who were close to the deceased person and/or are close to those they left behind.
But if you need to go, the English language has phrases that work well in this context: "I am very sorry for your loss" or "My condolences". In all likelihood, the professor will spend time with those he knows well, and your only contact will be in a line of people offering their condolences to the husband. You are not expected to make small talk there -- you shake that person's hand, say your sentence, and move on to let others in line have their turn. If for whatever reason, the professor chooses to talk to you at a later time, repeat the sentence and then let him choose the topic of conversation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Without knowing where you are in the world it's hard to answer. My answer is therefore biased towards the German (and Catholic) way.
#### Before deciding to go
Were you especially close to this professor? Was he a special advisor to you or did you work for him? Did you know his wife? Is it an open wake? If the answer to most of those questions is "no", then don't go.
You said your friend is planning to attend and that's why you want to go. If that's your main motivation, don't go. You two are presumably adults-- you don't need a buddy system. If your friend was invited they should go alone.
For example, I did not go with my partner to a funeral for his best friend's mom. I knew her, but we were not close. My partner was there to show support for his best friend and that was that.
Using a wake to "keep in touch" would not be well-received by most people where I live. Wakes are about remembering the deceased for the benefit of the bereaved.
If you want to reach out to your professor send a hand-written card with your sympathies.
#### If you still want to go
Two things to keep in mind:
1. Your professor has lost his spouse in a sudden and traumatic way. Most of his day will be about accepting condolences and possibly comforting/being comforted by those close to him. If you do go, keep condolences short and to the point. Getting condolences all day is tiring. Don't bother trying to talk about academic stuff with your prof. He just lost his wife. That is time for him to be with his family.
2. Other bereaved will be there too and if you end up staying for a while, they will probably chat with you. More than likely you will be asked how you knew the deceased. If you never met her it might be awkward.
Honestly, if you didn't know his wife or him in a more personal way, it's not appropriate to go. Something similar happened to my family at a funeral for a loved one and it was very uncomfortable and exhausting.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: A wake is generally not a social event. You can keep in touch via email, conferences, dinner invitations, etc. - not a wake.
I would expect such a wake to be quite emotional, possibly even devastating given the circumstances.
I wouldn't plan on saying anything beyond: "I am a former student of yours, Allure. I'm sorry for your loss"
To put it ultra-rational: don't say anything beyond this, really nothing!
What percentage of your time did you spend with this professor in the last 3 years? Then the professor deserves to spend the same % of time of his wife's wake with you.
---
Most of this answer is from the comments section ( @Gauss ) , since comments may be deleted unexpectedly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I disagree with some of the answers/comments that say a wake is "not a social event"; my experience of wakes is quite like OP's description in a comment:
>
> In the wakes I've been to, there are many tables set up. We go, talk to the deceased's immediate family, pay our respects at the coffin, and then settle down at one of the tables to chat. In that sense it is very much a social event not dissimilar to a marriage, except the overall mood is much more suppressed and the topics talked about are more macabre. Still, eventually people stop talking about death, and talk about work, life, etc.
>
>
>
However, it is important to note that this is a social event with quite a bit more formality to it than a mere dinner party. While it's typical in my experience to gather with close friends and family and talk about a variety of topics - some mundane (the weather, sports, TV and movies) and others connected to the deceased (favorite memories, specific things you will miss), the important thing to recognize in this situation is that *it appears OP is in an outsider position*. That is, they have a very tenuous connection to the spouse of the deceased, being merely a former student in some course.
As such, they should expect to be a very low priority for conversation by their former professor, as that person is going to be much closer to other attendees. The event is likely to be quite an awkward arrangement for this outsider person, as they may have an opportunity to say a brief phrase of condolences as others have suggested, but after that they are likely not to have much else to say to anyone else. The other attendees will be conversing with the other people there that they know, not with strangers like OP. They will likely feel interrupted and put off if it appears they are expected to make small talk with a stranger. If that leaves OP with only one other person that they are familiar with, the spouse of the deceased, that's just not a good situation for anyone.
I'd recommend not attending at all in these circumstances, unless the existing relationship is far, far more personal than the current description indicates ("The professor taught me a course many years ago").
Upvotes: 4
|
2022/02/25
| 1,083
| 4,595
|
<issue_start>username_0: Important Context: I should note that while we are both American and did our BA/MA in the US, both of us have/will have gone abroad for our PhDs. My friend is applying to a university in the UK and has already made personal contact with potential supervisors in this department.
I completed my PhD a few years ago and have been working as a postdoc at a well-respected European university since. I have a friend from my master's degree, which we both completed about 8 years ago, with whom I have remained in contact and acted as a bit of an academic mentor for throughout our MA and now as she has decided to pursue a PhD. I have a solid understanding of her academic abilities (know most of her grades, for example, and worked with her in group projects and understand her learning abilities and academic drive) and her personal commit, which I do think would make her a good fit for a PhD.
My dilemma: She asked if I could act as an academic reference for her as she has not been in touch with any of our instructors from our MA in the past 8 years, and I do, of course, work in academia. In the moment, I said yes, but now that I have received the link and it specifically asks that I explain "how long I have known the candidate ***and in what capacity***", I realize that I would need to note that I was a fellow student, not just explain when we met and what I believe her academic abilities to be.
I was originally assuming I could simply write something like, "I have known X since her time in Y degree at A school" and then proceed to explain different examples of her work ethic and abilities (of which I have many because, as I mentioned, I have been mentoring her and know her story in quite some detail). Now, I am wondering if it will be noticeable if that is all I say or if it will hurt her if I specifically mention that we were students together during that time and I have acted as an academic mentor to her since then.
QUESTION: Will it hurt her either way if I: (1) only mention knowing her from when she started her MA and specifically do not mention in what capacity or (2) do include that I was a fellow student with her in her MA?
P.S. I have read quite a few other questions here that are similar, but many of them seemed to be noting that the person could not actually speak to what the readers would want to know (i.e. academic performance and abilities), but I do believe I can speak confidently to such information.<issue_comment>username_1: Unless explicitly requested that it had to be written by an academic supervisor, I think an academic peer can serve as a good referee/recommender as well ! It feels equivalent to a colleague of the similar position/rank, writing a letter of recommendation for another colleague.
I think most importantly, as you have mentioned, you believe you can speak confidently about such information. If you can provide concrete examples to back them up, I think it would be perfectly fine !
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: One of the points to consider with LORs is how advisors are going to view the perspective of the letter writers themselves. They are going to look at a letter and ask "Is this person writing from a perspective similar to mine?" and if that letter writer is a PI/advisor, their words are going to carry the most weight because the answer is going to be yes.
In some cases, post-docs and others can provide a valuable perspective when they have overseen the applicant in a research capacity, but that seems not to be the situation here. You can skirt around the fact that you are writing as a friend, but the fact is that rank matters when writing letters and the reader may see through this, then wonder if there is a more significant reason than time as to why she selected a peer to write for her instead of a faculty member. If this were my friend, I would urge her to reconnect with former mentors over using personal connections.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Axiom: the weight that an LOR carries is, very loosely speaking, equal to the credibility of the letter-writer (in the context the LOR is related to) times the strength of the writer’s recommendation.
>
>
>
If you believe this axiom is correct, then your letter will carry just as much weight as it would if it were stating the exact same opinions but expressed from the point of view of a postdoc of equal repute to you and who knows your friend as well as you but in a different capacity (for example as her mentor, coauthor, etc).
Personally, I believe this axiom is correct.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/25
| 3,037
| 13,498
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc whose contract has finished, and I am in the process of applying for industry jobs. However, I have multiple papers making their way through the submission and review process. My institution is demanding my laptop back, but I don't have a personal laptop, just a phone. So if any of the reviewers ask for even minor analysis updates, I won't be able to complete them without a real computer. I did ask my PI if anything could be done, but he said that policies are policies and I should buy my own computer.
Is reasonable or common to ask to hold on to a laptop for a few months or a year after a position ends?
Edit: To be clear, the analysis is python scripts that require a lot of RAM. So I would need a good quality computer to be able to do anything.
**Update**: A friend has a spare laptop powerful enough to do the analyses. He's letting me borrow it until I get a job. For any revisions, I'll remove my former affiliation and listed funding because it's clear the institution is not interested in supporting the research. Thank you to those who offered helpful suggestions and support.<issue_comment>username_1: Not really. You can ask and explain the situation, but I expect they will say no.
You probably need to buy your own laptop, or borrow someone else's each time you need to deal with a review. Or you could talk to your former supervisor and see if they have any ideas.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Best way to proceed is (was) to ask to maintain a guest affiliation to the institution. Usually it is easier to translate your account (both in IT and HR terms) to a guest account.
It may be more difficult since you already left the institution, but it may be worthwhile: you do need the laptop and likely access to publications through the library, too, to complete requests from reviewers.
Escalate your requests to the head of department or similar; you have nothing to lose and it is time to “mark your ground.” As a plan B, I suggest you ask if there is a policy for buying used equipment from the department. You will buy some time and most likely you will be able to get a good working laptop for cheaper price (plus, you know what you are buying).
