date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2022/11/16
| 745
| 3,135
|
<issue_start>username_0: One thing that is stopping me from abroad studies is my lack of ability to drive. So, I was wondering if there are countries where it's not necessary to drive. Countries where public transportation is good in every part of the country.<issue_comment>username_1: **Pretty much all of them**.
Just live in student housing. You'll usually be close enough to campus to be able to walk there, failing which the university is likely to have arranged for transport like shuttle buses to and from campus.
If you're interested in going places other than the university, then it becomes more complex - where do you want to go? How often? How far? - and that will depend on your exact requirements.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you are posing too many strong assumptions.
English speaking countries is a too strong limiting factor.
There are countries like the Netherlands, or Denmark, or Luxembourg, where you can live (not just survive) only speaking English, and they have excellent public transport services [1].
With time, of course it will be better to learn the local language, but it is not necessary (although it is a bit of philosophical/ethic question, whether you should speak or not the local language).
If you then expand your search to countries where English is barely enough to survive, you may consider Japan, or Austria and Switerland, countries that made some gigantic passes (with respect to where they were) in understanding english in the past 20 years. Germany is also ok, if you end up in a big city (Berlin, Hamburg, Munich) you will be rather fine.
But overall, the requirement in being able to drive is not that common, unless you are doing environmental sciences stuff, where you are expected to be out "in the wild".
[1] excellent on a relative metric, relative to the English speaking countries. The Netherlands, for example, destroyed their network of local transport to small comunities ... it still exist and it does the job, but it was *way* better.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Very few students in the UK have Cars. I've made it to 41, as a permenant faculty member without ever owning a car.
That doesn't mean that public transport is good in every part of the country. Far from it. University towns like Oxford and Cambridge are so small neither public nor private transport is generally neccessary, and most people cycle most places. London does require transport, but the public transport in London is some of the best in the world.
In the big northern cities like Sheffield, Leeds and Manchester, the cities are big enough to require transport, but generally students live within walking (or at least cycling) distance of the university campus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: No problems to live and study in one of the bigger cities in Germany. Public transport is quite good, and I know many people who live there (not only students) and do not own a car.
Edit: Many German universities offer programmes in English (and it is no problem to live in a German city if you speak only English), so you might consider this, too.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/16
| 578
| 2,335
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing my PhD thesis now and my supervisor said it can be in the cumulative way because I've got enough papers, 3 in sum. So now I look for publisher permission to reprint the papers. My university uploads every thesis after it is defended to the university database, which is open access for everyone.
I got a little bit scared that I won't get the permission from Taylor & Francis, where my first paper is published, so the first chapter of my thesis is published. They need 6-8 weeks to answer, maybe more. So has anyone made some experience with permission to reprint their papers in cumulative thesis?
The other paper I use is published with Sage, and they say on their website, that it is possible to use the whole finale PDF in the thesis.
Is it common to just include the original paper PDFs in the thesis?<issue_comment>username_1: I can't speak for the publisher, but expect it to be fine. You may have been given an explicit license when you published with T&F and these usually include permission for exactly what you want to do.
I'd proceed in the short term as if it is going to be permitted, writing the other needed parts to complete the whole while you wait for their answer to an enquiry.
But, clear this with your advisor.
It is likely that the publisher will want you to use the same exact paper that was published (the PDF) rather than a different version. A different version would complicate things.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Why are you scared? You should read the relevant guidelines of the publisher. This is a non-issue.
[Taylor & Francis explicitly state](https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/moving-through-production/copyright-for-journal-authors/):
>
> After assigning copyright, you will still retain the right to:
>
>
> * ...
> * Include your article in your thesis or dissertation.
> * ...
>
>
>
Study the [article sharing guide](https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/research-impact/sharing-versions-of-journal-articles/) or ask the publisher to find out which version of your manuscript you should include in your thesis if your library puts the thesis into an online repository.
A "cumulative thesis" is not something unusual and publishers have learned to accommodate it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/16
| 1,669
| 7,027
|
<issue_start>username_0: A section in a paper I'm authoring goes something like the below:
>
> We want to do x. Upon first inspection, x could be easily done using approach A.
>
> A, however, has the drawback that .
> For this reason, we propose B.
>
>
>
The is rather long though, making me question whether or not to keep it in since I'm dismissing this approach either way. Is it best to have this in or to just assume my reader will understand why B makes more sense than A in cases like this?<issue_comment>username_1: My suggestion is that you write the paper as you think it should be written. If you get negative feedback from reviewers then deal with it then. But there is no reason to anticipate what the reviewers will suggest if you have reasons for your arguments. Expect that some changes will need to be made, but look at the reviews first.
Just. Do. It.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It sounds like you're potentially entering the pitfall of trying to write the paper following the exact thought process that you followed in your research. You may have first considered doing A, but then realized that that wouldn't work, and then thought about using B. Often the benefit of hindsight gives much more clarity.
In this case, you end up spending a lot of time and space describing what you didn't do, before getting to the important bit of what you did do. In practice this may make it harder to follow. It could be better to start with saying "we did B". This of course may raise the question "why didn't they just do A?". If this is an obvious question, then it should be addressed. It may however be better to do this after you have introduced B. This may give the benefit of being able to explain why/how doing B addresses the drawbacks of doing A, while explaining what those drawbacks are.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My advice is to identify what the challenges or requirements are and then explain how B meets them (and other methods do not). I encourage you to focus on the positive -- what you are able to achieve -- rather than the negative -- the ways that other people have failed. Also, in many cases I find it is helpful to first list the requirements or goals or challenges, then explain how your approach meets those requirements or goals or addresses those challenges.
Bad: "We use method B."
* This is bad, because there is no explanation of why you have selected B.
Bad: "We use method B, because method A is flawed."
* This is bad, because it does not explain concretely why B is better than A.
Better, but not ideal: "We use method B, because method A has problems P, Q, R."
* This is better, because this provides some explanation of why you selected method B and specifically what the advantages are, but not ideal, because it is focused on tearing down someone else's work, rather than on what you're trying to achieve.
Best: "Ideally, we would like an evaluation method that has properties X, Y, Z. We ultimately chose to use method B, because it provides all three properties. Others have used method A, which provides property X but does not provide property Y, Z. In our setting Z is particularly important."
* In my opinion, this is best, because it is focused on the positive - what you are trying to accomplish and what you have achieved; and does so in a way that explains why you chose the method you did, while treating prior work with respect.
* If there are multiple options for evaluation methodology, you might even consider a table where you compare all the options: you can have one row per candidate method, one column per requirement or desirable property, and checkboxes in the cells indicating which methods meet which requirements. This can provide a visual summary that makes it easy to quickly understand why you have chosen your particular method. You should probably supplement it with a detailed definition of each property and discussion of why each property is relevant and important.
If some of the explanation gets too detailed or lengthy and is distracting, one option is to put that detailed explanation in an appendix, and summarize the main idea in the body of the paper with a reference to the appendix for further elaboration.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: This is typically what Appendices are for: to detail things which are not necessary to understand the paper, but could be useful or interesting to the reader.
Example:
>
> We want to do x. x could be easily done using approach A, which however, has some drawbacks, among which 1 and 2 (see Appendix n for details). For this reason, we use B.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Assuming that A is a well-known approach and B is something which will be unknown to people using A, you should keep your paper exactly as you propose. Providing a description of A (and its drawbacks) gives your readers a reference point and a good feeling of whether they may be interested in B.
Let's assume that A refers to using a microwave oven, and X is an egg. You tried to use A on X and discovered that X tends to explode when exposed to A. Then you discovered an alternative approach B (a steam cooker), found that it works on X rather well, and wrote an article about it.
Now imagine that I'm a fellow researcher who tries to work with Y (tomatoes) and I'm confronted with a similar problem when using A on them. If I see an article about A not working for X, I will be really interested in trying out B, because the problem you have solved is quite similar to mine. On the other hand, I will likely skip an article about steam-cooking eggs as irrelevant, or even not see it at all because I will search for "tomatoes", "explosion" and "microwave", not for "eggs" and "steam cooker".
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Following up to @Clef's answer, if you're writing a conference paper which has a short page requirement and can't add an appendix easily, people often cite a longer version of their paper on something open-publication like arxiv:
>
> We want to do x. x could be easily done using approach A, which however, has some drawbacks, among which 1 and 2 (see an extended discussion in the Appendix of [citation of arxiv version] for details). For this reason, we use B.
>
>
>
Of course, this doesn't work if the paper is supposed to be double blind.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: Depending on the context, it may be possible to recast the text so it focuses on the problem/task rather than the method. This could help clarify a non-obvious aspect of the problem, without getting too bogged down in details of a method you are not using in your paper.
For example:
"We need to solve problem X. At first glance, problem X looks like a standard example of general problem class Y, which has a known solution A. However, problem X actually has unusual feature Z, which presents an obstacle to using method A in its standard form. Therefore, we use method B to get around this obstacle."
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/16
| 1,440
| 6,166
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was recently been asked by a colleague to help acquire some data with a specific method that only I know about. Beyond that, I have an analysis pipeline that is very specific to this project. Originally, my colleague said that I could look at all of the datasets but suggested that it would be good to look at one subject first, to try to examine the results of that one subject, and then go from there.
I agreed. I did the analysis for this one subject with this very specific analysis pipeline, and then showed my colleague the very promising results, thinking I would continue the analyses and be a part of the journal publication. The colleague then asked me to send her the whole pipeline and asked me questions about the analysis. She also asked me to form hypotheses about what might be going on, which I did. The colleague then said that they would be taking over the rest of the analysis and I wouldn't be able to look at the data.
This feels quite sneaky and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I definitely wouldn't mind being a co-author and I don't have to be first author, however, I am not completely sure what the next steps are. Should I bring this up to my senior PI? I don't want to come across as aggressive, but I am definitely very annoyed. Does anyone have any advice on how manage this?<issue_comment>username_1: **Communicate early about mutual responsibilities.**
To be on the safe side, do so in writing - e-mailing key points after important meetings is an option for recording oral agreements. Especially if you end up re-negotiating something, like you have.
Now, I have done what you did on several occasions, and was not met with malicious intent, so - anecdotally - do not start with assuming something bad (but do not write it off, either!). The major concern here comes from
>
> The colleague then said they would be taking over the rest of the analysis and I wouldn't be able to look at the data.
>
>
>
There is a big difference between the hostile "I would not give you access to this data" and "I want to handle it myself and do not need your involvement any more". I would certainly pry. Better late than never - you have already done some work, and have not reached any agreements about publications yet: time to arrange that. Ideally, this should have been done at least prior to handing the pipeline over.
First authorship dispute is more delicate. In my field, for the first author claim one typically has to play a key role in the experiment design or take more responsibilities regarding data analysis and writing than you have described so far. It is possible to take a potential paper over like that (and I have done so very recently, actually, but certainly not by scheming about "how do I get a first authorship paper"), however, this is certainly not something to be coming at on full blast.
A common parlance in academia is that the ideas are cheap. This is not entirely true - once some preliminary work is done, it is clear that some ideas are more equal than the others. People get understandably defensive when others try to ride 10% of their ideas that were promising to success, and the perspective of "but I did all the work here" too often neglects the amount of work poured in pursuing the other 90% of ideas which ended up in the trash bin. I agree with Roland here: as the situation is presented, you do not have a strong claim on the first authorship, but you could push for the further collaboration explaining how your expertise with the method would be valuable, and propose leading the next paper with significantly more in-depth analysis. Overall contribution evaluation would still depend on the method and experiment complexity and a lot of other factors, so just talk it through.
To sum it up, first steps would be:
1. Get a clear picture of your agreements with said colleague. If they do not exist in writing, make sure they do.
2. Discuss the current authorship situation ASAP.
3. If needed, get the more senior PI involved.
4. If you get an authorship out of the current paper, but it is unsatisfactory for you (and, crucially, you are not required to do any more work on it beyond revising), pitch a new one where your part is the centerpiece.
Your negotiating power is tied directly with the work you perform. Use it well.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Take this as an opportunity to learn how to collaborate appropriately. Before collaborating, you should set your terms up front (and not after). It is absolutely fair to ask the PI to intervene and decide who gets what. Chances are if both of you are equally qualified as first authors, then maybe you all are. I have seen papers with more than two first authors and it is not entirely uncommon these days. In your case, it is easier to settle earlier than later.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Firstly, always establish authorship before working with someone. It seems awkward, but it is best to get things clear before work progresses. As long as you're not rude, no one should be offended.
Lesson learnt.
As for current situation. You've not given enough detail but as you have said you could speak to your PI I'm presuming you're a post-doc? Is the other person in the same lab? If so - speak to your PI ASAP and they should mediate. If they are not in your lab, still get advice from your PI.
Authorship inclusion is usually decided by the first author, which they will and should be if it's their data and they are writing it. Personally I have put people on a paper if they have contributed to analysis in the way that you say - because I couldn't have got the paper together without them and their input (or maybe I could, but it would have been a lot harder). This is your argument for inclusion. Depends on the field, but generally speaking an extra author does not detract from the first authors work and many journals list contributions.
Finally, if you do have the same PI, it's worth bringing this up as they might not know that your are helping them. Avoid a situation where someone if claiming your work is theirs (in this case the analysis pipeline).
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/16
| 421
| 1,892
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a manuscript accepted with minor changes. I had to delete and rewrite some texts as the reviewers suggested. The journal specifically asked "Please highlight the changes to your manuscript within the document by using bold or coloured or highlighted text. Please do not use track changes or strikethrough text". But I can't seem to figure out how to indicate deletion without using strikethrough. Any thoughts on how to do this? Thanks a lot!<issue_comment>username_1: What you are returning is a new draft, not the final copy. Another version will eventually be required. Simply provide a key either within the document or as a separate note stating that words in a given color have been (are to be) deleted. Bolding is a bit less useful since it can have other interpretations.
Put (or mark) the key itself in the color you will use, indicating that it, too, will be removed eventually.
Alternatively, ask for more specific instructions from the editor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are times when one might just decide to ignore the rules. In your case, it sounds entirely reasonable to re-submit the document in two version: One that shows track changes including additions and deletions (struck through, if that's what your software does, or additions in blue and deletions in red), and one version that is the clean final product.
If they really really want to insist on their own rules, then you can still provide what they want. But in the end, you are satisfying the spirit of the request: To make it easy for anyone to see what you have changed. I'd give it a 95% chance that you can get away with that. In fact, I'd give it an about equally high chance that nobody who will handle your re-submission actually knows the rules well enough to know that they *could*, if they wanted to, call you out on the rules violation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/16
| 1,818
| 6,691
|
<issue_start>username_0: So first off, let’s start by saying that I’m insanely stupid for letting this happen. I’m currently a doctor early in my career. I was on a dating app and I sent nudes (No face showing).
It turns out I was texting scammers which were making demands for money and they threatened to send the pics to everyone I know as they had my list on my instagram, LinkedIn and fb. (Screenshots of conversations with my display picture and chats showing). They have also uploaded screen recordings on a porn website but deleted it after I blocked them.
I have since blocked the scammer and secured my online identity. This happened 2 months ago and the scammer seems to have given up. I called the police today and they said that the nudes are unlikely to be leaked as these scammers scam 5-10 people a day. Also, they’re probably scamming from another country so it would be virtually impossible to catch them.
Will it affect my career moving forwards if my nudes get leaked?
The scammer knows my first and last name. I have middle names that the scammer doesn’t know of and I was wondering if I should use those names for research publications.
Can this hurt my career prospects? For example, getting kicked out of a residency program (Medical training necessary for doctors to progress into specialists)?
Would it be fine to use my first and middle names for work related reasons?<issue_comment>username_1: Oof I am so incredibly sorry. In terms of residency: I think it would be unreasonable for a residency director to kick you out of residency for this. You are the victim here, and honestly if a residency program were to kick you out for this, that really shows that they themselves are lacking empathy.
I am a PhD researcher, and have been in academia for awhile; I would be very surprised if anyone cared about your nudes, my perception is that researchers tend to be more forgiving and relaxed about these things. God knows many academics have history of harassment and no-one bats and eye, so I really don't think you should be worried.
I would continue to pursue a legal course of action through the police if possible. I think the scammers will probably give up; I don't get the feeling that these guys are going to try to stay organized with random nudes for years and years.
And also just in general, I am so so sorry for this happening to you. Also, I think it is a huge win that your face is not in the photos; you can always say it isn't you!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You can use whatever name for publication.
I would even suggest go ahead with using your middle names, even without all this terrible and unfortunate issue. It will help distinguish you from people with similar names.
The only potential problem is with linking different names (see [similar problem](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/92946/can-you-start-using-your-married-name-on-publications-prior-to-getting-married) for people getting married). But this depends on how big is your cv, and how much publications you are ready to loose in the (useless and shameful) metric computations (in the worst case, and thanks to all the data miner like google scholar that make their algorithm obscure and irresponsive to customers and content producers, aka scientists).
Overall, I think you are on the safe side, the scammers have some nudes and they can photoshop whatever name and portrait on top of the conversations screenshots. Are their efforts worthwhile? if you start to give in to their requests, yes, their efforts will be worthwhile and you will be their golden egg chicken.
I know it is a bold statement, but maybe you should go the [Jaromir Jagr way](https://thehockeynews.com/news/jaromir-jagr-blackmailed-with-photo-could-not-care-less-about-it) (NHL ice-hockey star blackmailed to not publish pictures of him with a 18-yrs model ... his response "I don't care").
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are five reasons this is unlikely to be of any consequence;
1. Having a personal life is not any kind of academic misconduct, no body is kicking you out over this. Everyone with a lick of sense realises that most other people have a personal life. At worst, it looks like you have poor judgement in who you chose to have a personal life with.
2. The world is a big place, even if the scammer sent the images to everyone you know (and how would they get that contact list?), the set of everyone you know probably contains almost no one who will make future hiring decisions about you.
3. The fact that they haven't sent them in the last 2 months makes me think they probably won't anyhow. They probably don't want to be arrested, revenge porn is a crime in most places.
4. Just posted on the web, they are also unlikely to be seen by anyone relevant to you. If anyone who does make a hiring decision about you looks further than the top 3 google results you are lucky. Keeping the first page of your google results clean is not difficult; make yourself a linkedin/orcidID/twitter and post work appropriate content. That's a good idea anyway, you should have a professional online presence.
5. In the age of deep fakes, nobody will even be confident these nudes are real. Google any famous name + nudes, and you will probably get images that look like that person, mostly, they aren't real. The better the tools get, the more likely that explanation becomes, so in the long run, no nudes are credible.
It's a really frustrating experience, but it's really unlikely to have a material impact on your career.
The only thing you might want to do is decide how you will respond if a friend/colleague does tell you they were sent your nudes. That's more a matter of taste than anything else, but you might decide to tell them the truth and make a joke of it - "Someone I was exchanging nudes with tried to extort me, but my nudes are excellent, so I'm not ashamed. Sorry if you saw more than you wanted to, I hadn't meant them to be passed around like that.". Decent people will be sympathetic, and making a joke of it makes the conversation less awkward.
Finally, it may bring you some comfort to know you are in good company; similar misfortune befell a [new york city councillor recently](https://nypost.com/2021/06/19/nyc-council-candidate-caught-with-dominatrix-in-leaked-bdsm-video/). [The response was pretty sympathetic](https://twitter.com/ELECTWEINER/status/1406293543975591952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1406293543975591952%7Ctwgr%5E4d5c9d1db4080f576c99fb7df941df8ff16dd809%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Filovetheupperwestside.com%2Fzach-weiner-owns-leaked-video-support-goes-viral%2F).
Upvotes: 5
|
2022/11/16
| 2,185
| 9,293
|
<issue_start>username_0: As I write personal statements for graduate school, I want to highlight my hard work through humor and also just show my personality. As someone who works full time (in order to fund my education) as a carpenter and does research/studies in their free time while working towards a masters degree, I had made a joke in one of my personal statements that goes something like this.
>
> As a full-time masters student, I've had to support myself as a student, requiring me to seek a full-time job in addition to going to school at night and spending my free time doing research and studying. I'm kind of like <NAME> from *Good Will Hunting* but just better-looking and much smarter.
>
>
>
The final statement will have the joke stated more elegantly but that's the general idea. Although I am being sarcastic, I realize that this might not be evident for everyone that is reading it or might come off as arrogant or trying too hard. Additionally, I'm afraid that the joke might be inappropriate.
**My Question**
What is the general consensus on humor in a personal statement. Additionally, any comments on my specific joke are appreciated. (This question specifically pertains to personal statements, not statements of purpose or statements of intent.)
This school has a separate writing sample for statement of purpose and asks that the personal statement satisfies the following "We are interested in learning more about you as a person and how your background and experiences motivate you to make positive contributions to your community. There are no requirements for what to include;"<issue_comment>username_1: I would advise caution. The particular example phrasing you suggest sounds off to me. A humorous way to connect your carpentry to your studies (other than that the one finances the other) might work.
Ask one of the professors writing you a letter of recommendation to comment on a draft.
I can report one instance where humor was acceptable. When I was department chair a friend and colleague coming up for tenure asked me to check his personal statement. He introduced his draft with this paraphrase of the personal ads common at the time:
>
> Assistant Professor, 40, seeks permanent relationship with urban
> university.
>
>
>
The department was small, the case was straightforward, and we decided it would be fine and fun to leave it. He was awarded tenure.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It's less an issue that a personal statement can't be humorous and more that humor in a written context is *very hard to get right*. Timing and tone of voice are easily lost in written media, and self-deprecation in particular depends heavily on timing and tone - those aspects are the difference between funny and... sad or uncomfortable. Sarcasm is hardest.
For people that you know, or for someone you are familiar with through their other work - say, someone who you've seen perform as a comedian, or even a social media account that you follow regularly - you start to build a mental scaffolding of their tone and personality, and you can fill that in around even a brief statement. Maybe you've even experienced this when you tried to share a joke with a friend that someone else said that they don't know - often, they just *won't get it*, because they're missing that other context.
Your joke *might be funny*, but it certainly didn't land with me, a stranger. It's not clear from it whether you're trying to convey sarcasm, insecurity, or egotism.
I'd recommend using other opportunities to showcase that part of your personality, like interviews (especially during less formal contexts, like a dinner or similar social event). In that context, it's more about "fit" - you don't really want to work in a group with people who you won't get along with, and vice-versa. For sharing "who you are" in a personal statement, I'd stick to description and perhaps short narrative. It's not clear to me how having a sense of humor relates to "how your background and experiences motivate you to make positive contributions to your community" in the area of graduate studies.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Here's a general rule: If you have to think about whether something is appropriate, it's probably wise to just not do it. I believe this rule applies to contexts far beyond just application documents.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: To me, that personal statement smacks of arrogance and rubs me the wrong way. There is no way to know how serious you are being, and I've known and interacted with many people who would say and mean such things quite seriously.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: The answer is that humor at academic level should be philosophical. Anything else will be seen as at best immature and at worst dangerous to relations within the department.
You should be quietly proud of what you achieved through your self-supported studies to date. Not boastful, not embarrassed. So just state what needs to be said on how you supported yourself during study. You don't want people to see you as inferior - or willing to accept an inferior status in the new department.
*I'm kind of like <NAME> from good will hunting but just better looking and much smarter.*
This is a real stupid sentence.
1. Never compare yourself with someone else - enough people will try to do that anyway without any prompting from you. Just present your study/work to date clearly and concisely.
2. Never EVER claim to be "smarter" than anyone else. We are all smart and stupid in some ways or others. Besides there's no agreed measures of what really constitutes intelligence in general as opposed to specific (rational, spatial, conceptual, emotional, social, etc) types of intelligence.
3. Never EVER EVER claim to be better-looking than anyone else. If you write like you don't yet realize that looks are largely a gift from nature and not something we can really cultivate beyond making the best of what we've got, then NO ONE will want you in ANY department.
I think your humor isn't yet mature enough for you to include it in an important letter of application.
And if it was perhaps you might be seen as someone who was trying to humorize/socialize his way into a new milieu: these people seldom do hard work and are lousy at supporting struggling colleagues.
Leave it out, man.
Better to show some courtesy, understanding and respect in the way that you phrase your letter. That opens a lot more doors than humor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Whenever I deal with applications, I do my very best to ignore such stuff. It should really neither give an applicant an advantage nor a disadvantage. Where I currently am there is a points system where points are allocated to various features of an application. Humor is not one of them, and neither is "personality".
It may be that the process is different in some places, but I'd be very wary of making admission decisions in any way dependent on this kind of thing. It should be well known that all kinds of stuff is written in personal statements because applicants were advised that XXX makes a good impression (or they believe it without being advised) regardless of whether it has any relevant informative value, which it normally hasn't.
Ultimately I can't tell whether this kind of thing is ignored everywhere, but for sure it is in many places (and in my opinion it should).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I wasn't going to write an answer, but unusual that there are six answers that I mostly disagree with.
I would make two points:
* I thought your joke was funny. Perhaps I am in the minority -- but maybe not, hard to tell from a handful of datapoints on one website.
* While it's a little risky to use humor (people might not get it, and a few might even say "this is a real stupid sentence"), it's also risky to write a thoroughly boring, forgettable personal statement.
Overall, I would have to see the rest of the essay before I could confidently make a recommendation either way. And certainly you should work hard to get the phrasing and everything right. But personally, I find the negative reaction here a little extreme. While it's unlikely to have a significant effect in either direction, I would in general encourage writing an interesting, memorable essay -- if you find that humor is the best way you can do so, then fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: A lot of schools have a word limit on their SOPs. There is no way I'd personally use up space with quips like that but it's really up to you.
And while grad committees aren't *supposed* to evaluate with biases, if I were on that committee reading such a statement, I would question whether the applicant was taking themself and the situation seriously enough. You can show off your charm once you enter a program, but I don't necessarily think the joke shows a distinctive personality. Maybe that's because I'm from Boston where I hear quips like that far too often.
That said, I do think there are ways to inject personality into your statement. For me, that would be demonstrating passion and thought in your statement, and illustrating why anyone besides yourself should care about your pursuit of this degree.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/16
| 1,046
| 4,059
|
<issue_start>username_0: In 20+ years of research, I believed rounding of results should follow the "round up at 0.5" rule, while internal rounding during computation may follow other rules such as "round to even" that are supposed to reduce cumulative errors. However, I just learned that my favourite programming language's string format '%.2f' uses "round to even", e.g.
```
$ python
Python 3.6.15 (default, Sep 23 2021, 15:41:43) [GCC] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> '%.2f' %0.125
'0.12'
>>> '%.2f' %0.375
'0.38'
```
I wrote a little function frac2decimal(n,d,precision=2) that prints fractions n/d as decimal with "round up at .5" with configurable number of places. In the absence of policies on this matter at my institution and from my publisher, should I use it in future or stick with "round to even"?
Related:
* <https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/218821/round-to-even-rule>
* <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rounding><issue_comment>username_1: Some considerations:
1. If it matters, be explicit about what you did.
2. If it matters (e.g., the distinction between .12 and .13 is important), you should be reporting more than 2 decimal points. If your measurements are not sufficiently precise to support a third decimal point, then you don't actually have enough precision for it to matter.
3. For most "real data" contexts with continuous computations, the probability of ever observing a number ending in exactly "5" down to machine precision is vanishingly small. Consider other representations for data where you'll be e.g. dividing integers by integers: does the original integer tell you more than the ratio? For example, if 3/16 responders in your survey prefer "round to even" over "round up at 0.5", you probably shouldn't be reporting that as 18.75%, 18.8%, or 19% - all those numbers imply far more precision in measurement than you actually have. Just report 3/16 or 3 out of 16.
4. For observed data that are already rounded by the limits of precision of some technique that gives data to 3 decimal places, for example, 0.12 and 0.13 are exactly the same number. You should always use the full data (e.g. 0.125) for all computations, and only round for the very last step (typically, for display).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: How you treat round-off depends on context. There is no "one size" rule that works for any possible type of result.
What you should be doing is [uncertainty analysis.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_analysis) Any given data point will have some degree of accuracy. You *urgently* need to record this information and evaluate how it affects the results you report. If you do not then you leave yourself open to severe criticism of any calculations you perform with the data, even to the point of your conclusions being entirely invalid.
Just a trivial example: If you use a ruler to measure a distance, the usual rule is the accuracy is +/- half the smallest division. So if the ruler is divided into mm, then your uncertainty is +/- 0.5 mm. This will then contribute to the uncertainty in any calculation you perform with this measurement.
For other types of data there will be other types of accuracy or uncertainty. Some times it is +/- some value or percentage. Sometimes it is statistical, such as randomly selecting some sub-set from a population in trying to represent the whole population, such as a survey. Sometimes it is due to systematic effects such as in medical tests that can give false positives or false negatives.
In each case you must include this degree of uncertainty in the measurement when you perform calculations. This is a very large topic with huge amounts of discussion. My favorite method (when it is applicable) is [Monte Carlo.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Carlo_method) There are many valid methods.
But it is very high priority to include a calculation of the accuracy of the result based on the accuracy of the data that is used, and the nature of the calculation.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/17
| 238
| 946
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a professor/postdoc, when you submit an article to a journal you note your department, school, and city:
>
> Department of History, Barnett College, Fairfield, New York
>
>
>
But when you are in a PhD program, do you need to explicitly mention it in your address and if so how?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, an enrolled student can use the university (and the department) as an affiliation. It is probably a good idea to also note that you are a student so that people will realize that the affiliation will change within a few years (or less). So, add "(Doctoral Student)" or similar when possible.
When you use an affiliation you want the institution to be able to verify it if needed.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It is entirely appropriate, highly recommended, and possibly mandatory if this is part of your PhD work.
The format you have mentioned should be adequate.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/17
| 495
| 2,078
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a Ph.D. student in the Social Sciences at a German university. I want to apply for an exchange program at a research institute in France, which is very relevant to my research. It is a very big research institute, with ca. 40 senior researchers and ca. 70 Ph.D. students (half of them visiting). The university would provide funds that should cover most (possibly not all) costs related to the stay. I also have some savings that I could use for this. The research stay can last between six and ten months.
I am reflecting on the pros and cons of a shorter vs. longer research stay. I plan to return to Germany for my postdoc phase. The research stay will be in my third year. I would be willing to extend the length of my Ph.D. for a meaningful research stay abroad, but I will have to look for other sources of funding after the end of my third year.
Do you have some advice related to the length of the research stay? Do you think the advantages of a longer research stay would be worth spending a part of my savings or taking longer to graduate?<issue_comment>username_1: A longer stay would, presumably, give higher probability of reaching some useful, publishable, result. But this might depend on the field. A longer stay might also let you make some stronger connections/collaborations with people there for the future. But that depends on the nature of the interactions generally in your field.
Otherwise, I see no significant difference for a small difference in time.
---
Your added question is too personal for me to give advice. I can't know all of your options.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In academia (being a part of life), everything is unpredictable. I would ask which is harder, lengthening a short stay or shortening a long stay, and then apply for whichever is easier to adjust.
If they are the same, then I would go for the short stay. After you have been there a few months, review this decision, and apply for the longer stay and look for a few months more accommodation if that seems to be wise.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/17
| 2,995
| 12,362
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc at the lab of, say, <NAME>. Together with a few students and external collaborators, we performed a research study and sent a manuscript for publication, where I am the leading and corresponding author. Prof. Johnson and I verbally agreed on the author's order and role before first submission. All other coauthors agreed as well (but this is not documented).