I am not a lawyer, this is not a legal advice, but in general it has lighter consequences switching from “keeping an object that does not belong to you” (wrongful appropriation) to “not having paid for an object that belongs to you” (late or missing payments).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: They're unlikely to just let you keep it, but have you thought about making them a monetary offer to buy it? A used laptop is unlikely to be worth a huge amount of money, and they might decommission it anyway. There might be bureauratic rules that prevent them from letting you keep it, but it would be worth at least making them an offer if you want to keep it. The worst that can happen is they say no.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I've seen many students and postdocs get requests from admins for their loaned computers when they leave. Now I'm not saying this is what you should do, but as a matter of fact as to what happened in these incidents. **The people who ended up with the best outcome were the students and postdocs who just ignored the admin email requests for the laptop**. They didn't ask anyone. They figured if the computer was really important, their supervisor or head of the department would contact them or the admin would call them on the phone or physically visit them in person. But guess what? That never happened. These students were able to just return the computer a few months later, and everyone was happy. Of course this is only for a short period of time. What happened to the students who asked permision to keep the computer? Exactly what you are experiencing. It drew attention to themselves and created work from everyone else. After seeing multiple types of responses across 10 or so incidents at 2 universities, this is just the reality. I'm not saying you should ignore the admins, I'm just saying doing so may be practical for everyone. It depends on your comfort not following the rules. Sometimes, the admin team is just following bureaucratic procedures and doesn't have any use for the laptop at all. Other times they have a reason they want the laptop back, other than just following the motions. If the former is the case, the admin is unlikely to bother your supervisor or department heads. At least not for a while. If the latter is the case, they will call you, visit you in person, or contact your supervisor. If that happens you can and should return it immediately. But also if this happens, you weren't going to be able to keep the laptop with permission anyways.
So here is a potential option, you return the laptop immediately if you receive a phone call, text, or in person visit from the admin who sent the first email. You also return the laptop immediately if anyone outside the initial email sender, asks for it back in any medium, without you bringing it up. But if you don't hear from anyone again, don't return it until you do. Note because you've already asked about the computer, your experience may be different from others. It is possible that your supervisor does not care about it. Your supervisor might have only said something because you asked about it, in which case they can't tell you to break the rules, even if they believe you should or could.
Are you breaking the rules? Yes. Are you committing a crime? Maybe, it depends on your jurisdiction and the context, best to consult a legal professional. Before it is actually a crime, they do have to make their "best endeavours" to contact you, in the USA or Aus. If they can reasonably contact you using a means besides email, they must do so, as emails could just be going to your spam folder, and wouldn't suffice as "best endeavours". I worked for a car rental service for a bit. People kept the car past the due date more frequently than you would imagine. We only contacted them if the car was booked by someone else, or if the renter was several days past the due date, and hadn't reached out. Usually, they returned the car eventually, and we charged them for the extra days, with no additional penalty and no drama at all. We only contacted the police after trying to get in contact with the renter via phone, email, and text, and the renter didn't respond for more than 30 days. The point is, you were legally loaned the laptop. This situation is not the same as you breaking into a store or bank and stealing it, as some of the comments make it out to be. It will be obvious when the situation is gradually escalating. You will not be charged or punished suddenly without warning (in the USA or Australia). You will have plenty of opportunities to return it quickly, without penalty, if the university really wants it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: No, it is not a reasonable request. It very unlikely that such a request will be granted, even if the laptop is worthless. It is possible that the request will make you seem unreasonable.
Keep in mind that many universities lease computers instead of buying them. You might not know who actually owns the computer.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Many postdocs are jobs where the postdoc works on the supervisor's projects. If this is the case with your postdoc, it is important to note that you can immediately stop working on these projects if you want. If the projects are important to your supervisor, and they were paying you to work on their projects, you are under no obligation to finish them for free. So the supervisor has a reason to go to bat for you about the computer if you remind them about the above. Paying someone else to finish these projects would be a lot more expensive than letting you keep a laptop for a few months.
Have a conversation with your supervisor. Say something like, "Right now I'm unemployed, paying off student loan debt, and can't afford to purchase a laptop. I also will be pressed for time finding a job, and with my new responsibilities in industry, when I do find a job. Even if I could afford it, wasting time, re-setting up this project on a new laptop takes too much time away from my other projects, unnecessarily. While I want to finish these papers, without this laptop, I'll have to stop working on these projects until I am fully settled into my industry job, or I am financially secure enough to buy a personal laptop. Let me know if there is any way for me to keep this laptop so I can continue working on these projects over the next few months. Of course, if I have to return the laptop and drop these papers for an extended period of time I totally understand." This might sound like an ultimatum, and since your supervisor's opinion of you matters, I might avoid this until I have a letter of rec from them. But this statement is totally reasonable. It is unreasonable for a former employer to expect you to work on their projects without compensating you in some way, and it is especially unreasonable for them to ask you to spend your own personal money on this work. But unfortunately, some professors think research is a fun hobby (because it is for them) and it is only natural that you spend your free time on it. Sometimes they forget what it is like starting out with very little money. Now if these are independent projects, that are mostly yours and not your supervisors, then this advice won't be very useful. But many postdocs are jobs where the postdoc works on the supervisors' projects. If the supervisor is really interested in finishing these projects, they will find a solution to this situation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This answer is based on information given in the original question. The actual requirement has been substantially modified since then in comments.
Is there information ON the laptop - if so you MUST back it up yesterday - to "cloud" or similar AND a hard disk - an external portable drive or PC or other. Single point of failure loss prospect is not acceptable professionally or personally.
Is there information that can be accessed via a university account? If so a cheap used laptop or desktop would suffice. Account access is then the key issue.
Backup often, backup now!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: You don't have a location tag; this answer assumes one of the industrialized countries. If you are in a poor country things may be a bit different, except that the first paragraph applies universally.
**Buy a (used, crappy) computer. You need one. Do some menial work for a few days to earn that money.**
Desktops are cheaper than laptops for the same performance. If, hypothetically, you don't have and cannot muster, say, $250:
* Most public libraries have free computer work places these days.
* Internet cafes or copy shops often have computer work places for small money.
* Ask a friend.
* A computer is indispensable for an academic and it may be necessary to reduce other costs to afford one.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: If you still have unfinished articles under review, and these articles have co-authors that still work for the research institution, you are still working for the institution as a "gentleman scientist".
Surely depends where, but at least in the United Kingdom where this title likely originated, it is understood and respected. I even had an access to supercomputing facilities while under this role. You can have access to various resources and equipment that would never be given to a "random person from the street". Obviously, you must be strongly backed up and trusted by your professor in the institution to get and maintain such a status.
At least in Europe, there are many very strictly temporary positions, some even with explicit statement "no possibility to prolong will ever be considered". This creates situations when researcher does not have the funding to stay employed within an institution, while still having an unfinished (or possible to further develop quite easily) project, connections with the former hosting laboratory and obviously absolutely matching competence, not like in the past when "amateur scientists" were mostly illiterate self learners. Further, while in an ordinary job no salary usually means immediately no further effort at work, researchers are often more motivated to complete all unfinished articles and the like first, because they hope that this will help finding further positions.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: In a different world, it might be reasonable to ask to keep the university's laptop for a while...
But, in most of *this* world, as far as I can tell, it is not reasonable to ask this. In addition, even though in various ways the universities currently do effectively require faculty and grad students and undergrads to have laptops... they rarely pay for them.
The issues about our personal computers having university-proprietary info on them, and therefore supposedly warranting university intrusion/control are just silly, in my opinion. (That is, if you want me to do only the things you want, with a computer, and nothing personal, and have everything on it exposed to you, give me the thing and don't expect me to pay for it. For that matter, even if you offer to buy me underwear, I might not want to be obliged to show it to you whenever you want.)
You need a laptop anyway...
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/02/25
| 725
| 3,152
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in a master's program and have already completed my bachelor's, which is the only formal requirement for doctoral study for my program. The first semester went great and I received top marks. This semester, however, I suddenly became gravely ill (to keep it brief: COVID infection triggered a severe chronic health issue), and have been struggling to keep up. I've been committed to doing the work and have been working with several doctors, so I haven't wanted to tap out, but now I am concerned about my capacity to complete my course. The department is encouraging me to take a leave of absence before my dissertation due date that would (1) preserve my first semester work entirely and (2) allow me to renter next January, with no penalty, to complete the course.
The problem is that I was recently admitted to my dream PhD program, with full funding and an amazing stipend package. It is for the 22-23 year and I obviously mentioned my master's studies in my application.
Do you think it would be possible for me to defer this program for a year, during which time I would finish the second semester of my one-year masters? I know it's a loopy situation but the problem is medical (I have ample documentation), and I am only just realizing that my treatment plan may not be enough to get me through the semester. I am wary of continuing with the course only for things to worsen and to be unable to complete my final assignments.<issue_comment>username_1: So obviously we can't tell you whether your PhD program will accept your request, they may have a *no-deferrals, period* policy. We don't know.
But, if the question is "Is this a reasonable cause to ask for a deferral?" I would say yes. No reasonable department would consider this to "endanger your acceptance." The worst they can do is say, "no, you have to reapply," you aren't going to be blacklisted or something.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you're strategizing too much and trusting someone you need to trust (your future program) too little. If you trust them that little, you should absolutely not begin a PhD there under any circumstance.
The question to ask your future PhD program would be whether it is A) Possible for you to join that program on schedule if you are unable to complete your masters for medical reasons, or B) Possible for you to join that program 1 year later than scheduled to allow you time to complete your masters degree as offered by your current institution.
Both of these options may be possibilities, but you won't know until you ask. I think you can take your current department's willingness to be flexible with you as a clear endorsement of the legitimacy of your medical concerns. There is no reason you should expect your future department to see it differently.
Of course, their hands may be tied by policy or outside factors (sources of money, for example), but ultimately it's much more important for you to learn about your options than it is to hide what you are suffering. Your original plan (complete masters this year, start PhD program in the fall) may no longer be feasible.
Upvotes: 5
|
2022/02/26
| 723
| 3,258
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'd like to publish a paper in a cosmology journal. However, I've been outside academia for about 3 years since completing my masters. Is there any platform where I can share my idea and get feedback to beat it into shape? Or where it can be critically judged? What is the best way to proceed to get this published?<issue_comment>username_1: Certainly post the paper on the arxiv, to give it some exposure and potentially get some feedback from strangers in your area. Consider sending it to some contacts you had in academia without the expectation of a response, knowing that they are very busy and may not be able to read it. Please understand that, especially if your paper claims a particularly groundbreaking discovery, or if it is not written exceptionally well and in proper style for publications in your field, it may very quickly be dismissed. Once you are confident in it, feel free to submit it to a journal without reviewing costs, and you *will* get feedback from them directly, one way or the other.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer your question: yes of course it's possible to publish a paper if you are outside of academia. However I would like to make the following important comments.