The manuscript has been accepted. After acceptance, <NAME> asked me to e-mail the editor requesting changes to the author list. He wants me to remove one of the students (say, Jane) from the author's list because he (quote) "does not clearly see her contribution." I also know that <NAME> and Jane recently got into a personal fight with each other. Apparently Jane borrowed money from Prof. Johnson and has not paid Prof. Johnson back. Jane has now left the lab.
I worked together with Jane, and I know she contributed with data analysis and creation of some figures. This is something I believe can be documented. I also believe that removing Jane could lead to an accusation of unacknowledged appropriation of her work. Additionally, if Jane's contribution is not enough for co-authorship, we would have to remove another co-author as well (which is not under discussion).
For this reason, I manifested my disagreement to Prof. Johnson, but he maintained his position. I asked if I could get written permission from Jane, but he said "this is not necessary." Finally, Prof. Johnson said that he would request manuscript withdraw or retraction, if I don't agree to remove Jane from the author's list. The institution where I work has a publicly known history of ethics violations, so I would not trust the internal committees to reach a fair decision.
What would you advise me to do? I would like to avoid a confrontation with Prof. Johnson, but I am afraid that such a request to the journal would cause the paper's acceptance to be rescinded. Also, recent ethics violations in our institution have been reported by international media.<issue_comment>username_1: Oh my. I suspect there is no good answer to your question. Here are several ideas to consider. Whether any of them is feasible in your situation depends on information only you have.
* Prepare a rough draft of the paper that removes Jane's figures and
data analysis and ask <NAME> if he thinks the paper without her
contribution is still good.
* Find someone at your institution you can ask about this matter.(They
would not be the official channel for resolving this, since you don't
trust the official channel.)
* Consider involving (or threatening to involve) the journal editor in
the controversy. Since the paper is in its second round of reviews
there, this change might (should) influence whether they will
publish.
Good luck. Please report back on this site with what happens.
---
**Edit** in response to update in the question.
Since the paper has now been accepted, I suspect and hope that the editor would not allow you to remove an author without that author's permission. That might not sway <NAME>, who seems willing to withdraw the paper if Jane's name must be on it.
If Jane has not only left the lab but permanently left the field then she could agree to have her name omitted at no cost to her. That would still be somewhat unethical, since she did the work, but she might be willing so that you are not denied the publication.
You could still try rewriting the paper omitting everything Jane contributed.
This is still a quandary.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: It's not entirely clear from your description the following two things:
1. How closely reliant are you on this PI? i.e. is he your primary/sole sponsor, or one of several you work with?
2. What was the nature of this "fight" between Jane and PI, and is she a grad student with him as advisor?
Also let me add broader question (3) What are your priorities, between 'doing what seems just/fair' and 'grease a few wheels to advance'?
If he is your primary sponsor AND he is not Jane's advisor, then side with him. If he IS her advisor, maybe what he really wants is to get her to quit or switch advisors. Even if you convince him to keep her on this paper it really just drags things out for both people who don't want to be in the relationship.
If you are not reliant on him for support and on merit things should go with Jane in terms of the fight, well, propose withdrawing your further work with him and he can have fun with sub-par students like Jane. If such action is too adversarial, suck it up and remove Jane.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on how much of your own benefits will become void If you keep your ethics.
I will feel really sorry for her if I were at your position, but I would be more worried about my consequence if I support her.
I probably will let her know that the professor is kicking her out anonymously, and it's up to her to fight against the professor. I might give her some anonymous evidence too but it depends.
Either way, I strongly suggest you to keep some evidence of your professors kicking Jane out, in case you will be in the same boat later.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: For the neutral part:
You are being the victim of a weird system. Please note that <NAME> is as much an active actor in this system as a victim.
<NAME> is strongly entrenched in their request to remove Jane. If you are completely expelled from the academia because of this friction with Prof. Johnson, you will leave your place to someone that may or may not be as good as you at advocating for fair authorship.
So do whatever you have to do. if the paper is 100% necessary for your career, make an half-assed attempt at changing the authors list, write to the lowest editor of the journal an email with your prof Johnson in cc, asking the removal of Jane from the authors list.
Now, assuming your side of the story is the right one.
Keep in mind a couple of things for the future:
* If you have strong arguments with your subordinates, do not be revengeful and avoid resentment (well, this is true even if Professor Johnson was the right one in the big argument with Jane);
* do not be Prof. Johnson.
For the present keep in mind this: becoming a professor is like winnning a lottery. You need a lot of stars to alignate for that to become reality. The small star being the +1 paper with famous/influential prof. Johnson is negligble. And the other co-authors may find you a jerk for blocking the publication of the paper on this conflict, but even if they are in absolute need of that paper for their PhD, they are at risk of a much bigger jerk, so I suggest you to clearly explain your concerns privately to them.
On the other hand, as a postdoc you do not fully realize your potential of finding a satisfying job outside the academia. Do not forget that.
Good luck!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I would advise you to try to avoid a direct confrontation with <NAME> but to refuse (very politely) to remove Jane.
You could e.g. say that unfortunately this is not possible because you believe the journal doesn't allow the list of authors to change between submissions (which is probably at least kind of true). Or you could say that you understand if he wants to contact the editors directly but that you don't feel comfortable doing that yourself. If possible, say all this by email so that there is a written record. If you are willing to compromise a little bit, offer him to become the corresponding author instead of you and let him take responsibility with the editors; or tell him that unless Jane herself agrees to renounce authorship, your hands are tied.
In any case, even if you take a risk by confronting <NAME>, you also take a risk (possibly greater) if you agree to do something clearly unethical such as removing Jane, unless you have proof that you were coerced to do so.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Some opinions sure to be extremely unpopular so downvote away.
First: is Dr. Johnson right? It's possible. His INSISTENCE makes it sound like he's seeking personal revenge, but maybe he's right. I'd love to ask him why he approved the authorship in the first place, but that's the kind of discussion that probably won't help anyone.
But let's say he's wrong, and this is only his personal vendetta.
How are you going to be if you force the issue? Are you going to lose your position? Will you be able to advance your career? Will you be able to work in the field further? That's the potential cost. What's the potential benefit? Is there ANY amount of stink you can raise that will get Jane and the other smaller contributor's name on the paper, and if so, how much of a help will that be in their careers? It's good that other answers are conspicuously "virtue-signalling," advising taking the moral high ground, when it's not their career that could be affected.
In fact, that's normally my personal play even at risk to myself. But if the potential benefit is zero, there's going to be SOME cost which it is not a smart decision to incur for said zero benefit.
Life is about learning experiences and we've learned a bunch here already:
* vet institution before joining
* commit decisions to ink (email) not do informally, no matter how friendly or good the people are; even morally-upright friends can have huge misunderstandings
* do not fight with bosses, as apparently Jane did. No fight SHOULD result in this retribution, but we have to acknowledge that there are abusive people who will engage in this retribution. Jane did so, and you have to be selfish for a second and note that she's put YOU in a bit of a dangerous position with that, along with anyone else in her clique in the department. Don't hold it against her (or at least I wouldn't) but it's an important angle to understand.
* it's too late now, but don't take action (such as your approach to Johnson) until you've figured out that this is your best move. In my career I've made this mistake several times.
* as another commenter mentioned, don't be Prof. Johnson when you get into such a position. Seeing such revenge first hand actually could help you be a better person than you would have been otherwise.
So what to do? You haven't shared all the potential costs and benefits and its probably impossible to summarize in a short note anyway. But:
0. Verify with the journal whether authors can even be edited at this point, and if possible talk with the editor verbally and imply you're looking for a no, if there's not a written policy. This no will avoid all future discussion.
1. I wouldn't get the more minor contributor axed as well. Leave the poor guy out of it.
2. Jane obviously is going to find out if she's removed, and the more likely that is, the more likely you should let her know the situation. She might have good information, such as a trustable party in the institute you can talk with. Or, she may confide that she was wrong to fight with Johnson and was going to apologize anyway. Or that she's not concerned about this minor authorship as she's onto something bigger, or that she's decided to leave academia. Or something. I might try to present this as "we've got a problem" (you and Jane) and ask to brainstorm solutions on you two's mutual problem.
3. You're a good person to want to help Jane out with trouble she apparently has landed herself in, but just as you can't take home all the kitties and puppies in the pound, this might not be YOUR fight to fight. Maybe the solution is for Jane to fight this, if she wants to fight it, and you two connive for you to give maximum aid commensurate with not damaging your own career?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I would suggest involving the chair of the department or lab (assuming it is not Prof. Johnson), because the upcoming harassment suit is going to be very, very painful. Even, I might add, if that isn't the cause of the personal dispute, because that's how it will be framed. If this is Prof. Johnson, I would move on up to the dean. Jane is going to notice the absence of deserved credit, and it won't get better from there.
The last journal my wife submitted to required *repeated* certification that all researchers had received appropriate credit.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/17
| 364
| 1,671
|
<issue_start>username_0: I need to use a figure from a published paper that is non open access, and copyrighted. What is the general advice for going about this? Do people tend to pay the fee for access to reproduce it? Or do you just not insert it into your preprint article? It would be difficult for me to not have it in my article, since it's the central framework I am using<issue_comment>username_1: The copyright holder of the figure has exclusive rights to **reproduce** (reprint in exactly the same form) or **adapt** (reprint a version with elements added/removed) the figure. Paying the fee to access the article does not confer copyright. If you want to reproduce or adapt the figure, you need to get permission from the copyright holder, or else you can't legally do so.
What you can do is **redraw** the figure. Copyright covers the particular expression of an idea, but not the idea itself. You can take the original figure of a schematic or workflow or whatever it may be, and produce a new figure from scratch that represents the same information.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: If you're determined to include the figure from this paper in your article, you'll have to get permission from the copyright holder to reproduce it. Some journals allow free licensing through the copyright clearance center marketplace - you should check that first. If that doesn't pan out, large publishers typically have a licensing, reprints, and copyright department that you may be able to contact with your request.
If you can't secure a reprint license through those methods, you can always make your own figure based on the same data or concepts.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/17
| 862
| 3,471
|
<issue_start>username_0: I realize that lots of engineering/biology/physics/computing sciences tend to encourage their researchers to go and make industrial applications out of their research.
I noticed there is a complete lack of that in the social sciences (which is neither bad nor good), except in economics. I never hear of sociologists/anthropologists/ethnographers/etc. making a business out of their work and research.
How come? Why are those disciples less prone to industrialize their work compared to STEM fields? Is it a cultural byproduct of the mode of work in those fields?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe this largely has to do with the initial funding boost provided by a variety of means - or lack thereof.
If some research has potential applications in the industry, governments and private organizations both would be willing to bridge this gap, invest in bringing academic results to the wider public. It is rarely academics who make the first move - after all, if one's goal was to make money off their research, academia is hardly the place to be. It is true there are spin-offs with ties to academia, but more often than not, people branch out very early in their careers.
And as for ethnographers at least, they are encouraged to make their results more accessible as well, but it is not what you would necessarily encounter in the wild. What is the business model here? A museum might pay them to make their expositions better (and they do), they could start a youtube channel or be featured on one (again, some do), but in general, business models are rather limited there.
In addition to that, commercializing sociology or anthropology is very dangerous: whoever has the money to pay steering the society is widely seen as an already existing problem, there is no need to further exacerbate it. Not to say it does not happen already, sociology is heavily involved in politics, and sociologists are being featured on political programs (and, I am sure, are mostly well-reimbursed for it). For an academic researcher in STEM, the notion of public service would not necessarily conflict with running a startup. For a sociologist, it most likely will.
Another evidence of this is biomedical research: the field is heavily commercialized, and "undesirable" research outcomes are getting suppressed as a result. If the same were to happen in social sciences, there would be no freedom of research and academic honesty, whoever pays for the show would immediately use this newly acquired academic credibility to push their own agenda.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think one piece of the equation is that some of the [natural sciences (rather than social sciences)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Branches_of_science) study much finer-grained phenomena. Relevant XKCD:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AivzPl.png)
By this, I mean, it's easy to monetize, shall we say, more efficient combustion, the new best encryption algorithm, or the cure for cancer. What a social scientist might study are human systems at the level of communities.
We can learn that large segments of the population are obese because fast food is cheaper than healthy food in their [environment](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_desert), but you don't solve that by becoming a grocery store entrepreneur, you solve that by going into government.
It's hard to sell the solution to systemic racism.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/18
| 1,362
| 6,205
|
<issue_start>username_0: I sent an article to a journal of a reputed publisher. After about six months and 3 revisions, of which 2 were major and 1 was minor, I re-submitted the article. However, after the third revision, I received another request for revision, and this time it was from a third reviewer. The first reviewer has explicitly stated that they are satisfied with the changes made. However, the third reviewer has given almost 4 pages of revisions.
The editor has termed it as 'minor' revision. However, they are not minor at all. The third reviewer wants me to completely re-write every section of the article. The article is conceptual in nature and so their view is completely different than mine.
Naturally, I am exhausted of the back and forth. Are there any suggestions as to what I should do? I am a young author trying to make my way into the world of research and publication.<issue_comment>username_1: Your options are the usual ones. You can comply as best you can. You can complain to the editor and hope for the best. You can withdraw the article and submit elsewhere, though that will start the process over again.
A complaint to the editor could be mild, or a refutation of the need for revision, but it is the editor that has all the control here. But your statement that the reviewer has a different conception might hold some sway.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can always argue why the suggested revisions do not agree with the main theme or aim of your paper. In particular, show how the reviewer's suggestions detract the main message or contributions of your paper.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If I were you, I'd probably try to make the smallest revisions possible that allow me to state, in the reply to reviewers, that I addressed at least some of the comments of the new reviewer. Sometimes things look big but can be addressed in a small way, for example a reviewer might say "rewrite Section X and in particular change the claim that XX", and you can address that changing said claim only. Whenever they are not specific, there's a good chance getting away with not changing anything, or changing some wordings just cosmetically. I'd also give arguments why I don't do all of them (in case I don't). Maybe I'd add in my comment/letter to the editor a remark about how the process has gone up to now and that demands of previous reviewers have been satisfied, so the opinion of the new reviewer asking for a large rewrite is apparently not shared by the others, and it's not my own opinion either that this would benefit the paper, however I tried to address raised issues as well as I could.
Obviously I can't know to what extent this strategy works here without much effort (for sure it takes a bit), but my impression is that your chances may be best if you continue to "play the game" in the regular way at the surface, still giving the new reviewer as little as one can just about get away with. At the end of the day it will depend on the editor to what extent they rest with the reviewer or with your point of view, and we can't know that. However, if I am editor and I bring in a new reviewer because a previous one dropped out, the new reviewer doesn't necessarily make me happy with a review like this if otherwise the paper looked close to ready. I may well accept in the next round if the author convinces me they have done all that they reasonably could leaving unchanged some bits of the paper that were unfairly attacked. The editor will make the decision, not the new reviewer, and the editor is not obliged to insist on whatever the new reviewer says.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I am an associate editor at a journal. Here is my recommendation for an author who might find themself in your situation.
I recommend that you write a **very polite** email directly to the lowest-level editor whom you are able to contact [see my note below] and explain your frustrations (again, very politely and without accusing anyone of anything) and then explicitly propose to them which revisions you consider reasonable and which you consider unreasonable. **This lets you take control of the situation.** Considering that your article has not been rejected at this point, you can reasonably assume that the editors are favourably disposed to your article. So, by proposing what you consider reasonable, many reasonable editors will agree with what you propose.