1. Even if you'd *like* to publish a paper, there is no guarantee that your work will meet the quality threshold of any one journal. It's not a matter of "liking" to publish stuff (everyone would *like* to publish a paper), it's mostly a matter of meeting the quality requirements, and meeting these requirements has (in principle at least) nothing to do with holding an academic position.
2. It is often easier to meet the quality requirement if you are part of an active research program, simply because you are more likely to be current with the topical literature and have better context to judge if your work is actually novel, and more likely to have experience (or access to experienced collaborators) at presenting your results in a matter that will be of interest to the readers of the journal.
3. There are no obvious platforms for discussion of results that need to be "beat into shape". Most of the work is expected to be "publication ready" rather than at a stage where it requires to be "beat into shape." Unless your are exceptional or have lots of experience, properly editing and "beating into shape" is usually done through collaboration so maybe the first step for you is to find a collaborator with experience in the field. Finding a collaborator is a highly non-trivial task.
4. There are many more disreputable journals that will charge a fee than reputable journals that will not. There are of course some excellent journals that do charge as many work on an open-access model.
5. There is no monetary cost (that I know of) in *submitting* to a journal that would charge a fee, although you want to be careful not to transfer copyrights before the work is accepted. You could try to submit to an open-access journal but your cover letter should indicate clearly your circumstance and that you do not have funds to pay any author charges: the journal might still continue with the referee process and waive the author charges, but there's no guarantee of that.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/02/26
| 1,596
| 7,195
|
<issue_start>username_0: Here's the scenario. I am an expert in a subject X and I would like to combine it with method Y to do something new. I have a distant connection to someone who co-authored a book on Y and I approached him suggesting a collaboration. He responded positively as X is interesting to him.
My collaborator then pulled in a PhD student to look at the problem but he was not good and nothing happened. He has now pulled in another PhD student but his work is equally disappointing. I think he must have spent a week putting together some really buggy code that does not do even the simplest version of X. In the meantime (about 2 months) I think I have learned enough about Y to be able to do the whole thing myself. So I am not longer sure if there is any value to me in the collaboration, especially as getting the students to do the work right may take longer than me doing it.
Would it be reasonable to ask to end the collaboration ?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Would it be reasonable to ask to end the collaboration ?
>
>
>
Short Answer
------------
Yes and no. Collaborations established as you outline are mutual investments in future promise, not official (legal, written) contracts in shared workload or in shared distributions to any returns in investment. However collaborations entered in the way you that have outlined are not just street-corner banter about hopes for shared adventures at some future point. In short, what is reasonable to do for a lack of contractual obligations may be unreasonable (and disrespectful) to do preemptively if not unilaterally in respect to (written and time-honored) codes for professional conduct.
Longer Answer
-------------
Perhaps. Consider these questions.
* You hedge about the level in investment you will need to make to do the work versus the investment for your collaborator to train a student do the work "right". Presumably you mean no insult because of course you will also have to do the work "right" (whatever that means). Are you certain that you have gauged well enough the distinction between what you will have to invest versus to do the work "right" versus what a properly prepared student under structured mentorship might be able to do "right" (and perhaps even better than you) given the same time + resources?
* Have you considered the alternative that, with your supposedly new-found insights, you could propose to take charge to provide a student who will meet the criteria that are needed (because you presume to know as much now as your collaborator)? Have you weighed this option as a way to allow you to continue the shared collaboration?
* You are at liberty to make a preemptive, unilateral decision to end the collaboration. However, in the same line as the approach you took to ask for help, have you considered whether all that you need to do is ask for a hard discussion to air your frustrations and re-align the collaboration more closely to your growing awareness?
* You did not state whether you made verbal agreements upfront on the eventual distribution for products from the collaboration such as intellectual property, publications, or patents. If so, what considerations do you have and do you believe that your collaborator has regarding how a breakup in the collaboration should change those agreements?
In summary, whatever your decision, approach making it with the same respect that you took when you approached the colleague to initiate the collaboration. What were your interests when you started the collaboration and how well informed is your collaborator now about your growing frustrations because your interests are no longer being met?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to what Jeffrey already wrote:
It is like (to a certain extent) asking how to end a friendship because one becomes able to enjoy watching a movie (or doing anything) alone.
These kinds of issues in voluntary/non-binding collaboration are very common and justifiable. It is maybe very important for you to incorporate Y in X but for the other party, it might be just a nice idea that is worth realise. I presume your collaborator is a professor or a team lead who has a lot of duties and projects to complete. The same thing for his/her PhD students whose theses might be on a different topic. They can also be new in research and, normally, they do not accomplish anything.
Now back to what to do:
**Preferable solution**
Since you mentioned that you master Y now, did you consider co-supervising the PhD students (in this specific project I mean)? With this, you strengthen the collaboration, support your collaborator and help junior researchers do research.
**Acceptable solution**
You realize the idea yourself but you still consider the other party collaborator who can co-author your findings. --although your collaborators do not realize the idea with you, they spent time trying to realize it and they gave you consultancy in Y--
**Not recommended but possible**
You ask for a meeting and inform your collaborators that you need to speed up the realization (I am pretty sure you have valid reasons) and you will try to do it yourself and that you can further collaborate in improving work or you suggest another idea that you can realize together without being pressured with time.
In summary, when the collaboration is established, it never ends even if the project is over. Instead, it is suspended until a new idea/project comes up and then you contact your former collaborator directly and you know what he/she is capable of.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's certainly reasonable to ask to end a collaboration that is unfruitful, but the request should come with a discussion about what credit (e.g., acknowledgments, authorship, etc.) are *already owed* in relation to the inchoate collaboration.
In this situation, I'd recommend an opening communication with your distant expert connection letting him know that you're not happy with the progression of the project, you think the collaboration is not working, and you'd like to have a discussion about how to dissolve the collaboration in a manner that gives all parties proper credit for their work. You should acknowledge that you were the one who initiated the collaboration and you should avoid making any criticisms of any errors made on their end for the moment. (It might be fruitful to have some kind of a debrief later where you both do a quick audit of why the collaboration didn't work, and what you can learn from that failure, but that would come later.) Bear in mind that your collaborator might prefer to continue the collaboration, but be open to making changes to his practices to improve things for you (e.g., do more of the work himself instead of giving it to his PhD students). Decide in advance whether you are open to a reform of the collaboration as opposed to ending it, and if you are, what you would require for things to work. In any case, the first step would just be to start a respectful discussion where you can chat with each other to see if the collaboration can be salvaged, and if not, what a fair dissolution of the collaboration might look like.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/02/26
| 616
| 2,746
|
<issue_start>username_0: A common structure of a thesis in computer science has the following structure:
1. Introduction
2. Related Work
3. (Requirement) Analysis
4. Concept
5. Implementation
6. Evaluation
7. Conclusion
Considering such a thesis, I would like to ask how can I differentiate which aspects are part of the concept and which is considered to be a part of the implementation?
My advisor's advice was: specific things and technical details are written in the implementation section, more general ones are in the concept. There are no strict rules but he can see the difference but not explain.
The problem is that I do not have a very generic concept, since my research question is very strict and the solution is not a generic one, it is for this specific purpose and doing it more generic, it makes no sense since it does not work or has any purpose.
So my question is: are there any other hints or question how I am able to differentiate what are parts of a concept and what the implementation is?
Thanks in advance!<issue_comment>username_1: Suppose that, five years from now, someone produces some "new" (open-source) software to solve the same problem that you're solving in your thesis. Of course, he might have used a totally new approach, but suppose that, after you study the new software, you see that it just uses your ideas, changing perhaps the programming language, the specific data structures used, and similar details. So you decide (perhaps indignantly) that this isn't really new at all.
I'd say that those ideas of yours that were copied are your concepts. The aspects that were changed without making an "essential" difference are the implementation.
(Of course, if you had invented an entirely new data structure, then that would become a concept rather than part of the implementation. But that seems to be a rare situation.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In many other fields, what you have called "concept" is, roughly speaking, called "methodology. You have a problem. How to you propose to attack that problem.
Likely you have some insight (concept) into the inner workings of things that might be tested (verified, debunked) with an implementation, usually code, less frequently a logical analysis.
Back in the day people were trying to create effective and efficient garbage collectors for dynamic memory. There were many approaches. See: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garbage_collection_(computer_science)>.
But each them has a high level description (concept) and an implementation (or several) to "prove" the concept. At a certain point in time a small percentage increase in efficiency was good for a dissertation. But without that implementation, it was just a dream.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/02/27
| 2,705
| 11,655
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently working in a group of two where I and another person is supposed to compose code for an assigment we recived. This worked well in the beginning, as we discussed various solutions and tried to understand some concepts of the code language we used.
However, during the weekend I get a message telling me that he has made the entire thing from start to finish, with the reason being that he learned the concepts best that way.
This makes me both sad and angry, and it feels like he is abounding me simply because he got the hang of it before me.
I have no idea how to proceed. I wanted to help, I really did but he gave me no opportunity to. He still calls it "our" project, and it will be handed in as such, but it will be painfully obvious I had no part in it.
I did not laze around, I did put effort into solutions and such, but not even those was visible in the final code.
So, should I confront him, contact my teacher, or just accept the situation?<issue_comment>username_1: In most cases where students are allowed to work with partners on assignments, the expectation is that they will share the work equally. In part, that's so that both will learn from the experience. (If you haven't done the work, how will you pass the exams?) But also, in academia, if you turn in work with your name on it, the expectation is that you will have contributed and that anyone else whose name is on it also contributed. If you didn't contribute, that's generally considered an academic violation (for both of you.)
But yours is not the first partnership that's ever gone off-track. You should talk to your instructor. You can bet they've seen it before and that yours is not the first case they've had to deal with. They may be able to help you find a different partner, if not for this assignment, at least for future assignments. But it's also possible you may be stuck working on your own. Either is a better outcome than turning in work that's not your own and not learning a thing from it.
One of the most important determinants of all your outcomes in life are all the other people in your life. When you have a choice, it matters who you choose. This particular partner was not a good choice. Talk to your instructor. Good luck. I'm sorry you're going through this.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would add this to @NicholeHamilton 's excellent answer.
Code always benefits from several sets of eyes. Consider taking your partner' solution, reading it carefully and improving it. Things to work on:
* Is every feature properly tested?
* Is there a design document that sets out the strategy and the reasons
for that strategy?
* Is the overall structure sensible? Are there modules/functions that
should be separately coded?
* Is the code formatted and commented so that human readers can
understand it?
These are all questions that the two of you should have thought about together, but since he wrote all the code, you can suggest to him that you do this part. Be sure that your instructor understands your significant contribution when you submit the project.
You will both learn a lot from this exercise. The least of it will be you understanding what your teammate wrote.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a little bit sympathetic to your partner. Group projects where everything is done together often move very, very slowly. If a project seems to be stalling, it may make sense for an individual to make a big push. Even if the project wasn't stalled, it is easy for an individual to start working on something, get "into the zone" and make a ton of progress, and then they want to get it totally finished so that it is off their plate. That said, I am also sympathetic to you: your partner did unilaterally change the terms of your partnership, and now there is no straightforward way for you to contribute useful work.
Is there any room for improvement in your partner's work? Is there any additional work that could further extend the project's scope or depth? If so, then there may not be much of an issue here; it is not too late to make contributions.
But if your partner's work is good and there is nothing else to do, then I think your next steps depend on context a bit. Do you get projects like this every week, or is this a one-time, end-of-semester project? In the former case, a discussion with your partner is in order, so that you both have clearer expectations for next time. In the latter case, it may be a matter of chalking this up under lessons learned: at the beginning of a project, you need to "partition" the work as much as possible so that you both have agreed-upon responsibilities, and you can both make progress asynchronously. Partition early and partition often!
I would hesitate to discuss this with the instructor. It seems like there is no real problem for the instructor to solve -- and if there is a problem that can be solved, you should first discuss it with the partner before complaining about the partner to the instructor. That said, I might adjust this part of my answer depending on your instructor's personality: even if there is nothing that the instructor needs to "do," some instructors are very good at giving advice and offering alternate perspectives.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: A, and perhaps the, key issue is that you must be certain that you will not be disadvantaged or marked down by accepting what has been done.
IF this is a formally shared project where you have academic responsibility for the result and can receive credit or demerits as a result then it is utterly essential that you engage with your partner over their actions. What happens next depends on the outcome of these discussions.
Again - it is essential that you discuss this.
If a project is assigned to two people and both can gain credit or demerits from it then there MUST be a degree of cooperation - even if it is going over the solution together and you agreeing to accept it.
If you agree to the solution then you MUST understand the solution and be able to replicate it yourself.
If this fails, then you MUST tell your partner what you are going to do and then go to your supervisor and discuss what is happening.
It may be to your advantage to largely accept your partners solution, but you MUST have a proper share in it. Failing to do so is an academic failing and may cause you major demerits.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: If your partner decided to code on their own and it went smoothly, and they found it "better to learn the concepts that way" to the extent of making it hard for you to contribute, chances are you're capable of the same and will also learn as much.
As discussed in other answers as well as comments, learning to behave in teamwork, be it communicating with others or adjusting yourself, plays a key role in these group assignments throughout your college life. Depending on the situation, this may or may not be the hill you want to die on. Working alone or finding other partners are never as bad an option as it may seem.
Talk to your instructor and explain the situation. Since you mentioned you had discussions with your partner and you (plural.) had disagreements in your approaches, it's reasonable for you to come up with your own implementation (code) and submit that as yours.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> So, should I confront him, contact my teacher, or just accept the situation?
>
>
>
Let me first summarize my view of the situation. You and your partner were both given a total amount X of work to split among you. And he, instead of doing X/2 and leaving the other X/2 for you to do, did the whole of X himself.
Is that a bad thing? Well, yes and no. Although it certainly suggests some negligence and selfishness on the part of your partner in that he did your part of the project without any consultation or consideration for you, it is also impressive in a way. He did twice the amount of work he was expected to! So while I do not mean to suggest that your feelings (sadness, anger etc) are invalid, some of the other answers suggesting that your partner is a bad partner and someone unworthy of fraternizing or collaborating with seem misguided to me. In fact, I think your partner has the *potential* to be a rather awesome partner and collaborator in the future, once he is made aware of his immature behavior in connection with the current project and reflects on it a bit. Honestly, I don’t think that will be a hard lesson for him to learn, assuming he is not an inherently selfish person.
About the current project, I think there is a likely solution that will be a win-win for everyone: you, the partner, and the instructor. You and the partner should talk to the instructor, explain what happened, and ask for suggestions for broadening the scope of the project to roughly 3X/2. This additional scope could then be your part of the assignment, which hopefully will have as much value for you in terms of the learning you can derive from it as the original assignment. Ideally, during this conversation your partner should apologize for his lack of consideration and for putting both you and the instructor in an awkward position. I’m reasonably confident the instructor will be happy to accept such an apology and not penalize either of you for this situation.
Of course, to make this happen you will have to talk to your partner. I wouldn’t describe this as “confronting” your partner as that sounds rather adversarial. You should simply explain to him how his behavior has deprived you of a valuable learning opportunity and the satisfaction of doing an interesting assignment, and suggest how to move on from there.
If this arrangement works out, everybody will benefit, and I think you and your partner stand to get an excellent grade for doing a project that is well beyond the scope of the original assignment. I can’t guarantee the instructor will cooperate, but it’s not clear to me what else they could do that isn’t clearly penalizing you for something that’s not your fault. Anyway, good luck, and I hope things turn out well!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: I used to be a student, then a teacher and then left academia.
**Student perspective**: if this was a project you were not particularly enthusiastic about - rejoice. If you really wanted to do it then, well, shit - you would have had a good time. But you have some free time now to ace that tough exam the day after.
Key point: make sure you are comfortable with the outcome:
* whether the output is good enough, a good rule of thumb is "would I have done it better?"
* how you will address this group assignment in front of the TA. It would be less than optimal if your colleague said "I did it alone and DirtMixWater brought pizza and beer" (though it depends on the TA)
* what did you miss in terms of learning. There are some projects I did I would like to forget but they still haunt me and I would have paid with my body to have it done by someone like in your case.
**Teacher perspective**: a good TA will immediately see who did what. The work does not have to be balanced, I had teams where one was the lead thinker, another one the lead doer, and a third one the lead entertainment/food/drink supplier. And it was great, each of them did their role very well (and, counterintuitive, the third one is important in the real world).
You should be careful if you plan to lie to the TA, it will be obvious. See above the point about clearly agreeing on who did what.
**Outside of academia perspective**: it does not matter.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/02/27
| 802
| 3,465
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently doing my third postdoc at an Ivy league university. My supervisor is very famous in his area of research and he was very supportive for me during the first year. However, he waited until the end of the first year before offering me an extension so I applied to a few tenure-track positions just in case he wanted me out of the lab. I got two visit campus so I told him about that because I mentionned him as one of the three references. I also reassured him that I will be staying in the lab until the end of my contract (completion of the 2nd year). He said that he is happy for me and that he will gladly write a recommendation letter and support my applications.
Then, his behavior became very strange. For example, he will not communicate with me or answer my emails unless it has something to do with what he needs for some project. He also started excluding from the different projects and the key meetings. Meanwhile, I passed the first campus interview and the chair of the search committee told me in the end of the visit that they didn't receive a letter from my supervisor. So I asked him about that and sent him two remainders so he can send the reference letter. He did not respond to any of my e-mails or messages. So I contacted the search committee and told them that my supervisor is busy. I asked them to change my reference and use my PhD co-supervisor as a reference and they accepted my request. My PhD co-supervisor sent them a strong recommendation letter immedialtey.
A few days ago, I got a verbal offer from the college dean and I'm currently negociating with them the details with her. But I'm still cannot understand what motivated the change in my supervisor's behavior, and wether I should stay in my lab until the end of the my contract or terminate it sooner (I am not sure that it's going to be a nice experience without my supervisor support).<issue_comment>username_1: I guess it can be multiple things. Depending on your field, your supervisor can now see you as a potential competitor, whence your exclusion from the projects you are not directly involved in and the limitations of your email exchanges to your projects only.
For the recommendation letter, I do not have any answer. I think it is quite low to accept to write a recommendation letter and then not do it. If he did not want to write you one, he could have just said no.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you can meet with your current supervisor, you can ask him why he stopped replying to your emails, didn't send the reference letter, etc.
If he apologizes and has a good reason, and if you are sure that he will invite you to meetings, reply to emails, etc in the future, then maybe could stay in your current job till the end of the contract. But I would say you should only do this if you are sure everything will be fine.
If that doesn't happen, then I think you should start the new job as soon as possible.
If you don't get a few more answers on this website, it would be good to ask some people you know for their opinions, even if they do not work in academia.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Your supervisor has many things in their life that are more important to them than your campus visit. It's most likely the change in behavior is caused by something unrelated.