**An important note:** Here is what I mean by "lowest-level editor": some journals have an editor hierarchy of Editor-in-Chief | Senior Editor | Associate Editor. (Note: this does NOT include any purely administrative editorial managers who just forward messages back and forth--I am referring to editors who are actually subject matter experts.) If that is the case, then you should address your concerns to the Associate Editor. You should address the lowest level so that you do not offend anyone by "jumping rank". However, in some journals (like mine), the associate editor is anonymous and authors are not able to contact them directly. If so, then you should address the lowest level editor who is visible (Senior Editor) in my example and politely explain that you would have addressed your concern to the Associate Editor except that you have no direct access to them. Again, this is important so that you do not offend anyone by "jumping rank" in raising your concerns.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Please remember: the reviewers are giving suggestion to you and to the editor, but the editor has the final word regarding publication.
It seems like 3rd reviewer is crossing the line, from simply reviewing your paper to wanting you to revise the paper towards their interpretation of the concept you are discussing.
In fact, the 3rd reviewer is not finding any error in your paper, but they have different opinions and views.
This debate is best addressed involving the community at large (i.e. at conference and by allowing the community at large to read your opinion), not by removing the debate with "tampering" publications with different views.
Point this out politely and clearly in your confidential reply to the editor.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/18
| 795
| 3,495
|
<issue_start>username_0: A big argument I hear for why stipends are actually a great deal is because tuition is covered(often).
This makes sense for the first year or two but once courses are complete it's no longer a valid argument. Why doesn't your stipend jump in value in accordance with what tuition would normally be valued at? I personally never even used university equipment during my time as a graduate student nor did I go to campus once I completed my courses.<issue_comment>username_1: There may be some fundamental cultural/geographic assumptions underlying your question, I will tackle your question from the US perspective where someone enrolled in an university is a customer of a for-profit cultural industry (the university itself).
>
> I personally never even used university equipment during my time as a
> graduate student nor did I go to campus once I completed my courses.
>
>
>
It really depends on your specific university. Ask them. There are universities where tuition fees are higher if you are enrolled in let's say pharmacy instead of philosophy, because the expected usage of lab&co is higher.
In general, it is the same philosophical question as paying taxes for the maintenance of roads, even if you do not own a car and you only live on your privat ranch while working remotely. You pay for infrastructures that are used by you,directly or indirectly.
You may not have been to the campus, but your instructors are having their offices there, they are using the campus infrastructure (labs, libraries, servers and networks) to provide *you* a good service.
If you feel the cost/quality ratio is too high, leave them a feedback on Google Maps.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Typically the funding for tuition waivers and the funding from the stipend come from separate pools of money. This is true of my current institution.
This arrangement makes more sense for the student. If instead we take the total amount given to the student in stipends and tuition waivers and distribute it equally across the student’s whole time in the programme, for the first couple of years the student will be in terrible financial hardship because they have to pay for tuition. I think most students would prefer a reasonable financial situation throughout the whole programme, rather than starvation wages in the beginning and a windfall at the end.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The issue here is that your base premise, that tuition waivers represent some kind of significant income for a graduate student or an actual cost for having a graduate student around, isn't right (US perspective).
In STEM disciplines where a typical PhD student is a teaching or research assistant, the University is getting some value from the student as an employee. This is the extent of the financial relationship between the two. Mentoring, teaching, etc. do cost something for Universities to maintain, but then again any other viable business hiring junior employees must also maintain some of this infrastructure.
A "tuition waiver" is pure administrative fiction. The nominal amount cited isn't computed to represent actual costs to the University that they "miss out on". It's instead whatever maximum amount they can justify to external funding bodies like the NSF, which direct taxpayer dollars of this amount to the University for fellowship recipients. Every grad student doesn't cost Harvard 5 times what it costs a big state school to take on.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/18
| 482
| 1,844
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working with data on "parental level of education". I have ranked the following levels from the lowest to the highest. I am a foreigner and I do not understand the US education system. Could you please validate?
1. some high school
2. high school
3. associate's degree
4. bachelor's degree
5. some college
6. master's degree<issue_comment>username_1: I would assume if your highest attainment is "some college", that means you attended college, but did not obtain a qualification. Therefore this should rank at #3: you have done something after completing high school, but not enough to get any of the degrees. (Similarly, "some high school" is below "[completed] high school", which you have in the right place.)
An associate degree is, according to [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associate_degree)
>
> a level of qualification above a high school diploma, GED, or matriculation, and below a bachelor's degree.
>
>
>
Here "matriculation" means the process of entering university/college, so it is equivalent to your "some college". Thus associate degree is #4, and bachelors degree #5. (Associate degree is an unusual one, since it is the only entry in the list which is not a usual prerequisite to the next one.)
As EarlGrey mentions in the comment, there should be a #7 for doctoral and other degrees which are higher than masters.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You have levels 3, 4, and 5 disordered. An associates degree implies (usually) two years of college. A bachelors comes at the end of (usually) four years of college. And, you do need "doctoral degree" after masters. High school (2) should probably be "high school diploma", which implies successful completion of high school.
It is rare, but there are also people with no high school at all.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/18
| 800
| 3,218
|
<issue_start>username_0: I did not like my Msc. specialization (one of Chemistry streams). I won a PhD scholarship overseas. Though the area (protein engineering) was my favorite area, I graduated without having enough knowledge and skills due to the following reasons:
* the supervisor did not allow me to work on my chosen advanced topic and made me work on a title that is unfit for a PhD level,
* met with an accident, my recovery took my research time, and
* unbearable racism challenge in the lab.
**Since I am more interested in the field** I want to learn it by applying again for a PhD scholarship abroad, it could be in a different department: Chemistry, Bioengineering, Biotechnology, Biomedical Engineering,.. research that encompasses protein engineering.
If I disclose my PhD, what I think of as **advantages** are:
* to let the selection committee know I have not **ONLY** been offering courses since 2011,
* I am not applying from scratch, I have some background about it.
* to let them know I had won acscholarship abroad, if they may consider it as great achievement.
**Disadvantages**
* they may think I distanced myself from research for a long period of time (from 2011-to date). UNDERSTAND IT FROM MY CV, EDUCATION HISTORY
* they may select only the one who has background about it in their M.Sc.
* they may give the chance to the one who have no PhD
**If I state my publication and conferences in my CV to let them know my background by CONCEALING my PhD, a series of questions may pop up in the selection committee’s mind**:
* how were you able to do research on protein engineering while your Msc. field is Inorganic,
* how was it possible to work on it with someone in even abroad?
* in the publication it is stated that your affiliation is X University which belongs to other country (not the one mentioned you have been working in), were you student there, or did you go for visiting, for internship, ….
if you believe that there is still something to say to convince them while disclosing my PhD, please make a suggestion.<issue_comment>username_1: In Germany, you have to list all previous studies when applying to a university (no matter if is for a BA, MA or PHD). Failure to list all previous academic history can lead to expulsion from the program (and in case of receiving a scholarship, you might be required to return the money), and you could even be sued. I imagine the situation is similar in other countries. Not disclosing a PhD is thus a very bad idea. I think already having a PhD might limit your chances to get a scholarship PhD position, as those a rare are rather given to people that do not already hold a PhD. Nevertheless, you should disclose it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You have not mentioned the most serious consequence - expulsion. For most universities in developed countries, you have the obligation to provide information about all of your tertiary education activities including PhD. Failure to do this will result in punishments once it is disclosed.
Also, many universities will not offer any scholarship/stipend to students who already earned a PhD degree. Check the conditions for research scholarship for more details.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/18
| 1,115
| 4,654
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m doing a postdoc in a STEM field in central Europe. I’ve been employed for a year, with a bit over a year of funding left on the contract. Over time, I have become less and less interested in continuing in academia, and I have now started looking for industry jobs.
My dilemma is that I don’t know if I should tell my postdoc host about it. We have a rather good relationship I think, but don’t work closely together on a day-to-day basis, and we have not had any proper career-conversations, just me sometime saying I will probably want to continue in academia, which is not true anymore. Best case scenario, I tell them I want to leave academia, they are supportive, and agree to write letters of recommendation and act as a job reference (which would be the main reason to let them know). However, I’m not sure that would be the case, and I genuinely can’t predict how they would react. The main reason I’m unsure is that I have several ongoing research projects, which would likely never be finished if I found a new job and left. No one else in the group does the same type of highly specialized research as I do, so no one would be able to “adopt” the project. Worst case scenario, they would be very disappointed if I tell them I am looking for other jobs, our relationship would go south, and they would not be interested in helping me in my career.
If I left early for another postdoc or an assistant professor, which I think is completely normal during a postdoc, we would be able to continue to collaborate, and I wouldn’t be hesitant to tell them. Same thing if I was close to the end of my contract. But since I want to leave academia, and leave my position early, I don’t know what to do/what is normal in this case. So the question is: do I tell my postdoc host I’m looking for jobs outside academia?<issue_comment>username_1: It is time for you to discuss your renewal contract and perspectives. You are not interested at the moment, but it would be good to discuss with your host *now*.
You do not have to expose yourself, but you have to know what they think. And they have to remember that you are there on a temporary basis, whatever contribution you can give to the group, can be given for the next 12 months only.
Academia people are rather irrational with respect to job hunting and financial planning. If you tell them you are looking for a job, there is a non-zero chance they will get it as a betrayal of you serving the higher good of progress of the humanity.
However, please remember that plenty of the inspiring manufactures and cultural heritages of the past (for example, the pyramids) are built on hard, unpaid slave work. And the humanity benefitting of unpaid work is incidental.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: My personal advice (as someone who has transitioned from a postdoc to industry) is that you should treat your postdoc like any other job. Generally it's a bad idea to announce you are looking for another job before you have a signed offer in hand, because it puts you in a very weak position. On the one hand, your host may be understanding and support you. On the other hand, they may look for a way to cut you out of the group. Either way, their reaction is not something you can control, and not a risk I would personally want to take.
I would not let the impact your departure will have on the work affect how you approach this situation. Ultimately that is not your responsibility. If the work is truly important to the PI and you are legitimately the only person who can do it, then they should hire you to do that work full time (I realize this isn't common in academia, but that's a flaw of the system you are working in). The fact that they haven't and won't is why you are in your current situation. I think it's more likely that either you are really not as irreplaceable as you think and the PI will find a student to get up to speed on what you've been doing, or it will turn out there is a path for the PI to achieve their main objectives without carrying on the direction you've been pursuing. Either way, the work and the PI will be fine. At the end of the day, there will be likely be some temporary pain associated with your departure, but that is completely normal ("part of the cost of doing business") and not your responsibility.
I think it's a good idea to leave on good terms if you can and try to give notice with some time to help finish off and/or transition work to others. But I don't think you should put yourself at risk to achieve that goal. Therefore, I think you should wait until you accept an offer to talk to your PI.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/18
| 1,591
| 6,923
|
<issue_start>username_0: I joined a PhD program in Germany 6 months ago. I have two supervisors here - one is a clinician and the other is from natural sciences background. I am really unhappy with the way I am being guided because really there is no guidance. The guy from the natural sciences background is my immediate supervisor. I have never seen him read any scientific papers. He also almost never participates in any scientific talks or conferences and even if he does his scientific work and presentation skills are sub-par. He never asks any scientific questions. The only inputs that I have received from him so far are regarding font size and margins.
Whenever I go to him with an idea, he says, 'Bravo! I was waiting for you to come up with this. I am really happy with your performance. Keep it up!' Initially, I thought that I am really a bright student but over time I realized that he says this for every idea of mine. I also tested him with absolutely rubbish ideas but his reaction remained the same.
Unfortunately, he has also hired other staff in the lab just as incompetent as him. All they want to do is finish their working hours and go home. Never have I received any scientific input from any of the post-docs or other lab members.
Now when I see presentations of other students, I get really worried because they are light years ahead of me. After asking them about how they manage to do such stellar work, they tell me that supervisor guides them to do so and also they also have lots of support from other members of the lab. As for improving their presentations, they often give mock seminars to their lab mates and receive a lot of valuable input from there.
Now, I do not want to be spoon-fed but nevertheless I need some guidance. I need someone to tell me if my line of thinking is right or wrong. I need someone who will point out flaws in my techniques. Neither my supervisor nor my lab mates can provide me this support. I got even more worried recently when a professor from another department clearly told me that I should continue in that lab only if my aim is to get a C grade PhD.
The thing is that I cannot change my current lab because I have already changed my lab once. The only way for me to get out of this mess is to make this work. Can someone suggest me on how to do good PhD given the above-mentioned circumstances? Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: He sounds like he has a permanent position and has given up any intellectual work.
If you are early in your PhD I would suggest to change positions, and find an advisor that is actively engaged in research (both in terms of keeping up with papers, but also participating in conferences and generating ideas).
Otherwise you will end up struggling to generate new research ideas and direction yourself, which even if it works will be sub-optimal compared to other colleagues that have a supportive supervisor that guides them and are also working themselves.
You need a supervisor who will both support your ideas like your current, but who will also provide you sufficient intellectual challenge to push you further. By simply telling you bravo, without asking any further questions (either on-spot or after some days after some thought) your advisor is not pulling their weight to properly guide your research.
I would say for your sanity and your future mental health, either try to see whether the 2nd advisor can be more actively engaged in guiding you, otherwise RUN. Or try to find some 3rd external advisor that might be more tricky to make the other 2 accept them and their ideas.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First, please realize that your position is not that bad. Your advisor is incompetent, but he also seems good-natured and supportive. That goes a long way. I used to work for a very incompetent professor, but this guy was the insecure type who would hide his mediocrity by pushing everybody down. His ideas were garbage and his advice always worse than useless.
The obvious answer is to change labs. You can change labs more than once. It's stressful, but the stress of working with an incompetent advisor will be much worse.
But assuming you really can't change labs: get someone to co-advise. In the experience I mentioned above, I soon realized that every other grad student in that lab was being "co-advised" by someone else, that is, someone else had taken the task of advising while the original professor kept the student as part of his lab (many reasons, including ego and funding.) The co-advisor can also be form another university. It's not a bad deal for them: they get to coauthor with you while someone else pays your stipend. They might even invite you to do mock presentations with them, etc. This is very common. In every research group I've belonged, there were always people (students/postdocs/visiting researchers) hanging around, socializing with our students and postocs and getting informal advice.
In my case, I did the co-advising thing, then never again spoke with my old advisor -- he was really useless. A semester later, I asked the new advisor if he could be my primary and the old one secondary, as that allowed the first one to save face. The next semester I fully changed research groups. Best decision of my life.
Another alternative is to make friends with postdocs. In my experience, they are all ready to start the role of advisor, and will welcome the interaction.
But again, keep in mind that your position is not ideal, but also not terrible.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There are at least two strategies that (may) work. I know successful examples of both (same incompetent advisor!). A caveat: I am a mathematician and things might/will be different in other fields.
1. A graduate student X arrived with a well-formed research plan. The student was fairly independent, and wrote a strong thesis (which eventually became a book) without any help from his advisor, found a postdoctoral position after PhD, now is a full professor in a top-50 university in the US.
2. A student Y published a couple of papers in rather obscure math journals while with the same advisor, from who he did not learn anything. (The advisor contributed nothing to the papers except for putting his name in the list of authors.) By the 4th year of studies, Y realized that he will finish with a thesis but his prospects afterwards will be very bleak since math they are learning is very shallow. Then Y applied to other PhD programs, got admitted to one in my department (I was on the admissions committee and understood student's situation quite well). The student then switched to a different (but somewhat related) research area. After his thesis defense, the student got a tenure-track position, now is a full professor...
In both cases students were strong enough to self-evaluate the quality of their papers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/18
| 650
| 2,798
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the guidelines for the statement of purpose for a PhD one of them says this: "A self-assessment of any past research experience and analytical skills.". This is my first ever statement of purpose and I'm not really familiar with it, plus I'm not an native English speaker, so I'm not sure I understood it correctly. Do I have to write about what I've done in research, like projects I participated in, the tasks I performed...? And what does analytical skills refer to?
Thank you in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, the SoP should be forward looking, not backward. What do you intend to study? The field and, if possible, the subfield. What are your goals for study and thereafter?