I've seen faculty suddenly change their behavior quite a few times, and most often the cause was a sick relative.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/27
| 873
| 3,581
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first year PhD student in an interdisciplinary STEM subfield, in a UK-style program (so 3 or 4 years long). I have been offered a 12-week internship in a biotech startup working in a similar subfield as me. My university allows graduate students to pause their PhD in order to take internships in industry (with the support of the PhD supervisors, the Degree Committee, etc). I am not sure if I should take this offer, I list below some of my main considerations/thoughts.
I understand that this choice depends on personal reasons and is only mine, but I would like advice of the form "you shouldn't be worried about X point because of Y" or "have you considered the impact this would have on Z?".
* My supervisor said to assume that the internship wouldn't be directly helpful for my PhD (and I agree, it would however give me a good general background of the relevant subfield of biology, which I currently lack because my background is in maths/physics), but that is as much info as advice as I could get -my PhD supervisor seems to be exceptionally busy recently.
* I want to stay in academia
* I have done an industry in the past and I didn't enjoy it, but it was in finance
* I am enjoying my PhD
* I would potentially be "out-of-phase" with respect to the other grad students, and this might be a problem when applying to postdocs if they start with the academic year (I would be three months behind)
* I can still think about my PhD research questions while on the internship and do some reading, so I'd be buying a bit of extra time before my PhD submission deadline
* I don't do experiments so no problem with leaving them halfway
* I might lose momentum in my PhD
* It might look negatively in my CV that I did this when applying to postdocs (since most academics seem to look down on industry)
* The startup is based in the same city as my university, so I wouldn't have to move temporarilly, and could potentially interact with my research group<issue_comment>username_1: You don't say what country you are in (only that your PhD is "UK-style"), bit id the postdocs in your country are also "UK-stlye", then i wouldn't worry about timings with regards to postdocs. Postdoc positions are advertised all the time, and don't follow the academic year (at least not in UK biology). It also won't look bad on your CV, if anything, it will look good. In fact, the PhD program that funds most of our students requires a three month internship outside the university.
In general, for bioinformatics, its good to have experience of as many different approaches and systems as possible.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Given the situation you described, it sounds like the internship is not worth doing, if you don't want to work at a startup (or in industry at all!) and the work doesn't have any obvious implications for your dissertation. It sounds like your PhD program is well-aligned with your career goals—why pause it to go and train for a job you don't even want?
It is very flattering to receive offers from cool organizations that seem like they're very selective, but I frequently have to remind myself that "someone thinks I'd be good at this!" doesn't mean I have to actually do it, regardless of whether they're right.
On the other hand, if you think maybe biotech could be an appealing direction for your career, this could be an invaluable way to find out whether it's for you. At the end of the day, I think it's critical to keep your end goal in mind: Which choice gets you closer to where you want to be?
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/27
| 2,186
| 8,834
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been contacted by the search committee of a Swedish institute to whose (STEM-based) tenure-track position I had applied almost 8 months ago. They informed me that I will have an interview over 30 days after their invitation email. I found that a bit strange because, at least to my experience, search committees often don't postpone interviews more than 10 days from their invitation email's date. I then informed my supervisor and a friend of mine, who is a rookie assistant professor in another Swedish institute, to see whether I can get some useful information about the interview process.
My friend told me that job advertisements in Swedish academia are only pretexts for legalization of recruiting internal applicants. He said, most of the times, an internal applicant has already secured a big chunk of funding/grant, and the affiliating university would like to hire them. But since they can't do it directly, they open a position, and regardless of the other applicants who may apply and their merits, they finally pick the intended person. My friend had already done his Ph.D. in Sweden, and he told me he had 3 interviews with different departments of that university all of which ended up with nothing better than rejection. When I told him about how far the interview date is from the date they invited me, he speculated that "their internal favorite applicant" may be waiting for the finalization of his grant, so the interviews are postponed so that the committee's rationale to pick him will be available. My friend advised me to check the list of the postdoc fellows of the university, especially those who are under the professor who is the position's contact, to see whether there is anyone in the field related to the position. If so, in his estimation, I (just like any other external applicant) may have no chance. (I did what he recommended without finding any good match between the current postdoc fellows there and the position's research topic)
After I informed my supervisor about the invitation, he said he has a friend in the medical department of that university. So, he contacted that person asking whether he has any access to my application and the current opinion of external experts about it. That guy fairly reiterated my friend's claim about the internal recruitment of rookies in Swedish system, and he (mistakenly) even claimed that I am invited to an interview for a senior postdoc position rather than an assistant professorship one! (Despite the clear assistant professorship nature of the job application, I contacted the coordinator of the position, and he just confirmed that this is indeed an assistant professorship position.)
Now I am thinking whether or not what these two (independent) sources claim are really true. To be honest, one may rule out their opinions for some reasons. For example, I felt my friend was a bit salty because of his rejections, and that medical faculty member's experience might only be the case in their department, as he wrongly thought this position cannot be an assistant professorship position. However, its seems that (at least some degrees of) nepotism in Swedish universities to prefer internal applicants is a well-known fact, as one may read in various reports such as [here](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hequ.12367), [here](https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20191122070839500), [here](https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/swedish-universities-nepotistic-union-report-finds#:%7E:text=Investigation%20discovers%20that%20three%2Dquarters,filled%20by%20an%20internal%20candidate&text=A%20Swedish%20academics%27%20union%20has,offers%20went%20to%20internal%20applicants.), etc.
Overall...
>
> Is there anyone from the Swedish system (or experienced in this topic)
> who can shed some light on whether or not tenure-track positions in
> Sweden exclusively assigned to internal fellows?
>
>
>
**Update:**
In the final ranking, I placed second right behind the internal applicant who is a postdoc in that department within the last five years. The only negative comment of the experts of the committee about my case (according to the public protocol of the committee shared by the department) was that I have not yet finished my first postdoc.<issue_comment>username_1: My personal experience tells me that your statement, in general, is false.
I was interviewed for a (permanent) Senior Lecturer position in a university in Sweden. I was not an internal candidate by any definition - I am from a different country and I did not know anyone in this University, even a "rookie assistant professor". I was offered the position, which I had to decline in favour of another one.
In total, I attended 10+ interviews for permanent academic posts in the UK and EU, and the interview I had in Sweden was perhaps the most transparent and pleasant experience, despite also being the longest and the most demanding interview I ever had.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I worked in Sweden, so I can answer that question. It turns out that I also know some people who were involved in such a process.
While it is true that they may have an applicant in mind, they have to legally open a position and external people can apply. They also may not advertise it for too long...
However, the hiring committee does not only comprise people from that department, and the committee members will still evaluate all the applicants. In the department where I was, they opened a position for one specific person but what happened is that someone external also applied to that position, and this person got hired because he was a better applicant than the internal person. So, hope is not lost.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Are tenure-track positions in Sweden exclusively assigned to internal fellows?
>
>
>
I have joined [Chalmers University of Technology](https://www.chalmers.se/Pages/default.aspx) five years ago on a tenure track position without having any prior ties to the university. So it's certainly not true that positions are given *exclusively* to "internal fellows". Moreover, thinking about our hirings since I joined Chalmers, I struggle to think of even a single case where we ended up hiring somebody who was already working at Chalmers in some form (we did internally "promote" some postdocs to teaching-focused faculty positions, but not to traditional research-focused tenure tracks).
That said, Swedish academia is a large place. I don't doubt that there are universities that are looking more at their current postdoc pool when filling tenure track positions, to the extent that external candidates do not have a meaningful chance altogether. But as a general rule about Swedish universities this is incorrect.
>
> They informed me that I will have an interview over 30 days after their invitation email. I found that a bit strange because, at least to my experience, search committees often don't postpone interviews more than 10 days from their invitation email's date.
>
>
>
Again, be careful to make sweeping assumptions and derivations based on how you think things should work. Scheduling an interview next month (rather than next week) is nothing out of the ordinary at all, and you should not conclude that something fishy is going on based on this alone. Thinking back about my time on the job market, I would say most interviews I attended across Europe were scheduled with months of leeway. I can only recall a single case where people basically asked me to come visit them next week, and I was more than a little annoyed by that because it sort of assumes I have nothing else to do.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: "Job advertisements in Swedish academia are only pretexts for legalization of recruiting internal applicants." I have worked as a postdoc in Sweden and from my experience this is to a very great extent true and not only about internal/external applicants, but Swedish/non-Swedish. At my department there are Swedes who start working as lecturers and assistant professors without a single published paper nor much teaching experience. Yet an international with more teaching experience and publications may have a difficult time getting their way through unless they use "V<NAME>"! I personally, and sadly, found Swedish academia, or at least my department, to work very much based on race and ethnicity rather than merit. Also, there's a white-collar/blue-collar devision within academia, meaning that a white-collar may be approached as a blue-collar based on where they from! So all in all, I think yes. Tenure-track positions are mostly reserved for internal(local?) applicants. One can also easily see that by reviewing the staff profiles on university faculty pages.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/27
| 1,504
| 6,134
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have 2 options:
1. I still have a very real chance to graduate with a (quite) legendary gpa, however this option is sort of throwing all of my eggs in one basket, as it makes me very committed (by limiting options) to continuing in academia.
2. Doing a part-time internship (but 30 hours/week, I was shocked too). I consider this as a much safer option.
Truth be told I've made my decision on which option to take, but I couldn't make peace with myself about the decision. Not in which option to take, but in wanting to do **both**. Doing both is stupid, I had confirm this stupidity myself by asking a few people, and all agree that doing both is basically impossible.
However, this wouldn't be the first time I had to choose on something like this. The last I had to decide between two tasks to focus in, I attempted to focus on both. And stupidly, I was rewarded with being able to do both (in this sense, if you award 1 point for completing one of the tasks, last year I get ~1.7/2 points by doing both).
That was done by having 2-3 hours of sleep/night on average, sustained for a whole semester, and being a hermit in general. I do not wish to go through this again, especially since I have relationships that I wish to maintain. This idea of doing both, however, keeps on haunting me. Something like, "if you can do it last time, why not this time?".
As I already made my decision, my question is how to live with the decision? It has gotten to a point where it keeps on distracting me during class, and I slowly begin toying with the idea of doing both (which is BAD).<issue_comment>username_1: My personal experience tells me that your statement, in general, is false.
I was interviewed for a (permanent) Senior Lecturer position in a university in Sweden. I was not an internal candidate by any definition - I am from a different country and I did not know anyone in this University, even a "rookie assistant professor". I was offered the position, which I had to decline in favour of another one.
In total, I attended 10+ interviews for permanent academic posts in the UK and EU, and the interview I had in Sweden was perhaps the most transparent and pleasant experience, despite also being the longest and the most demanding interview I ever had.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I worked in Sweden, so I can answer that question. It turns out that I also know some people who were involved in such a process.
While it is true that they may have an applicant in mind, they have to legally open a position and external people can apply. They also may not advertise it for too long...
However, the hiring committee does not only comprise people from that department, and the committee members will still evaluate all the applicants. In the department where I was, they opened a position for one specific person but what happened is that someone external also applied to that position, and this person got hired because he was a better applicant than the internal person. So, hope is not lost.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Are tenure-track positions in Sweden exclusively assigned to internal fellows?
>
>
>
I have joined [Chalmers University of Technology](https://www.chalmers.se/Pages/default.aspx) five years ago on a tenure track position without having any prior ties to the university. So it's certainly not true that positions are given *exclusively* to "internal fellows". Moreover, thinking about our hirings since I joined Chalmers, I struggle to think of even a single case where we ended up hiring somebody who was already working at Chalmers in some form (we did internally "promote" some postdocs to teaching-focused faculty positions, but not to traditional research-focused tenure tracks).
That said, Swedish academia is a large place. I don't doubt that there are universities that are looking more at their current postdoc pool when filling tenure track positions, to the extent that external candidates do not have a meaningful chance altogether. But as a general rule about Swedish universities this is incorrect.
>
> They informed me that I will have an interview over 30 days after their invitation email. I found that a bit strange because, at least to my experience, search committees often don't postpone interviews more than 10 days from their invitation email's date.
>
>
>
Again, be careful to make sweeping assumptions and derivations based on how you think things should work. Scheduling an interview next month (rather than next week) is nothing out of the ordinary at all, and you should not conclude that something fishy is going on based on this alone. Thinking back about my time on the job market, I would say most interviews I attended across Europe were scheduled with months of leeway. I can only recall a single case where people basically asked me to come visit them next week, and I was more than a little annoyed by that because it sort of assumes I have nothing else to do.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: "Job advertisements in Swedish academia are only pretexts for legalization of recruiting internal applicants." I have worked as a postdoc in Sweden and from my experience this is to a very great extent true and not only about internal/external applicants, but Swedish/non-Swedish. At my department there are Swedes who start working as lecturers and assistant professors without a single published paper nor much teaching experience. Yet an international with more teaching experience and publications may have a difficult time getting their way through unless they use "Vitamin B"! I personally, and sadly, found Swedish academia, or at least my department, to work very much based on race and ethnicity rather than merit. Also, there's a white-collar/blue-collar devision within academia, meaning that a white-collar may be approached as a blue-collar based on where they from! So all in all, I think yes. Tenure-track positions are mostly reserved for internal(local?) applicants. One can also easily see that by reviewing the staff profiles on university faculty pages.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/28
| 1,170
| 4,887
|
<issue_start>username_0: Yesterday, I was talking to a guy who has a Ph.D. in organic chemistry, got sacked from academia because of Covid related fund cuts, and he is not being able to find jobs in the industry because, what I realized, his proficiency is poor or nonexistent with computers.
Now, consider another candidate whose research field is related to genes and proteins, working with supercomputers and simulations, and has a Ph.D. in Bioinformatics.
What prospects will the second person have if he wants to switch from academia to industry?
How easy or difficult will it be for the second person to switch from academia to industry?
What factors help the switch?<issue_comment>username_1: I speak as someone a PhD in theoretical chemistry, who has landed a trainee position in industry with a promise of making it permanent after two years.
Doing a PhD in a narrow research field feels a lot like digging yourself a hole, where the hole gets deeper for every year. And a deep hole is hard to get out from... unless you have tools to make a ladder. Luckily you have most likely gained these tools from your PhD work. My ladder has been a desire for working with data, and becoming quite proficient in a a few programming languages. I code the best in Python, but I have some experience with c++ as well. **What is your ladder?**
I am by no means an expert in bioinformatics, but I think there are some similarities to my "old" field. The bioinformaticians I know do a lot of programming, often in Python, to develop analysis pipelines and web interfaces to new bioinformatics tools. Perhaps you have done this as well. Perhaps you have collected a lot of data from existing tools, and you have had to clean this data, explore it, learn to know it, and visualize it. These skills are relevant to the industry.
Also keep in mind that the industry does not value the same things as academia. While an academic application probably would focus on your research and all of your highly cited publications, the industry does not really care about these things *per se*. My experience is that they far more value what concrete skills you bring to the table, because your skills will be what brings value to the company. **So think about your transferable skills, and try to imagine in what types of positions your currently transferable skills become essential skills.**
I would say that a lot of PhDs do not realize just how attractive to the industry they are. Compare yourself to a recently graduated MSc or BSc. Studying is not the same as pursuing a PhD. Doing a PhD means to persevere in a high-stress environment working toward long-term goals, often with quite little short-term encouragement. You learn a lot about yourself as a person: What drives you? What do you value in life? In other words you have gained life experience, which means that you have become wiser. Most MSc/BSc graduates have not obtained this (at least this is my experience, both from talking to students and from remembering how I was myself at that time). **This sets you out from the crowd of BSc/MSc graduates, if you are able to convey this in a good way in your cover letter.**
Working in academia is curiosity driven and comes with a lot of freedom. I have come to accept that perhaps no industry job will offer me these things to the same extent. But, there are more important things in life. **A secure job** with **reliable income** makes it easier to provide for a family, and makes it easier to plan ahead. Bringing value to a company I respect is a lot more meaningful to me than doing basic research that may or may not bear fruits in 20 years.
So don't think of industry as a "Plan B", but rather as a "Plan A2". If you have successfully obtained a PhD in bioinformatics, then I am 100% sure you will be able to land an interesting job in the industry. Perhaps not working as a bioinformatician (although there are plenty of pharma-companies that would value such skills, I assume), but at least working with the skills you have obtained during your PhD applied to other fields.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Being a student of Masters in Bioinformatics in my final research phase with my stream being 'Translational Bioinformatics' dealing with Microarray and NGS, RNA-Seq related things, now working on Machine Learning related project and as a Associate Researcher in an Healthcare Industry, I can say that the the second person with PhD in Bioinformatics can easily secure job in Industry. There are many healthcare industries hiring Bioinformaticians. My 2 senior graduate fellows with Masters in Bioinformatics are working in a Healthcare company and working on a project that demands expertise of Genes, Proteins, supercomputers, Linux, Unix, R language, etc. So, don't worry. If a Masters graduate can do it, A PhD can also do it. :)
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/28
| 1,500
| 6,784
|
<issue_start>username_0: Me and my coauthor are writing a (math) paper with a third person who initially has been very active, mainly in the form of conversations and planning, and then after writing some parts, disappearead and proceeded to ignore every attempt to get in touch with them.
Let me note we are aware they've been in contact with other people we know (and active on social media). So, as far as we understand, they simply chose to ignore us.
Everything was running smoothly and we didn't have a fight or a discussion so we are very confused (and annoyed) by this behaviour.
But anyway, we carried on writing our paper.
Now we are very close to submission (on arXiv, for the moment) and we are pondering what to make of the third author's name. We thought of removing their name from the authors list since their behaviour has been quite unacceptable. We ended up doing the great share of the work ourselves, and there hasn't been any reasonable motivation from their part on why this is so.
On the other hand, they provided valuable input and even wrote up some parts which, even after some revisions, will end up in the paper, making up, say, 5-10% of the content. These are things they wrote before disappearing. So it seems correct to attribute authorship where due.
On a more pedantic note, they don't know the state of the paper we are going to submit so, as far as we know, we might not have their permission to put their name on it. We are going to ask them but, at this point, it's unlikely they are going to reply.
Hence, what shall we do? Is there a middle ground like mentioning their contribution in the 'acknowledgments', perhaps indicating they have been closely involved in the writing of some parts?
EDIT: after some pondering, we changed the paper to remove the small written contributions (which were proofs) made by the ghosting coauthor and replaced with alternative proofs (using a completely different approach) written by us or referenced from literature. We plan to still acknowledge them in our paper, for the parts they've been involved to, but not to have it in the coauthors list anymore.<issue_comment>username_1: You cannot list them as a coauthor without their concurrence. Include a substantial acknowledgement of the contribution - perhaps with explicit credit for the proof of Theorem X.
Send them the draft. Tell him politely that you plan to post this to arXiv and ask for any corrections. You could say that if you don't hear back you'll assume what you've written is OK.
If they reply that they would like coauthorship then I think you should do that, even if they do not resume work on the ms.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Hence, what shall we do? Is there a middle ground like mentioning their contribution in the 'acknowledgments', perhaps indicating they have been closely involved in the writing of some parts?
>
>
>
You are including content that can be directly sourced to someone other than you to substantiate arguments put forward in your article. You have bound them as co-authors by this action. That they wrote something and then disappeared does not change this fact. That you may have made modifications to their source content before adding it to the final document does significantly not change this fact. That the relative amount of the contributed content is by some measure quantifiably small does not change this fact.