For the most part the CV details the past, not the SoP.
However, they are asking you for information about your experience and skills as they enable your goals and will help assure success in attaining them. By "analytical skills" they might mean nothing more than "relevant skills" though in some fields it might mean more, such as lab experience, library research skills, or whatever is most applicable to the field.
But, put the projects and tasks, etc. in the CV and only mention in the SoP them as they support future study.
Note that the SoP is usually considered a quite important part of the application in the US.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it means you should describe the research you have done in the past. Mention the project or projects you have worked on, describe your specific contributions and what your findings were, and why the result is relevant to the field.
Use specific examples and be explicit about what you did e.g. "I performed the G-blob colour calculation, finding that..." or "I wrote a Python code to analyse Q-cell data, which revealed that...". Try to use examples which are linked in some way to the research you would like to be doing in the PhD you are applying to, for example, "My finding that G-blobs are more brightly coloured than Q-cells is in line with the recent results of Prof. Ann Onymous's research group in which they showed that Q-cells are dull in the presence of L-spikes. I envisage a future project in which we could study the effects of L-spikes on G-blob colour."
It doesn't have to be the next Nobel Prize-winning idea, it just needs to demonstrate that you've thought a bit about the open problems in your field and where your work fits into the big picture.
In my field, analytical skills would probably refer to data analysis and programming skills, but in another field it might be different.
Lastly, send your draft statement around to lots of people to get feedback on it before you submit it, especially if you aren't confident with your English.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/18
| 735
| 2,862
|
<issue_start>username_0: Sometimes I want to cite a PhD thesis of someone who has a name in three parts. The latest example I came across was "<NAME>". Shope sounds like a last name, but is there a way to know for sure? His name does not appear on Google and this kind of ambiguity seems to happen all the time for me (my work involves looking at a large number of PhD theses).
This is even harder with non-English names, for me at least. In those cases, it is often impossible to even guess whether the name in the middle is the second of two first names or the first of two last names. How does one do this?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally, style issues are going to be controversial. Different places, different offices, different schools, different editors at journals, will have different policies. You should try to find out what the place you want to publish will prefer. Look for a style guide. Check how other authors have done things and gotten published.
Generally though, a good rule to default to, is to try to cite any article with as close to the original as you can reasonably achieve. If the original has a name in a particular form, order, format, etc., try to follow that as closely as you can. The same is true for things such as the title, sub-title, even down to what appears to be spelling or grammar errors in the cited title.
The reason to do this is because you want to make it as clear as possible what you are citing. Any change from the original will be a potential source of confusion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Every library is going to have indexed citation information for documents in their possession. Unless you have some rare document that's never been indexed anywhere, they'll have labeled meta data to go with the document.
Many theses are in ProQuest even if they aren't published anywhere else, and you'll find the name used in the way you should reference it. [For example](https://www.proquest.com/docview/302719825?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true),
>
> DAVIS, <NAME>, 1944-
>
>
> THE LATE PALEOLITHIC OF NORTHERN AFGHANISTAN.
>
>
> Columbia University, Ph.D., 1974
>
>
> Anthropology
>
>
>
clearly identifies "DAVIS" as the last name.
Ask a librarian at your institution for help if you can't find a document anywhere else.
There is no way to just "tell" from a name; you need to find how it's used to refer to the specific document you're looking at. Two people can have exactly the same set of names and partition them differently. It's somewhat common for kids to be named with a combination of their parents' names, such as taking one of their surnames (or former surnames) as a middle name, or keeping both names as a combined surname. Often in the latter case people will identify this with a hyphen, but not necessarily.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/18
| 936
| 4,109
|
<issue_start>username_0: When I was a student, I wrote a paper and submitted it to a journal. Having graduated, I am working for a company and am very busy. Recently, we got a revision for the paper and my prof asked me to do it. Unfortunately, I don't have time for it right now. Then, I got another email from him that if I cannot, he will ask another person to do it and change the name of the authors. He put my name as the third author, while I was responsible for everything for the paper and it has been published in my thesis and I was the first author. Now, I have a few questions:
* Can he change the author's name while in my thesis I am the first author?
* Suppose that he changes the name without my agreement, how can I stop him from publishing my paper in his name?<issue_comment>username_1: 1. Yes, your prof can make a change to the list of authors, but it would be un-unethical to do so unless the amount of contributions changes. I note also that the paper has passed the first round of reviews. Most (or all) publishers do not allowed new authors to be added or the order of authors to change after submission. This means your prof may fail to make any changes, unless he/she withdraws the paper and submits it as a new paper.
2. You only need to inform your prof that you will not sign off on transferring the copyright of your article to a publisher. Hopefully, this will dissuade your prof from any un-ethical actions.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would imagine your professor is trying to put some pressure on you. Maybe (likely!) you did not discuss the authorship details in enough detail in advance. Unilaterally changing the authorship is unethical, however, walking away from a group project in the worst possible moment without facilitating the transition in any way also leaves a bad taste. If the paper was rejected and due to resubmission, the renegotiation would be more straightforward.
A case could be made for the professor's perspective, if the revisions are a substantial amount of work: they would require someone else to do what you did almost from scratch, relying on the description in the first version on the manuscript alone. This could be similar to abandoning the paper altogether and starting it anew, where your contributions to the lab would be recognized but the claim to the first authorship would not be as rock solid. Walk a mile in their shoes, this scenario is fairly bad for both sides. You are not obliged to keep working for them, but they are not obliged to see this paper to completion, either, and hardlining the "not my problem" approach well may tarnish your professional reputation. Especially if you knew in advance you would be taking up that job demanding pretty much all of your time and energy and did nothing to mitigate the issues you are facing now (admittedly, this is not exclusively on you though, the professor should have raise these concerns before).
Having said that, I would advise you to focus on what you are and are not willing to do for this work. If you could make yourself available to someone taking this project over and help them with some questions, it would be reasonable to demand no changes in authorship. Otherwise, I would probably give it up if I were you: even if you have played the leading role in the paper, not cooperating with the rest of the team just enough to see the paper to completion is a bad move. As is usual in negotiations, a good strategy is offering the other side choices instead of shutting down their propositions.
Find something that works for all the parties involved. You can take a hard stance on authorship, but it is then on you to describe what will your responsibilities be and how are you planning to get this paper published. You could ask for an extension of resubmission deadlines, offer consultations or try to find time to work on it yourself, anything really as long as you do not just walk off. See the other side of the story, too.
The rest is as easy as stating "sorry, I do not think the change of authorship is appropriate".
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/18
| 968
| 4,245
|
<issue_start>username_0: The purpose of end-of-course surveys is to have feedback on the course overall.
However, the survey is more of an evaluation of the instructor than the course itself. A successful course depends more on how a student approaches it than how the instructor does. Obviously, most of the time a bad instructor implies a bad course even for students that have a commitment to their studies. Similarly, a student that takes a course without putting in the effort/hours required for a college course and still has a "high-school" mindset, will evaluate the course negatively.
I'm allowed to add questions to the survey and plan to do so in a way that gives students the opportunity to reflect on the responsibility they had to succeed in the course they are evaluating. Hopefully, some of them, will take ownership of their learning and approach college in a different way.
With this in mind, what are good custom questions to add to an end-of-course survey?<issue_comment>username_1: "Is the course too hard?", "Which part did you struggle the most?", "How did your prerequisites help you with the course?", "Did the course meet your expectation?", "Should the instructor provide additional help to students? and how?",... They are typical questions in our end-of-course survey. However, I think there is another problem.
*(The original post stating that the current end-of-course survey consists of 20 questions directly related to the question "How good is the professor?")*
At my university, end-of-course surveys are taken seriously as well. However, I have observed that my fellow students tend to systematically select a higher rating for each question regardless of their opinions, also there are many questions with "No Answer". It is because of the survey design is not good.
1. There are too many questions as well (like **20**); however, most of them are multiple-choice questions (rating from 1-10) without much description. Many students will just avoid thinking and select a very high rating or very low one without even reading questions to finish the survey.
2. There are a few optional short answer questions at the end of the survey. However, no one wants to answer these questions after randomly completing the first 20 MCQs.
In my opinion, students do not have an incentive to complete that long, boring survey in an honest manner. The number of questions should be **reduced** before adding any new question to the survey. Avoid using too many MCQs. Instead of using a scale (e.g. 1-10), we should add detailed description for each option (5 options would probably be the best). Avoid redundancy - do not ask many questions for the same thing. **"20"** for "How good is the professor/the course?" is clearly too much!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Partial frame change answer.
Starting with the point of view that *"A successful course depends more on how a student approaches it than how the instructor does."* to write your end of course survey questions is not great. Before you have even heard this year's evaluation of your course, you have concluded that your actions had minimal influence on student outcomes. Therefore there is little to be gained by making changes based on their perception.
But your absolutely right that encouraging them to reflect on their own agency is helpful.
If you come at this in good faith, I think it likely the students will sense that. Seeing you honestly reflecting on what you did well, and what might have been better, gives you more credibility to ask the same of them. Furthermore, I think you should be honest about what you want to do here.
Making a specific suggestion is tough without seeing the other questions, but to make a concrete one;
>
> Some of the responsibility for enabling you to succeed in this course is mine. For you specifically, was there some aspect you would have liked me to take more responsibility for? What assessment rule or guidance did you find most helpful?
>
>
>
>
> Some of the responsibility for enabling you to succeed in this course is yours. In this course, which of your own habits and practices were most useful to you? What do you think you will do differently in the future?
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/19
| 2,805
| 11,916
|
<issue_start>username_0: I live in Western Europe and began a CS degree 1.5 years ago. I had no prior programming experiences but the degree was aimed for beginners.
The male-female student ratio was 100:1 (as also stated by the official statistics). I was expecting this but I didn't let myself feel discouraged. However, whenever we had obligatory pair or groups projects, I had to deal with many difficult situations.
Sometimes my partner would code out my part of the task before we met in person to discuss the assignment, and then demand a "favor" back, others acted out aggressive and told me women expect guys to do everything for them. Another time another partner removed my name out of our projects despite me having done my part (+ writing all the comments and tests) so that I had to clear things up with my professor. And inumerous times they tried to turn our meetings for the assignments into dates and/or accused me of leading them on when I rejected their advances. I did have two or three classmates whom I trusted, but our professors demand we switch partners for every assignment.
The reason we have pair and group projects is because our professors know it's difficult to solve the assigments on our own (plus, a big part of software develpment is discussing and exchanging ideas and solutions).
I couldn't deal with the hostile environment so I dropped out despite my interest in programming. I come from a culture where gender is often segregated so I didn't really know how to deal with such advances/comments. Whenever I made my professors aware of the situation I was dismissed and told I just had to be more resilient and be more firm in my opinions.
My questions are: if I do end up retaking CS in a college environment again, how can I best avoid this? Should I go for a non-traditional route instead?<issue_comment>username_1: While the behaviour of your fellow students is not something I'd consider ubiquitous, it is sadly common enough to be matter of concern in computer science. My estimate is that you got unlucky in how much of this you encountered, and that would it be reasonable to expect much less of it if you try another university. But it seems difficult to predict well how a particular student cohort at a particular university will behave.
What you can do is to look for instituions where the faculty themselves are keen to have a welcoming environment for women in computer science. For example, in the UK departments can seek accredidation with the Athena Swan framework to demonstrate their strive for gender equality. You can check whether there is a "Women in CS" (or similar) group at a university you consider applying to.
At a well-run CS department, your complaints would have been taken very seriously.
Addendum: You mention that the gender ratio at your previous institution was 98:1. That is an extreme outlier that in itself would make me suspect that something is wrong. For comparison, in the UK about 13% of CS undergraduates are women. So on average, you could expect a gender ratio of around 10:1. Of course, that is still lopsided, but not nearly as bad.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I am so sorry for your situation. It makes me think that gender diversity is not at all the concern of the university, and the academic environment is full of prejudices towards women. However, I believe your situation is just an extreme outlier that is relevant only to the place you are living/studying.
As suggested in username_1's answer, you should consider institutions having a welcoming environment for women, probably in other countries. I think it is true for most large institutions where such issues are taken seriously. You should take into account gender diversity and culture of the university as well. M/F ratio is a good indication. You can also ask (female) alumnis of the programs you are interested in for their opinions (on LinkedIn).
Yet, even if you choose an environment where women are welcomed to pursue STEM degrees, there is no guarantee that you will not run into a situation like this (e.g. when you do a group project with some male students). Once you are in a better environment, you should ignore them and just do your best. You can do it.
Furthermore, I do not have official statistics, but from what I have observed, CS programs tend to have higher M/F ratio than that of IT programs. IT programs are professional programs. CS programs are more theoretical and mathematically heavy. This is just an oversimplification.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: So it's worth stating here that you are probably right, the hostile environment is a side effect of sexism. Not necessarily overt "women are stupid" sexism, more like a misconception that they were doing you a favour by doing your work for you, and it was unreasonable of you not to be willing to "give them a chance". This kind of sexism isn't acceptable, and it's actually more challenging to handle because the perpetrators don't think they are being sexist.
My sample size isn't massive (4 institutes), but I will say that in my limited experience, this problem is particularly bad in CS compared to Physics. Also, exactly how bad does vary greatly between institutes. username_1's answer has already given you great advice about finding an institute that is better organised to tackle these problems, and has a better culture.
You also asked for some advice on handling it personally. Though I know all such advice is easier said than done, there are two things that I would advise.
Good boundaries make good friends.
----------------------------------
Or at least, when you can't be good friends, good boundaries make good working relationships. The difficult bit is not responding to the guilt you feel when you enforce these boundaries.
When I need to tell someone "no" or "please stop doing X", even when I'm well prepared, I feel bad. I feel like they will like me less, I feel like I'm being antisocial, I feel like people will think I'm mean. And I'm not entirely wrong, people can be judgmental. But not saying "no" is normally worse, because then I will start to feel resentment. I will resent the person that I haven't told "stop" for not reading my mind and stopping anyway. They will sense that resentment and quite correctly decide my behaviour is unreasonable.
On the other hand, if I just say "please stop that" they are only annoyed for a day at most. However, they move on, and they feel more comfortable in the relationship, because they are clear about what is acceptable. The relationship feels more secure, because we understand each other better. They may perhaps realise that I don't want the kind of relationship they want to have, so they back off a bit, but that's ok, you don't need to be everyone's friend. You will still find it easier to work together.
As someone who was socialised as a woman (I am a trans man) saying "no" is one of the few social skills that women are really not taught well. It was something I learnt later in life. Being friends with people socialised as men has really helped me work on this. You may also find this is something you are able to get better at.
Student unions are normally very supportive.
--------------------------------------------
This one is likely a bit UK specific, because while the other places I've worked sometimes have student societies, they don't exist in the same way.
Where you do have a large student union, they are excellent. Normally left leaning, and inclined to activism; yours is exactly the sort of cause they would be championing. They can be a source of sympathy, advocates to help you communicate well with the lecturers, and advice on navigating your universities internal grievance channels if it comes it it.
Perhaps even consider looking at universities that have a large student lead organisation in particular. It could be a really good counterpoint to any issues you encounter in the academic departments.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Assuming no institutional fixes solve the problem, you can pretty much do 2-person projects by yourself and it will be fine.
For grading I generally expected a 2-person project to be maybe 50% more effort than a solo. Communication and lack there-of is a big drain on "2 people = 2 times the work" idea. But then take two strangers, still learning computer programming, and with no project management training -- I don't have to even tell you, since you've experienced it -- there's so much time wasted on misunderstandings, egos, miscommunication that 1 person could easily do a better job. I'm actually somewhat horrified group projects are being assigned before the Software Engineering course (where they actually teach you how to do group projects).
Ask if you can do solo projects. If the class has an odd number of students, you're helping. And partners drop out of class and so on -- the instructor is already grading a few 1-person projects. If needed, mention why you want this, but don't bother mentioning partners taking your name off, or coding out the part they want in advance. All group "throw them in the water" projects have that sort of nonsense. Stick to how you're tired of being sexually harassed by partners. No instructor wants to deal with the blowback from that. An advisor may be able to help -- maybe even with a finding a more sympathetic instructor.
And then, you're still allowed to study with the students you actually get along with. When you're learning, ummmm, using functions as arguments(?), you can still go over the examples with those students.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This will likely be an unpopular opinion, but - save yourself the money. Find a digital problem in your life, and solve it with the programming language of your choice. You'll learn what to do, but most importantly, what *not* to do. You will fail often. CS is one of those weird fields where you can learn absolutely anything and everything using free resources, and in my experience self-learners do better because they don't fall into the trap of always expecting to have a manual tell them how things work - they know how to figure things out with little resources.
I dropped out of college after a year because I felt they were teaching things not relevant to my career. 12 years later I'm a DevOps Engineer, and get paid about as much as you can reasonably get paid in this field. I learned programming (JavaScript, C++, few others), I learned Linux system administration (Ubuntu, CentOS), and my education didn't cost me a cent (aside from the wasted first year, of course).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: Adding to the already existing excellent answers:
In Germany (and probably in other countries as well) there are some universities that offer CS studies only for women\* for the exact reasons that made you drop out of the program (see examples [here](https://fiw.htw-berlin.de/), [here](https://www.bundeswehrkarriere.de/duales-studium-internationaler-frauenstudiengang-informatik-309) and [here](https://www.hs-bremen.de/en/study/degree-programme/international-womens-degree-programme-in-computer-science-bsc/), 1 and 2 in German). I am pretty sure that programs like these might exist in othere countries as well.
If you can't find a program like this, it is always good to find allies: the (few) other women\* and the (few) men\* that do not behave the way you described. If you are sitting in the same boat, you can find strenght in numbers.
Another suggestion is to instead of asking to work alone (as proposed in other answers) is to ask to work with a fixed group of people that you know you can work with without facing unwanted advanced, sexism or other kind of unacceptable behaviour.
Student unions, equal opportunties officers, women\*'s represetatives or other support groups exist to help you with such troubles.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/19
| 699
| 2,965
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I posted a question about including [humor in a personal statement](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/190635/humor-in-a-personal-statement) for PhD school applications. In this question, I mentioned that I work full-time as a carpenter, in addition to working towards a master's degree. A comment expressed that one possible concern of the admissions committees' may be my ability to successfully live on the stipend offered and not attempt to seek jobs outside of my TA duties (which I understand is not allowed).
Some background information:
* My master's is not funded nor do I receive any financial support from the school or my PI
* I work full time to cover the costs of tuition in order to avoid taking out loans in addition to the costs of commuting or other costs associated with attendance
**Questions**
1. Does my choice to work full-time, in addition to the fact that I work in a field far removed from my field of study, raise any red flags or make admissions committees question my ability to be a successful graduate student?
2. If the above is true, do I leave out this information about working in my personal statement/CV?
3. Currently, my statement mentions "I work since my education is self-funded" (not the exact wording). Does this statement suffice or is a more explicit explanation needed?<issue_comment>username_1: Very few doctoral admissions systems in the US would bother to consider this. The stipends, along with tuition remission, are considered adequate and they normally are for anyone with a frugal lifestyle. The doctoral education system, including TA and RA positions is intended (at least) to be able to support its students adequately (adequately).
But, if you'd rather be a carpenter than a TA, it will be difficult unless you work for billionaires, since without a TA you probably pay tuition, which can be very high; somewhere around the US medium income, IIRC.
So, what they want is someone who is likely to be successful and to not waste university (faculty) resources. Some "outside" interests and commitments can actually work against you in this regard.
Saying that you have worked on your own to support past education, however, is probably a plus since it shows commitment. But don't focus on this in a Statement of Purpose, which should be about the future, not the past.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the important distinction is between doing “outside” work as a Masters student and doing such work as a PhD student.
There are benefits to mentioning in a statement of personal history that you worked full time while pursuing previous degrees. The academy needs more people who come from middle-class and working-class backgrounds, and this conveys that information. It also makes previous performance more impressive.
You should not work full time during a PhD. This will raise red flags. PhD should be funded by the department.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/20
| 3,460
| 14,893
|
<issue_start>username_0: One professor at our institute gave all his students the same advice when it comes to Ph.D. application: apply to non-obvious programs at top universities. Here "obvious programs" refer to the program that aligns well with your area of study. For example, if you are a Master's student in Statistics, then Ph.D. programs in Statistics, Applied Math, or Computer Science are obvious choices, whereas those in Applied Psychology, Electrical Engineering, and Mechanical Engineering are the non-obvious programs he suggests applying to.
His rationale is that the title of a top school helps a lot in job hunting (particularly in the industry), so you should try to get into a school with good prestige. However, obvious programs in these schools will be very competitive with strong applicants having the same background as you, so you should apply to less popular programs instead. He believes the mismatch in area of study is not going to be an issue, because Ph.D. students from every department do applied math in their research, so our quantitive skills will be useful no matter where we go.
I wonder how far should I take this advice. In fact, I do have some interest in electrical engineering, but some schools only allow one application, so I can apply to one program only. On the one hand, I always find hardware accelerators very cool and own a few FPGAs as a hobbyist. In fact, I taught myself Verilog in my gap year (it was the pandemic), which is quite unusual for someone with a Bachelor's in Statistics, so you can tell I do have some passion for EE. Additionally, I have some research experience in deep learning with JAX on TPUs, which means I am at least a user of state-of-the-art hardware accelerators. Moreover, I wrote some CUDA in a course project and am quite good at programming in general, which the recommendation letters can hopefully prove. Finally, for better or worse, my mathematical background makes me a special applicant. On the other hand, I have absolutely zero research experience in EE and few relevant courses on my transcript, as I stopped playing with electronics when I enrolled at a top research university as a Master's student in Statistics: I never consider the option of pursuing a Ph.D. in EE, because I thought it only was for those who have a relevant background.
Is it a good idea for me to apply to EE instead of Statistics? If this question is too narrow for this site, can someone possibly convince the admission committee in the EE department that he/she will be a good Ph.D. candidate with little relevant research experience?<issue_comment>username_1: Probably, what your prof means is the following: find a discipline in which your skill is unique or not common, and critically, it adds value to the discipline. To give you an example, I know of an electrical engineer student who took up a fellowship with a very well-known group in cognitive science. There was a task that the group carried out manually and took days to complete. The student instead wrote a Matlab program and solved it in a few minutes. The researchers in the cognitive science group thought this student is a godsent. On the other hand, in electrical engineering, such a task is equivalent to a third or fourth year lab exercise.
Following the above point, many universities emphasize cross-disciplinary research nowadays and thus have many funding opportunities that require individuals with different expertise. These opportunities may be your door into a top university.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: "Ph.D. students from every department do applied math in their research" plus "Applied Psychology" does not compute. (FWIW, I did my Ph.D. in applied math and have coauthored about 20 papers in psychology with Ph.D. students of my psych prof wife.)
Suppose you came out of an applied math or statistics undergrad and did a Ph.D. in psychology, but wanted to stay in math or stats. (If you wanted to switch tracks into psychology, then presumably you would not be posting your question.) When after your psychology Ph.D. you start applying to math/stats jobs, then your employer may well be impressed by your school. But they will also have some *very* probing question about just why you followed this strange career path. "It was less competitive" will probably not be an answer they will like to hear.
Also, even the "non-obvious" Ph.D. programs at top schools are competitive. Yes, even the tiny little programs, simply because some people want to do a Ph.D. even in [Caucasology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasology), and there are simply very few spots that these few people strive mightily for.
Bottom line: I don't think this is very good advice.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: There is probably something valid in the advice, but it would be a mistake to treat that as the top/first level consideration. Much (much) more important is what your career goals are. If you choose a specialty for the doctorate simply because it gets you in the door more easily, but it binds you, at least in the early years, to something you have little interest in, then your long term career goals are harder (much) to meet. There is little worse in life than being trapped in a career path that isn't fulfilling.
After all, your best job opportunities will be in the same field as that of your doctoral study. It will, perhaps, be harder to find a position you would be happy with. Probably not impossible, but you will face the same conundrum - competition.
So, first, decide what your career goals really are. If they have nothing to do with psychology then I'd recommend against joining a psych department just because they use applied math.
If a "non obvious" path is still on the main line to your real objectives, then fine. Otherwise choose a path that is most likely to get you to where you want to go.
Moreover, you might also find a lot of competition for a slot on that non-obvious path, just as much as on the obvious one. But that depends on your academic history and perceived suitability for certain study. In particular if a STEM department is large but a non-STEM department is small, you might find even more competition in the latter.
First, decide on what you really want. The pursue it relentlessly.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: If you replace "apply" with "consider" then this is probably good advice, if for no other reason that to help open yourself to wider possibilities and thinking outside the box a little bit.
At the same time, though, I would also urge you to consider two very specific questions:
First, if you are passionate about Subject X (enough so that it is the topic of your Masters degree, and the natural/obvious topic of your PhD) do you really want to spend another four-ish years, minimum, immersed in a detailed study of Subject Y?
Maybe you do! Some people change focus at some point in their career, some have interests so broad as to support this. The answer is not automatically "No." But it's not automatically "Yes," either. It is a question to consider carefully, and if the only reason you are doing this is a tiny degree of competitive advantage, I would consider it *very* carefully.
Second, PhD programs generally come with breadth requirements. For each non-obvious program you consider applying to, you simply must look over that program's breadth requirements *and schedule for completing them* to determine if they are realistic. They might simply not be. Jumping from stats to electrical engineering (or vice-versa) is not impossible. But those breadth requirements, especially qualifying exams, are going to be ferocious.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I had thought of this when entering grad school. I had an undergrad in EE and there were all sorts of options including statistics or even forestry (e.g., tracking mammals with sensors). I was specifically interested in signal processing, and the potential applications are almost endless.
In the end, I applied in EE and got a master's and PhD. I was very interested in the mathematics of waveforms but in my own master's and PhD work there very little use of waveforms and their math, but lots of linear algebra, statistics, and related work with algorithms. I am now a software engineer.
So I went to an 'obvious' programs, but there are several sub-fields of electrical engineering, so even in that choice one has to be discerning.
One caution: It is somewhat hard to pass the written qualifiers in a technical program, and if you did not get an undergrad degree in this program, it would be **very** difficult to pass the qualifiers. There is certainly EE work that uses statistics, but if one came to the qualifiers with only a statistics background it would require an enormous amount of preparation to actually pass.
I am in the USA and my PhD was obtained in the 1990's, so some things have changed, but I think the basics of understanding the undergrad material needed to pass the qualifiers has not changed.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> His rationale is that the title of a top school helps a lot in job hunting (particularly in the industry), so you should try to get into a school with good prestige.
>
>
>
I agree with this to a point. It is true that, all things being equal, a higher prestige school will be better for your CV than a lower prestige school. *However*, more important is your passion and research output. You can only be passionate and have enough drive to complete research if you study a topic that you are truly interested in. Going to a prestigious school and then accomplishing nothing because you are depressed about how much time you are spending on topics you didn't want to study in the first place will not lead to better job opportunities later.
So, the most important thing is finding a place where you can study what you are passionate in and be successful. Prestige is a secondary consideration. It's not a bad idea to apply to a "non-obvious" program if you are genuinely interested in making a career in the topic of that other program, but only with the context that this consideration is much less important than doing something you love.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I see a logical disconnect in the advice. In your example, if you have a Masters degree in statistics, then electrical engineering is a non-obvious choice for a PhD. That part is true, these two degrees are related but not the most straight-forward fit.
But then the conclusion appears to be that electrical engineering is easier to get into than statistics. That would be true only if electrical engineering is a non-obvious choice for PhDs in general, for the population of all candidates regardless of their Masters which at least for this example is definitely wrong.
So if you want to use this advice I think you need to start from the opposite direction. First identify PhD programs that are non-obvious in general and therefore might be somewhat easier to get into. Then check whether the Masters degree you have is at least somewhat of a fit for these programs and if that is the case it might be easier to get into these programs than into a popular PhD program.
The caveat spelled out in other answers that you should only apply to PhD programs you are genuinly interested in of course still applies. Getting into a PhD program you don't actually want is a huge waste for all involved, please don't do that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Such cross-disciplinary curriculum is a tradeoff: you broaden your potential research or employment opportunities, at the expense of expertise. It may be a good idea if you don't know which field of study you prefer, but not so much if you already have a clear preference.
For instance, if you're a Computer Science graduate with a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, you'll be able to apply to both programming and mechanical design positions in industry. However, you will be seen as an inferior candidate for a programming job compared to someone who has a CS masters degree and a Ph.D. in CS, or even to someone with a CS masters degree and 3-5 years of experience (which they got while you were busy with your Ph.D. degree).
The fact that both CS and ME require math will not matter much. In CS you'll probably learn queues and graphs, while in ME you'll concentrate on tensors and the like. There will be some overlap, sure, but don't overestimate it.
The value of a top school degree depends a lot on the country. In some places a the fact that your degree comes from a top-rated school or university will matter more than whether you studied CS or ME. Unfortunately, such top schools tend not to have "non-obvious programs" with less competitive admission criteria, getting into an ME program in such school will likely be as hard as getting into CS.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: I have some personal experience which you may find relevant. I switched fields at each stage of my academic career. I have a Bachelor's in Physics, a Master's in Environmental Engineering, and a Ph.D. in Biology. I originally applied for several Ph.D. positions which were much more closely related to my Master's degree research, but did not even get called for an interview for the first few. (I don't know what country you are based in, Ph.D. admissions processes vary. I was applying to programs in Sweden, where most Ph.D. students are hired to work on a specific research project.) I saw the position in biology advertised and thought I was unlikely to get it given my background. However, the research project sounded very interesting, and was related to an existing hobby of mine, so I applied for it too, and it is the one I got.
I later had a conversation with my Ph.D. supervisor about why he selected me given that there were many other candidates for my position who had done their master's degree in Biology. He said it was because I seemed genuinely interested in the project, I had skills which would be relevant, I seemed like a strong student, and that anyway the research experience of a master's degree is equivalent to only the first 6 months of a PhD. I have found that skills I picked up in my earlier fields (among them programming and statistics) have been very helpful to me in biology, in part because they are more rare among biology students.
I think your professor's advice is good, if you take it as "you don't have to apply to just a statistics or applied math program, you should think more broadly because your skills will be useful in other fields too." As other answers have said though, you should not apply to a program in a new field just because you think it will be easier to get (although in my case it seems to have been true!). Only enter a Ph.D. program if you actually want to work in that field!
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/20
| 3,280
| 13,830
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently in a PhD program in Electrical Engineering. Sometimes, my adviser will send me papers with a small note such as "I thought this may be relevant to your work. Please have a look and see if it is helpful." Because I'm relatively new to the field that I'm working in, reading a paper, even if not as rigorously, takes me some time. The main reason is that I am often not familiar with the technical terms in the paper, so I need to look them up while skimming.
While I appreciate my adviser's consideration for sending me paper X, it will often be the case that I am working on implementing something from paper Y when they send me paper X to read. Paper Y could have been a previous paper that my adviser recommended, or it could be one that I found.
Because these papers are technical in nature, so that only reading the abstract would not give me a good enough idea of whether they are helpful or not, I feel that my progress towards paper Y would be slowed down considerably if I split my time between reading paper X and working on paper Y, as the repeated context switching would waste some time. This is especially true if my adviser sends me more than one paper to look through.
I've added below some ways I thought of proceeding, and I'd appreciate any feedback on them, or any another way that I haven't mentioned.