The possible choices are demonstrated as below.
* Remove all content from the other person. Remove and/or revise all ancillary content that leads to or derives from that removed content. Make the article self-contained such that it demonstrates only what you and your other co-author have written. Make the contribution from the other person only relevant for how it guided *your* work rather than relevant in its own right because it supports the assertions being presented. Submit the article with just you and your other co-author. State an appreciation for helpful discussions from the other third party in the acknowledgments. Send the submission to the other person by email.
* Do not change the article. Put the other person on the article only in the acknowledgments. Send a hard copy of the article by return-receipt registered mail. Include a cover letter asking for confirmation within a respectable time before the article is submitted. State that a lack of reply will be taken as acceptance to the article as written. Be prepared to learn that the other person insists on co-authorship.
* Keep the other person on as coauthor. Send a hard copy of the article by return-receipt registered mail. Include a cover letter asking for confirmation within a respectable time before the article is submitted. Be prepared that the other person must also concur electronically as a coauthor at the time the article is submitted.
These are drawn somewhat to legal or official courses of action. Independently, from professional standards, you will want to reference your discussions with the other person at the start and throughout the project. The hard question to answer is this: Were any statements made by you or your other co-author, verbal or otherwise, at any point during the collaboration that in any way promised or even implied co-authorship in return for having contributions to the project? If the answer here is not a resounding no, you may appreciate that the respectable, professional approach is to accept the other person as co-author even with the reservations you have. Lesson learned. Next time, be clearer at the outset on how you anticipate the rewards to the project (a published journal article) will be divided.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: 5-10% of the content of the written paper does not mean 5-10% of the intellectual contribution. Conceptualization, design, and planning are often the most important parts of a project. Although being uncommunicative is unusual (although not unheard of), senior scholars in my field often help conceptualize and design and project, and leave it up the juniors to manage data collection and analysis, and write.
To me dropping them from the paper or posting the paper without their consent are both very bad professional behavior---at least as bad as them going AWOL, if not worse. Their bad behavior is private, between colleagues, you would conducting a public misstep on the academic record. I think you need to push harder to contact them. Call them, write again with "IMPORTANT, TIME SENSITIVE" in subject line, ask a colleagues of theirs you know to check in. I would not proceed without a response from them and, importantly, I would not work with them again in the future. But for this project, they are a co-author until they tell you they want out.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/02/28
| 1,743
| 7,126
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am from a marginalized community in my country whose religion X is persecuted in my home country (which is in Asia). Now, I am in my first year of PhD study in math in a top university in Germany
But this incident happened on Friday: A professor from my country, Mr. Z (of religion Y, which persecutes my religion so that my religion is now 0.3% of population, religion Y is 90%) came for a conference in Germany at my university last week.
At dinner, with about 20 professors and 20 PhDs and postdocs were present (majority white), a professor from France asked why my religion diminished in my home country. I said due to persecution by religion Y. To this Z said immediately, it is due to persecution by another religion, which is absolutely false.
I have anger issues (and I take pills for depression) and I immediately said: *Keep lying in front of these white monkeys* and stood up from the chair and left the dinner.
I have not met anyone from the university until now. I don't have any hatred for white people. I don't know what happened to me when I said that. Persecution of my religion has been so bad (and it is ongoing) and has complete support and encouragement from academia, media, and all walks of government and private establishment. The religious system in my country is fascistic. I don't even expect white people to understand this thing as this is far away from their land and why they should be bothered in first place. It was a terrible mistake and said in a fit of anger.
**How much fallout will I have on my career due to this? And what can I do to amend this terrible mistake?**
I actually want to become a professor in Europe and don't want to go back to my country due to violence and love math so much that I don't want to leave doing research in it.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a matter of poor anger management and that is how it will be seen.
I wouldn't worry about coming off as "racist" against white people. White people aren't a marginalized group and it is unlikely that you will be seen as a racist after saying something like that to a group of white people.
The reaction was probably more one of shock that you escalated so quickly rather than one of offense. The best thing to do is to apologize to the people who heard you say this directly, mostly the people in your immediate vicinity. Try not to overexplain, but with your apology maybe add something like "religion is a tense topic for people from my country". Don't place blame, take responsibility for your behavior, then move on.
There is a reason people tend to avoid conversations about politics and religion in polite society. I'd stick to that convention in the future and learn to deflect questions on inflammatory topics when you are in professional settings.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The only part that is really a problem is the "white monkey" part. I know what that means. If it was me I would want an apology and would be entirely satisfied with "sorry, will try to do better in the future."
The angry outburst is only a tactical issue. If you had remained calm and had the facts at the ready you might have been able to inform a bunch of people. Instead of maybe convincing some of the bystanders that there is a real problem they ought to have some concern for, you made people uncomfortable. And ended the discussion. You missed a "teaching moment."
It is massively unlikely you will convince Z that anything is not how he said. When somebody's income (prestige, position in society) depends on him not understanding a thing, it is very difficult to get him to understand it. But the people watching might well have been made to understand how things really are.
I have issues with being angry also. One thing that helps is this place right here. I find questions that are emotional and write answers. Only rarely posting them, by the way. I write 20 or 30 for each one I post. But it forces me to go get the facts, work out careful arguments, and keep my emotions in control.
So maybe you can notice the issues, questions, and situations that upset you. Work out, privately in advance, how you will approach such situations. Make plans for various ways the conversation could go. Have the exact facts ready, with the citations, names, and dates. Read online some of the discussions of related issues and see how other people have handled them. And "read the room." Meaning look around and see how your audience is taking it. If they are taking it badly then have a "not today" plan ready.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Okay, there are a few things to unpack here. Firstly, with regard to the disagreement on religious persecution, there is nothing inherently wrong with the fact that you and Prof Z express contradictory views on the cause of the decline of your religion. University is a place where people are used to hearing disagreements and opposing views, so the mere fact that Prof Z puts forward views that contradict your own does not mean that others will necessarily agree with him. If you can learn to remain calm and put your own case forward in a clear and appropriate manner, you might find that people will be influenced by your own views. Many academic topics elicit strong feelings, which is prescisely why it is valuable to learn to discuss and debate sensitive topics in a calm and analytical manner.
With regard to your reaction, yeah, that is not great. For one thing you have accused this Professor of lying, and that is presumptuous --- unless there is evidence of bad faith, it is best to assume that people have a *bona fide* belief in the views they express. Secondly, the "white monkeys" remark is also not great, and universities are pretty sensitive to anything that smacks of racial insults. For what it's worth, I'm a white person and I believe you when you say that you have no adverse feelings towards white people --- we understand that people sometimes fly off the handle and say things they shouldn't when they're angry (and your anger seems to have been misdirected in that instance anyway).
>
> How much fallout will I have on my career due to this?
>
>
>
This could potentially have some bad fallout, mostly depending on whether or not anyone at the dinner takes issue with it. A remark like that could lead to a formal complaint to the university relating to racial discrimination or bullying. Even without a formal complaint, it is likely to reflect badly on you to the people at the dinner. The fallout will depend a great deal on whether anyone chooses to complain about your behaviour.
>
> And what can I do to amend this terrible mistake?
>
>
>
We make amends by apologising for bad behaviour, so that is what I'd recommend in this situation. I'd recommend writing to this Professor, and also to the organisers/attendees of the dinner, and let them know that you're sorry for your behaviour. Let them know that you hold no ill-feelings towards white people, and also make sure you apologise for accusing Prof Z of lying. As you say, it was a mistake made in a fit of anger.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/03/01
| 1,433
| 5,445
|
<issue_start>username_0: I completed my masters in mathematics from Asia in August 2021 and joined PhD in Germany in Nov 2021. I had to do a masters project/thesis in my 4th semester (April-August) and for that I asked a prof. in my country but a different university in Jan 2021 as no one in my university was specialized in Algebraic Topology and he (say Mr. X) agreed to supervise my master's thesis. One prof. (say Mr. Y) in my university whose research interests align remotely with mine gave me a LOR to submit to X which he asked.
I visited X's university in March for 4 days. He met me on the 2nd day for about 20 minutes. He asked me 3 questions and I couldn't answer one of them because of difference in definitions (the term was not available in the book from which I studied). Next day he e-mailed me the link of a paper and said he was busy and didn't met me.
I studied the research paper and mailed him 2 questions which I had on May 15, 2021 and asking when should I visit him. Getting no reply, I e-mailed him again on May 30 and began reading two papers related to the 1st paper in spare time. I e-mailed him again on June 15 and getting no reply I realized he will not reply to my e-mail.
I was morose and for a week didn't attend any classes and only ate 1 time a day and didn't go out of my room, was really angry and depressed. I burnt my 2 books by putting them on fire in the room. Then, I called Prof. Y explaining him the situation, and he said I should remove X's name from thesis and I should add his name as some prof's name must be on thesis due to dept. rules. I had no guidance for my master's project. I wrote an expository style thesis explaining what I understood and got 2nd highest marks in thesis out of 32 students.
I also e-mailed him once again in Oct 2021 to review my thesis but he didn't reply.
This guy is one of the senior profs and is at the top university in my country. Prof. Y is much more junior to him and so are the other prof.'s (say P and Q) who wrote LORs for me. I didn't complain about him in his university or my university as the culture in my country is fascist and it is ingrained in culture to suck up and respect elders and seniors. Also, I am from a persecuted group and the
ethnic group of prof. X (and Y, P ,Q) has absolute dominance in academia and society and are persecutors. People here belief in a lot of irrational stuff. It was unlikely that anyone would have supported me. This prof. X has a lot of contact internationally.
This incident had a very deep impact on me. Also, I had to lose face among all 3 prof's who gave me LORs and my classmates. But I couldn't do anything.