1. Thank my adviser for sending over the papers, and let them know that I will get to them as soon as I'm done with the current paper that I'm reading/working on. I'm not sure if this approach would be considered rude or not.
2. Drop the current paper that I'm reading/working on and focus on the paper(s) that my adviser sent over. While this may please my adviser, I feel that my own progress would slow down, especially since I would be constantly reading over papers that my adviser sends over and not actually getting any work done.
3. Split my time between the papers that I'm working on and the papers that my adviser sends me. As I mentioned, because of the repeated context switching, I feel that this approach would slow me down.<issue_comment>username_1: As you mentioned in the comment section, since your supervisor gives you only 1-2 papers per week to read, I think it is totally possible for you to handle more than this. It seems that you spend too much time for a paper, but it is understandable as you are new to the field. It will take you some time to be familiar with the field. Eventually your understanding will be better, but you will still have to improve/practice reading skills. Knowing what to read and how to read effectively is important. Your time is limited.
Also, if your supervisor sends you something to read, it is usually something useful. It does not mean that you have to read it now.
I have my own strategy for reading papers. It does not work for everyone, but it is similar to (3). Assume that I have many papers to read. I choose one of them and spend some time on reading the first 2-3 important sections of that paper. Then I move to another one and repeat the same process. I keep doing it again and again until everything is finished. It also helps me cope with getting bored with reading a very long paper.
Last but not least, it is helpful to take notes as you read.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Basically, if they send you a paper, saying it is relevant, then you should read it. If they don't send a paper copy then print it out and put the date received on it so that you can sort them as needed. (See below for "why" paper.)
But you are busy, so you need a way to proceed to make this reading "easy" to accomplish.
Here is a pro tip for any scholar. Always have something immediately available to read no matter where you are. This was early advice to all of our doctoral students.
Whenever you are "out and about" have one or two of the papers with you. Also carry a pen so that you can annotate them, and perhaps a highlighter. Optionally, carry a few index cards as well so that you can take notes external to the papers and arrange them as needed later.
Now, whenever you have a few moments of dead time, perhaps waiting for your lunch to be delivered or you are waiting for a bus (or riding one), pull out one of the papers (or a few of the index cards) that you are carrying and read or review what is before you. This turns "wasted" time into productive time.
Yes, you should thank them. No, you shouldn't interrupt all other work to read the new paper unless the supervisor strongly recommends it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You may talk about this with your advisor, but I strongly suspect that an advisor sending you a paper does by no way mean that you should read it immediately. Most probably the advisor was doing some research on their own, found that paper, thought that it may be useful for you, and immediately sent it to you so that neither them nor you will forget about it. But it should not be considered an immediate call-to-action.
So what you can do is schedule some time for reading papers, say each Monday morning, and you postpone any new paper till next Monday (unless there are strong reasons to read the paper earlier, of course). (Obviously the period may be different, depending on your situation and suggestions from your advisor.) If before that your advisor asks whether you have read the paper, you simply reply that you were working on , and you plan to read the papers on Monday. (And obviously do it, and this includes having some system so that you do not forget which papers you advisor has sent to you. This may be a simple "mark-it-unread-in-email-inbox", or a todo list, or just "print-it-out-and-put-into-a-physical-to-read-folder", etc.)
This way you will not have that much context switching, and at the same time you will thoroughly read the papers.
Probably you don't even need to reply to your advisor email, or just reply with a simple "received, thank you" (this depends on your advisor and general culture, of course).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Lots of good advice\* but I'd like to emphasize that the strategies urged upon you (keep up the physical work, but make regular time for reading papers in addition) will be *valuable to you*. How many of us find things when writing the thesis introduction and background at the end of the PhD project that we wish we had known *before* we did the experiments? One here!
\*which I can't comment on due to insufficient reputation - else I would just add a short comment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: When I was starting out in my PhD I used to have this same problem that you're having. I realised after a year or so that when my supervisor read a paper, what he meant by this was that he had read the abstract, and then opened it up and flicked through the equations. What reading a paper meant to me at this point was that I would go through every line in detail and try to understand everything I could, following references for things I didn't understand and deriving equations.
So I would advise you that, an important part of the process of doing a PhD is learning how to read texts at different depths. I guess at the start you would be likely to need to read things in a bit more depth than your supervisor to understand as much as they do, but it's unlikely that they expect you to read everything that they're suggesting a lot of detail.
If you're unsure, you could also try asking your supervisor, "how in-depth do you think I should read this paper?", or "how much time do you think it would be worth investing on this paper?"
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: (This is an attempt to summarize the advice given in the other answers and comments in a more hands-on form.)
Your supervisor is asking you to *have a look* at the paper, which is not the same thing as reading it. Your supervisor is probably expecting you to quickly browse through the paper to form a first impression of its relevance to your work.
What I'd do is what others are suggesting: spend 15-30 minutes with the paper, and with Google, to answer the following questions:
* What does the paper try to do?
* How can this be relevant to your work?
* Do you think studying it more will be worth your time?
* Why? / Why not?
The answers should all be one or two sentences. Write them down. If you can't decide on an answer, write down which questions you need an answer to first. File the results in your list of known papers. Discuss these results at the next meeting with your advisor; they may be interested in your findings and they should be able to advise you how to proceed.
The goal here is not to understand papers in depth, but to navigate the space of papers. Your advisor can help you with this, but only if you can establish a dialogue on what you're finding.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Welcome to being an academic.
One important distinction that many younger academics don't make is "being ready to *hear/read*" vs "being ready to *understand*". Not every paper that is sent to you should be read in full detail. Or even in partial detail.
There is one broader lesson here, the way mentors/advisers interact with you is as much the lesson as whatever technical content they tell you.
When I got to grad school my adviser would talk about math in ways that sounded unhinged and weird to me. But he is an excellent mathematician. It was the way *I* was talking about mathematics that was wrong not the way *he* talked about mathematics. He was (still is) better than me. When I defended my PhD we went out to dinner and I was talking in the same "unhinged" way. It's just a matter of information throughput.
One thing that I think is missing from your calculations here and from some other answers is *sending papers to each other is how academics interact*. Your adviser is sending you papers partly so you can read them and learn from them. They are also sending you papers because that is how you should interact with other academics you work with. I send papers to people literally everyday almost. I get papers sent to me almost literally everyday. This is just being an academic.
As for how much detail etc. do you read them? If you're asking this question, you're thinking about this very wrongly. You're an academic now. It's your decision. How relevant or interesting is the paper? Not every paper should be read the same way. Some I've poured over and others I've skimmed. It's your call because you're the researcher.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: tl;dr: Talk to your advisor about this.
---------------------------------------
>
> What should I do when my advisor tells me to [etc. etc.]?
>
>
>
The answer to this question template is most usually: Talk to your advisor and coordinate their expectation from you. Not every time you get this message from them, but when it happens the first time, schedule a chat at their office or remotely; tell them you want to attend to the request/suggestion they made; explain that you are not sure exactly what they expect in terms of scope/breadth/etc., and you would like for "meta-guidance" on that.
**It is ok not to know how to best handle such requests and to ask to be told what to do. You will not appear foolish, argumentative or ungrateful.**
Specifically in your case,
>
> Because I'm relatively new to the field that I'm working in, reading a paper, even if not as rigorously, takes me some time. The main reason is etc. etc.
>
>
>
Tell your advisor that. Ask them whether they think you should invest the time to read rigorously, or whether they mean skimming the paper, or reading abstract / abstract & intro.
>
> current paper that I'm reading/working on
>
>
>
talk to your advisor about prioritizing or scheduling ongoing work (including reading) with their incoming suggestions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Authors include abstracts for a reason, my advice is to go through the abstracts, and then prioritize into 3 buckets (read the whole dang paper ensure I understand everything, skim the paper for important points, skip/read later). It sounds like not everything your advisor is sending is going to be 100% relevant (just, maybe relevant). If you do this you will get a sense of which papers are seminal real quick because everyone will be citing those papers. If one of those landed in your skip pile, you pivot to read the whole dang thing.
Now, I know you said that utilizing the abstracts is probably not good enough. I actually agree with that point. You are a student, you need to get your hands dirty with the technical aspects. However, you can still prioritize based on the abstracts. My 3 categories could be broken down like this:
```
Paper appears directly applicable to your research topic: read the whole paper
Paper appears to only be tangentially related to research topic: skim the paper
Paper appears not to be very relevant for your topic: read later
```
I would suggest doing your reading with a study journal. I like the hard bound, lined journals, with page numbers and a table of contents section. That way you can create a list of what you read in the table of contents and where you can find your notes on it later by page number in your journal. The hard bound physical journal works well for me because it is sturdy, doesn't require power, and I won't get distracted by browsing the internet. But you do you, it works for me. Some folks like bibliographic tools and they are really helpful when you actually go to write so take my suggestion with a grain of salt.
The other thing is that I wouldn't try to reproduce the papers. There is value in that as a grad student, but you should just try to understand the papers. Make notes about them, and do your own thing later.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/20
| 1,020
| 4,261
|
<issue_start>username_0: There's a large, publicly available data-set that, in my opinion, has been horribly under-analysed. I can only find one paper that seems to use the data from it and I think there's some significant value in going through that data, identifying trends and performing a proper analysis of it.
That being said, I've never written a paper that's purely based on analysing a pre-existing dataset before. I'm used to the hypothesis, test, analyse, conclusion sort of structure, so this is alien territory to me.
I believe that there are 4 categories of data within the set that would benefit from being explored somewhat separately, although they're not entirely distinct.
As things stand, I can think of two possible ways of structuring my article:
```
data/
├─ cat a
├─ cat b
├─ cat c
analysis/
├─ cat a
├─ cat b
├─ cat c
conclusions/
```
Or
```
cat a/
├─ data
├─ analysis
cat b/
├─ data
├─ analysis
cat c/
├─ data
├─ analysis
conclusions/
```
However, neither of these feel quite right and I'm not really sure where I'd put the analysis of where cat a might imply x about cat b. I'm also not really sure what (if anything) I'd write in terms of methodology, since most of the work is analysis, as the data has already been collected.
Is there a sort of standard approach to this? If not, what would people recommend?<issue_comment>username_1: If there is synergy between the groupings then probably the first option. The more distinct they are the more it pushes toward the second. You have to decide.
In the first case you can describe those synergies better in the analysis part since all have been seen already.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you are running into this problem because there is a deeper issue. Namely, you haven't identified a story or message that you want to tell with this paper.
Now, there's nothing wrong with analyzing old data sets and publishing the results. There are many quite good papers that do this (admittedly I don't know what field you are in; possibly you would need to consider publishing in a journal outside of your norm). There are many possible reasons to write such a paper, for example:
1. There is a new analysis method that can be applied to old data to obtain new results.
2. There is a new insight that you've found in the data that people hadn't appreciated before.
3. Given knowledge of some major event that happened later, you can retroactively look at historical data to see if there were hints in old data preceding that event.
4. The dataset is particularly complete and can be used as a baseline to compare future results to.
Each of these possibilities suggests a different structure for the paper. Using the examples above:
1. Write a section explaining the new analysis method(s), give a brief review of the data set, and present the results of your new analysis.
2. Review the data set and how it was analyzed previously, explain what feature was not appreciated and if possible why it was not appreciated, and present your new insight.
3. Review the historical and new data, then present the results of your analysis of the historical data.
4. Explain why the data set is very interesting and complete and show what performance metrics are achieved in different categories.
I think the issue you are running into is that "we analyzed some old data because it was there" is not in itself a very compelling idea for a paper. I think there is very likely more to it than that, but you just haven't articulated this clearly (to us and maybe to yourself). You wrote, "in my opinion, [the dataset] has been horribly under-analysed." *Why* do you think this? Are you expecting to find something interesting that was missed? Do you think it is a good data set for benchmarking? If you are "just fishing" through old data to see if there's anything there, be aware there's a risk to doing that precisely because it might turn out that you don't find anything interesting and don't have a new method to present.
So, I think you need to clarify why this project is interesting (perhaps for yourself). Once this is clear, then the structure of the paper should follow naturally from how to logically communicate that information.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/20
| 347
| 1,513
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have submitted my PhD application. I like it very much but I want to update my motivation letter with more details.
Should I do it?
I don't know if this kind of behaviour is too pushy or impolite.
The position is in the Netherlands.<issue_comment>username_1: If I was the person who got the application, I'd reply with a polite "Thank you" and then ignore the email. My life, like that of many of my colleagues, consists of too many 2-minute processes that end up taking so many hours of my life, and replacing one document by another one in some system (or just in my own files) is one more of those.
The way I'd be thinking about this is that if an applicant can't be bothered with getting the final version of their documents together before they send them off, then that's on them and they will just have to deal with being evaluated based on the documents they submitted.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There is a high chance that the professor couldn't update it anyway. When you submitted the application did you send the files directly to the professor or to a central University system? If it was a university system, then the professor probably doesn't have write access to the system. You might then have a chance if you email the contact person for the applications, especially if the deadline for applications hasn't passed. If its now after the deadline then I expect even if they could they wouldn't update the files (to be fair to all applicants).
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/21
| 1,424
| 5,775
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a master student employed at a company as a co-op intern. For the first half to two-thirds of the program I had really poor mental health and had extreme difficulty to focus on anything. I only recovered a little during the last third of the program (still worse than my usual state). I could only scrabble together a so-called research project in the final months just so I had something to show during meetings, which I'm already very unhappy with. Now, months later, I just realised that in my panicked state I forgot to do even some basic research on existing literature. This is both mortifying and makes me feel like I have wasted so much time.
The master program is ending soon and the plan is to stay at the company after graduation. Despite being unhappy with the work I've done, I don't think my graduation is directly at risk. My supervisors at the company and the university all expressed interest in continuing working on the project and maybe pursue some kind of publication.
My questions:
1. How to talk about the situation with them without appearing incompetent or using mental health as an excuse etc? I feel it's important to clean up the situation with my supervisors for the sake of planling future works.
2. How open should I be with my supervisors at the university vs. the company?
3. Since working on this project has been such a painful and futile experience, I find myself repulsed by the prospect of continuing working on it. But I don't have a good reason to abandon it. Is there any suggestion on how to make this less unpleasant?
Although I'm not necessarily pursuing anything in academia in the foreseeable future, I'd very much like to keep a good relationship with my academic supervisor.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you need to look at this project with fresh eyes. Pretend that someone else had done the work and you had to decide what to do next.
1. Does the research question still seem viable/interesting? Answering this may require doing the literature review that you should have done some time ago.
2. Do you trust any of your previous results?
a. If not, what would it take to make you trust them? Can you fix them up within a week or two?
b. If so, are the results promising?
3. Did you build tools that might be useful for future work? If they are not in a good state, what would it take to improve them?
4. Can you boil down your "story" to one sentence? "Up to now, I did \_\_\_; next I will focus on \_\_"? Even if the previous work seems insignificant to you, it is still helpful (for you and for others) to factorize the project like this.
After you have objectively inventoried the situation, you will be in a better position to decide how to proceed (or whether you want to proceed).
As for talking to your supervisors, I would try to strike the right balance:
* They will likely welcome technical discussion of the above points, including your recommendations and your level of interest in continued work.
* If you like, you can acknowledge that you are not happy with your past performance and believe you will be able to do better in future. This is likely to be a welcome admission regardless of whether or not they have noticed a problem.
* Give a candid assessment of what the project would need. You can avoid framing this as "I did a bad job and here's what it would take to fix it." Rather, frame it neutrally: "Currently, we have X but to do this properly, I would need to build Y."
* If you would like to share your mental health concerns, you can, but be concise. Even if your boss or professor is understanding, you should avoid using them as a therapist. Rather, think about what they need to know in order to objectively accommodate and evaluate you.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> How to talk about the situation with them without appearing incompetent or using mental health as an excuse?