I sometimes felt like verbally abusing him over a phone call or writing a mail filled with verbal abuses. But, this guy would have definitely called prof Y and my dept and that would have definitely badly impacted my career.
I think this guy has no conscience and shame and is absolutely filth of a human.
---
**Now this prof. is coming to my university in Germany to give a talk in my dept. and my advisor is the only prof whose interests align with him.**
When I meet him, I am sure, he would say that I was not good enough when he asked me questions at his university in March 2021 or that I lied to him about my qualification. (I had done 2 internships and 2 courses in topology before asking him for supervision).
The only thing that comes to my mind as answer of this question is "HECK yourself, you piece of filth" . I think I will be really angry in that scanerio. But, other people there will not be pleased and he will definitely tell Prof Y, P, Q who gave me a LOR.
When I imagine him in elevator alone with me, I think I might punch him or slap him, if he starts talking about how or why he didn't supervised my thesis. I will get involved with the law.
>
> How should I engage with this person when I will meet him which doesn't harms my career?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Physical violence will certainly hurt your career, so don't do that. Even "just" being verbally agressive is a very very bad idea, so don't do that either.
If he is a prof and you are a PhD student, and you don't trust yourself to remain polite, then just don't say anything, or at least as little as possible. Let the profs talk among themselves, and leave as soon as is politely possible. Start conversations with other PhD students, so you don't have to join the conversation with the profs.
Also remember that the fact that you have strong opinions and feelings about him does not mean the prof has similar opions and feelings about you. He may not even remember you. Which is probably the best case scenario.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Given the long list of things which are bit too strong a reaction (burning books, for one!) - seek professional help with anger management and mental health in general. All is fine and dandy until it starts affecting your life seriously - and it is starting to.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I suggest a positive approach. X being top as you say is likely incredibly busy and maybe had something going privately you can’t know. It is perhaps an opportunity to discuss the results you achieved and/or future work. X may like you worked independently and be interested to collaborate in future. May I also point out that this close supervision model is new, X might be old school believing you should do it yourself
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/03/01
| 1,134
| 4,824
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am wondering whether a company employee can take a role of associate editor of a scientific journal. Let's take the following example.
Suppose I am a university professor, and my role is teaching and guiding students and doing research. At the same time, I am also taking a role as an associate editor of a scientific journal (SCI with good IF).
If I quit my job at the university and moved to a company/industry and my main role changed from teaching and research to focus on company products (of course science based products), then can I still continue my role as an associate editor of that journal?
My question is, how do researchers look at this?<issue_comment>username_1: You have not specified your field so I assume that this is a field where editors do not get a salary from the journals they are editors for. In this case, I know many people who are affiliated with a company but who also are associate editors in one or more research journals. Companies also do some decent R&D, but this has to be agreed upon with the HR or superior to make sure that it is fine. The people I know handle papers outside their work office hours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes**
There's nothing fundamentally against a non-university professor becoming an editor of a scientific journal. Such editors need to be experts in their field, and there are plenty of experts that aren't affiliated with a university. For example, [Five IBM fellows](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Fellow) have won the Nobel Prize. Surely they'd be suitable to edit a journal in their field (and most journals would be ecstatic to have them), even though IBM is not a university.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a researcher at a company and also an associate editor at two journals.
If a company supports research in any meaningful way, it will generally recognize the value of professional service (including editing journals, reviewing manuscripts, and organizing conferences) as part of scientific participation. You might be able to make your work as an editor part of your official job tasks, or you might need to do it "off the clock" - that will depend on both the company and the amount to time expected to be needed. In general, however, most companies will support volunteer professional service at least as far as not obstructing you.
If you would be *paid* for your work rather than being a volunteer, however, that would likely be significantly more complicated. Most researchers at companies are full-time salaried employees, and employment contracts often require that one get explicit permission and go through a conflict of interest process before accepting any second source of income.
Bottom line: volunteering is easy, getting paid is hard.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: As an example, the [*International Journal of Forecasting*](https://forecasters.org/ijf/editors/) has among its editors [<NAME>](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Ek6m-HIAAAAJ&hl=en) from Amazon and [<NAME>](https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=LhPDIYIAAAAJ&hl=en) from McKinley Capital Management. (Also a couple of people from central banks, probably not what you have in mind, though again, non-university.)
It all depends on the field, and on the journal. If you are an acknowledged expert in your field and based on this are invited to join an editorial board, then your expertise will not suddenly disappear when you leave academia. If your field is applied, then editorial members from outside academia may even be sought after to bring a little balance and diversity to editorial decisions.
Of course, if your position outside academia means that you do less research, then your expertise may indeed become dated. If you have gone five years without publishing, then you may not be invited back in the next turnover of the editorial board. Then again, your editorial work may be enough to keep your knowledge up to date.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I am an associate editor of a well-respected journal (arguably the top journal in my field, which is a branch of CS/math/engineering). I have never worked for a university, and have published very few research papers, though I do conference talks every once in a while.
The companies I have worked for have been happy about my editor position, because it gives the company some visibility and credibility, and helps to maintain connections with academia. There has never been any mention of conflict of interest.
The journal and conference organisers are happy because I provide useful insights into interesting industrial problems and the real-world relevance of research.
The journal doesn't pay me, but I don't think there would be a problem even if they did.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/03/01
| 298
| 1,197
|
<issue_start>username_0: The preprint version of my article has been already published in arXiv. Now I want to add the ISSN of the journal that published my publication. Unfortunately, they don't provide any doi. Could you please explain how to add ISSN to an arXiv preprint? Is it like -> Edit journal ref -> Report number:?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, the journal ref seems the right tool for the job, from the description on <https://arxiv.org/help/jref> . But I'd say the journal name is enough (as they suggest on the page I linked) and the ISSN provides little additional information.
Have you tried adding one with the memnu entries you stated in your question? Does it work?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The arXiv user support team replied this:
>
> There is no present metadata element for an ISBN (though this may be
> included within the new data model, which would be instituted in the
> coming years), and further, there is no standard location to indicate
> such. DOI and Journal-ref should be reported in those fields, and an
> ISBN number could be part of a Journal-ref if the complete workshop is
> issuing page numbers and DOI.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/03/01
| 719
| 2,841
|
<issue_start>username_0: I do not see any questions here about how to convert APA (or MLA, Chicago, Turabian, etc.) style into HTML (**edit: styled with CSS**) for online publication. Since HTML is perhaps the most accessible format for assistive technologies, I'm puzzled. As a professional who helped faculty create and teach online courses, I have experience with both website design and academia. One problem I've wrestled with has been APA run-in headings (level 4 primarily). I finally submitted the problem to Stack Overflow, and a CSS (cascading stylesheet) guru wrote a [brilliant solution](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/71288927/better-css-for-run-in-headings). My primary question is this: has anyone here encountered this problem? I'm also wondering, is the crossover between academia and online technology insufficient to know this is a problem? Is anyone here aware of issues in converting academic writing into accessible web-based material? Has anyone asked a webmaster to convert a paper into a web document and been told it was too difficult?<issue_comment>username_1: APA and other conventional scientific writing style guides are not well-suited for online publications.
The most elaborate way of displaying scholarly articles for online viewing is probably the one used by [*Research Ideas & Outcomes*](https://riojournal.com/) at Pensoft Publishers.
[Here](https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.8.e79187) is an example of a recent paper, including a [machine-readable XML-version](https://riojournal.com/article/79187/download/xml/) of the paper.
Browsing through the XML, you will see how standardized it is and how many metadata it embeds -- here is a screenshot of one part of the -tag (containing information about the submission history, license, abstract, keywords, figure counts etc.):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/B9vN8.png)
Such a metadata-rich formatting allows them to track statistics such as which Figures were viewed or downloaded most often - - again an example from the paper above:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/KqGJg.png)
EDIT: Just found out about *DocMaps*, this might be relevant here too: <https://docmaps.knowledgefutures.org/>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: No, have not encountered this problem: some publishers do aim for an online presentation of materials using regular web pages indeed, but then they have a freedom to pick a convenient citation style and whatnot. And if you are not a publisher, the "normal" way to disseminate the research results in academia is a publication list on a personal page and PDF files. So in a nutshell, there is not enough interest to the specific problem you are posing here indeed.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/03/01
| 519
| 2,124
|
<issue_start>username_0: As part of PhD applications, I shared a copy of my unofficial GRE test scores from a test I took approximately 5 years ago (using a PDF from the ETS that shows the date I took the test.) Now several months later I have received PhD offers but my GRE test scores have expired. That is, my GRE scores have expired between the open applications window and when the admissions offers rolled out. The ETS will not send out expired scores.
How big of a deal is this if any? Should I bring this up before "accepting" my offer? Should I retake the test?<issue_comment>username_1: I suspect that if you got an "acceptance", rather than a "conditional acceptance" then it will be honored. It seems unreasonable and inefficient to reopen a case based on such a situation. Easier to let it go, even if it is noticed. It would seem to be a case of "buyers remorse".
If, as I suspect, this is in the US, then the risk of honoring it is also small since the impact on the decision of the GRE was small. Decisions are made on a broad view of the candidate, not just how they do on standardized tests.
But that is only the "reasonability test" for a rarely occurring situation. You can ask, specifically, of course, though it might be worth following up on your admission as if there is no problem. "What is the next step I need to take to complete my admission."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: #### Don't look a gift horse in the mouth
You have your offers, so presumably the relevant universities were able to scrutinise the applications prior to the GRE scores becoming unavailable (or they just didn't care about the scores). This is not a big deal, and there is no need to go looking for faults in their admission process now that you have got your offers. Just consider the offers you have received, accept the one you want, and then decline the ones you don't after you have confirmed your place in your preferred program. (Make sure you do all this by email so that you have the [offer and acceptance in writing](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/181031/).)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|