>
>
>
You could consider getting a psychiatrist to write a formal letter about your condition/state. It has the legitimacy of a medical excuse, and the formality of the business world. It’s also concise. I would be surprised if they did not respond with understanding. The people you work with may have had the same experiences, unbeknownst to you.
Second, find someone in the organization you find understanding to talk with. Set an appointment for a private meeting, or find a moment to speak aside with them. I know someone who had an anxiety disorder related to phone calls. She explained it to her boss and they were more than willing to adapt her job to fit her needs.
>
> I feel it's important to clean up the situation with my supervisors
> for the sake of planling future works.
>
>
>
Consult with psychologists to establish a treatment plan. Include in your medical report that you are cooperating with doctors to address the problem.
>
> How open should I be with my supervisors at the university vs. the company?
>
>
>
The type of organization isn’t important, it is the personality of who you work with and the work culture. Understanding professors/bosses will be understanding. Unempathetic ones will not be.
>
> Since working on this project has been such a painful and futile experience, I find myself repulsed by the prospect of continuing working on it. But I don't have a good reason to abandon it.
>
>
>
If you find another job or preoccupation, that would be as good a reason as any to move to something different.
>
> Is there any suggestion on how to make this less unpleasant?
>
>
>
Psychological treatment. Psychiatrists and psychotherapists can offer you different management strategies.
(From personal experience, going on 3 medications has helped me almost indescribably.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/21
| 782
| 3,497
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently applying for the Ph.D. programs in the United States. My academic instructor has been notified that he violated some immigration regulations (he is not U.S. resident) and he lost his affiliation. Now he's in transition and applying for his next position.
We had very good collaboration and I know that he will write a strong letter for me. However I'm now a bit concerned that whether his letter will have any negative impact to my application, since faculties from other universities don't know his situation. I got different opinions on this problem and some people suggest me to re-consider whether I can use his letter.
So how will the faculties from other universities treat this case? Personally he told me that he don't think this would be an issue for my application. But I just don't know how others would think about it.
If there are some potential issues, what should I do to decrease the negative impact?<issue_comment>username_1: If the letter writer adds a short note to their letter explaining the lack of affiliation at the moment then it should be fine. They don't need to explain any violations, but just that visa issues required their exit.
It shouldn't be construed as reflecting on you. It is individuals, however, who make their decisions, so it is impossible to give guarantees.
It isn't outside the range of possibility that the institution won't object if they use their former affiliation, provided they were in "good standing" when they left. But they should ask. An appeal on behalf of yourself would probably help. "I'd like to use U of X as affiliation for purposes of writing a letter of recommendation for Y".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A letter from a person who appears to be unemployed (and is technically unemployed) can indeed be less effective than a letter from a person with a stable academic position. Unless the researcher is so well-known that they can count on their reputation preceding them anywhere the letter is sent, the fact that they can sign the letter only with their name and no “Professor” title, and the fact that they cannot use an institutional letterhead, are all things that seem likely to limit the effectiveness of the recommendation, due to either conscious or subconscious bias. By how much exactly, it seems impossible to say.
One way to try to mitigate the harm is for the letter writer to provide a concise and clear explanation of their situation and the reason why they do not hold a position. The explanation has to come from the letter writer, not from you. (They are vouching for you, so it’d be pretty strange if you first of all had to vouch for them in order for their recommendation to appear credible...)
Moreover, the explanation has to be of a fairly innocuous nature if you want this harm-reduction approach to work. For example, the person leaving their job because of health reasons would qualify. “Violated some immigration regulations” could mean all sorts of things, and maybe some of them are innocuous (in which case the explanation should be more specific), but I wouldn’t count on everyone seeing things that way; immigration in the US is a sensitive topic on which people hold diverse views.
Basically, if there is anything about this person’s behavior that led them to lose their job that you think some people might find objectionable, then you are probably better off getting a letter of recommendation from someone else.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/21
| 1,436
| 6,067
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had taken a year break after my masters, before seriously applying to PhD programs. The reason was that I was stressed and burnt out, especially during the COVID times, and wasn't ready for a PhD directly after 5 years of university, and felt like I should take a break. Even though I had applied to 1-2 places due to the insistence of my parents, and for the sake of easing my conscience that I wasn't applying anywhere, I did not put my heart and soul into the applications like I would have liked to.
Now that I have taken a break, and have had time to think about it, stay away from mathematics for a while, or have read some mathematics that I like in my own pace (Nothing hugely substantial in terms of my future plans, but I think I really needed the break, to clear my mind.), I am applying this academic cycle.
The problem is, one program asks me for any situations or circumstances that I had for any significant gaps in my education period, and they claim that the information is voluntary and will not affect my application negatively. But as I understand it, they probably mean reasons like an illness, family emergency, having a child, or some other emergencies that could not be avoided. I am doubtful whether taking a break because I was stressed (of which I have no concrete proof, than my own feelings), or was unable decide whether I want to continue with a PhD then (but the fact that I want to, is as clear as day to me now), would count as a valid reason.
Moreover, I do not understand how can something be used to better understand the application, but still not be used negatively.
So, do you think it's a better idea to mention these reasons in the application, or would it be better to avoid it altogether?
Also, seems like [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55441/146761) would be similar to mine, but it does not address what to do if the program application asks for a reason for the break.
Edit : I realize that I might have potentially miscommunicated the time I got out of university. It was in this (2022) summer that my masters got over. When I mean I took a year break, I just mean that I would only be admitted in the coming fall, and hence it would be a year after my masters; and not that one year has already passed after me finishing my masters.<issue_comment>username_1: Describing the break as caused by "burn out" is probably a mistake. It is a common enough practice that it probably needs no explanation unless asked. But "I felt I needed a break to consider options" is better than "I was burned out from five years of study."
If you let the break go on too long, however, it makes applying more difficult as you start to lose contact with potential letter writers.
And, if there are still mental health issues, talk to a professional so that you develop a coping plan that will carry you through several more years of intense study.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> But as I understand it, they probably mean reasons like an illness,
>
>
>
Stress, particularly stress which prevents you from working or studying effectively, [is a health condition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_stress#Negative_health_and_other_effects). Burnout [is also a health condition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_burnout).
For the purposes of your application, it doesn't really matter that you don't have a formal diagnosis from a doctor or a psychologist. They wouldn't ask to see evidence of a diagnosis anyway; if they would demand you to substantiate your answer, then this field on the form wouldn't be voluntary.
If you were asking for adjustments (e.g. more time on exams) due to a health condition then that's when you would be asked for evidence.
>
> Moreover, I do not understand how can something be used to better understand the application, but still not be used negatively.
>
>
>
The main things they are interested in here are:
* If your interruption was caused by something that could happen again during your studies, and
* Whether your interruption has left you "out of practice" with the subject, or if you have maintained your knowledge and skills in the meantime.
It's difficult to say what process they might have in place to ensure that information you provide about it doesn't negatively affect your application. There are several possible processes; the simplest is that they could just "assume the worst" if you don't write anything, but in that case they should warn you that leaving the field blank could harm your application.
I could speculate about other possible processes they might have in place, but I doubt that would be helpful. It certainly seems like there are things someone *could* write in this field which would be worse than not writing anything, which it wouldn't be rational for the institution to ignore. For an extreme hypothetical, if an applicant wrote *"I spent five years in prison for maiming my previous supervisor, Dr. Smith"* and Dr. Smith worked in the department they were applying to, I sure hope it would negatively affect their chances of admission.
So I wouldn't take the words "will not affect your application negatively" literally, rather I think what they mean is that if there is anything in there which might suggest a problem for your future studies, but you're an otherwise promising applicant, then they are more interested in working with you to prevent that problem, rather than rejecting you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> The problem is, one program asks me for any situations or circumstances that I had for any significant gaps in my education period
>
>
>
Not going straight to a PhD after your master's is not a "gap in your education period." Especially not if you went straight into the master's after undergrad!
It sounds like they are asking about if you had to take time off in your undergrad or something. I don't think this applies to you and you don't need to answer it with an explanation about burnout.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/21
| 445
| 1,822
|
<issue_start>username_0: I’m a freshman attending a community college. I’m taking 17 credits, 5 of which are from my MTH 111 class. I have struggled with sepsis and infection over the past year and got sick in the middle of the term, causing me to fall behind in due dates and information in the class. It is too late for me to withdraw from or drop the class, however in the grading options I have an option between A-F grading or Audit grading. I have no idea what to do and I need advice. Should I change the grading style or just fail the class?<issue_comment>username_1: Many institutions allow a hardship withdrawal after the deadline. Check with the registrar's office. You will likely have to produce documentation that you were treated by a doctor.
If a hardship withdrawal is not available, ask what changing to audit grading will do to your GPA and how it will show on your transcript. It will likely be better than a grade of F.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Failing the class means you hurt your GPA and do not get credit for the class.
Taking an audit grade will not affect your GPA (but check the specific details at your school), though you will not get those five credit hours.
Another option, depending on how far behind you are, could be to take an incomplete and wrap up the class next semester. The details would be negotiated with the instructor. This risks failing the class but would give you some time to study enough to pass. If you pass, you get the five credit hours. I did this once in college, and it was not a big deal. (In a class of 20-30, I was not even the only student who took an incomplete and took the final exam the next semester.)
Medical issues often get special consideration, so there might be even more options if you talk to your instructor or advisor.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/21
| 1,475
| 6,274
|
<issue_start>username_0: An [NSF](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation) research proposal was prepared last year.
Even though all scientific work planned at the university will be done by two postdocs and 2 - 3 graduate students, the university requires a tenured/tenure-track faculty to be a [PI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_investigator). As a result, they couldn't submit the proposal.
This year, to satisfy this requirement, a tenured faculty was chosen to be a "place-holder PI". This PI's research is not directly related to the project, and he also has little interest to get involved. He's just there to satisfy the university's requirement.
Will the existence of such a place-holder PI hurt the chance of such a proposal being funded?
If not, how should the proposal explain the role of the place-holder PI?
---
**More detail:**
The proposal in question is actually a collaborative proposal
(also interdisciplinary: math + biology),
and there is an experienced biologist
who will be the PI in University B.
The two post-docs, in University A,
are on the mathematical side.
The university rule is that they cannot be the PIs.
A tenured/tenure-track faculty *in University A* must be the PI.
That's why a place-holder PI was picked.
So the proposal's personnel structure look like this:
* **University A**: 1 Place-holder PI + 2 post-doc co-PIs + students
* **University B**: 1 PI + students + ...
So my question is mainly about whether or not
the appearance of one useless PI can be problematic.
(the other PI is not useless)
Just to add more detail,
in both the proposal development stage
and the proposal itself,
more experienced professors are indeed involved.
The post-docs' mentor
(who was also the advisor of the graduate students)
was deeply involved in the development of the proposal
but can no longer be the PI
(for reasons that are too unique to mention here).
A slightly more experienced researcher outside University A
(me) is also listed in the proposal
for the role to provide some guidance
--- basically fill in the hole the original PI left.
And I will provide a letter of collaboration.
My original question left out these important detail
(to avoid the rather unique situation being easily identifiable).
This misled earlier answers to focus on the appearance
that we have two post-docs are leading the project,
which does not look like a good situation.
This is actually not the case.
But those answers are, of course, still very good answers.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally a funder won't provide funding to a project unless the host institute guarantees the grant holder will have a job for the length of the grant. Generally institutions will only do that if the person in question is tenured or tenure track.
The phrase we'd usually use is something along the lines of "<NAME> will provide strategic guidance and team management". The point being that if you and your co-investigators decide to do something else with your lives, it will be up to ProfJones to find people to replace you so the research can still be provided to the institution's customer (ie the funder).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You can either acknowledge in the proposal that the PI will do nothing and “he’s just there to satisfy the university's requirement”, or you can try to hide that fact with misleading language and trickery.
If you hide that fact, then you are engaging in misrepresentation. This is unethical and borders on fraud.
If you acknowledge it, it wouldn’t be unethical, just foolish as the proposal will obviously not be funded.
Either way, this sounds like a bad idea. A PI has to actually want to be involved with the research they are signing up for as “principal investigator”.
For what it’s worth, as far as I’m aware it’s not an absolute requirement that the PI on an NSF proposal has to be a tenure track faculty. At my department we had some visiting assistant professors (a 3-year postdoc position) who submitted NSF grant proposals. This was a while ago, but I think it was enough that they included a letter from a tenured faculty member who said he’d be willing to take over the grant in the event of the PI’s departure. So I’d suggest checking with your institution if their policies might allow such an approach.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with Dan that you should not try to misrepresent the role of the PI, but this raises a broader issue that you seem to have avoided with the premise of your question. Presumably the university rule in question is there to ensure that there is an experienced researcher with a permanent faculty position leading and supervising the research. This has some obvious advantages in ensuring continuity of the research and ensuring that junior researchers can draw on the experience of a senior person. It is not too surprising that the university would impose such a requirement on a funding submission.
In view of this, you should rethink your approach of appointing a PI only as a "placeholder" to overcome a bureaucratic obstacle, and instead think about how you could have the PI perform the role that is the underlying goal of that rule. This would not only assist you to satisfy the university requirements for submission of the proposal, but more importantly, it would give you the benefits of experience and guaranteed continuity that is the underlying goal of this rule.
This would require you to find a PI who is willing to take on a genuine role as a "principal" in the research, which means taking responsibility for the progression of the research and supervising the more junior researchers. It is possible to construct the PI role in a way where it is largely managerial and supervisory rather than being involved in the nitty-gritty of the research, but it still invovles being the person in charge of the research project. The kinds of tasks that a PI could perform would include planning and management of the project, strategic guidance on research direction, supervision and development of junior researchers, review of research drafts and outputs, strategic guidance on appropriate outlets for publications or referees, and administration of grant funding and personnel decisions.
Upvotes: 5
|
2022/11/22
| 604
| 2,709
|
<issue_start>username_0: If the editorial manager wants a list of changes during the revision process, is it normal to add another file (what should this be called? Should it be a highlight or the name of the file is not important as they will eventually read through all files?) or where should I address my changes (which are pretty much big as the comment from the reviewer suggests to find a better way to address it - for which I can improve a result a little bit, too)?
Am I understanding this process right? Or is it needed to address the changes in the other ways?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, a standard approach is to write a resubmission/response/referee response/rebuttal letter. The exact name of the file isn't particularly important, but making it descriptive is always a good idea. It's quite typical for these letters to start with (sometimes optional) comments for the editor, followed by an itemized summary/list of changes, and then responses to referee comments. Normally\* I copy-paste the full referee reports into the letter (with distinct text formatting), and address the referees' points one by one where they appear. So if one reviewer suggestion is to improve something you would address this under said comment, and briefly add a mention to the summary of changes.
\*If there is a length restriction on the response letter it makes sense to only include the salient parts.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I normally indicate the changed passages in red in the updated article text. In addition, I copy-paste all reviewer comments into a separate, new document (titled reply to reviewer comments or similar), and add a short reply to all comments explaining what I changed and why.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Some journals make it possible to upload a manuscript with changes tracked as well as the "clean" updated version. username_2's suggestion is similar - if anything, text color is something you care about with galley proofs in hand, but not as much during revisions. It is definitely something that can be fixed at later stages. This approach is a little more tricky for manuscripts prepared in LaTeX.
If the above is not feasible, one might write something to the effect of "clarifications were added (the penultimate paragraph in the Discussion section in the updated version)" or "We have added the values for x and z (line 271 in the revised version)" in the point-by-point rebuttals.
If everything else fails, you can always e-mail the editorial office with the additional version of your manuscript with the changes clearly marked. But most likely, there will be some provisions for it in the online resubmission form.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/22
| 1,315
| 5,390
|
<issue_start>username_0: When a professor gives me some timelines to choose for an interview, I always say I am available anytime that suits your schedule, mainly because all times are OK with me, I can even have a discussion even at work.
Do you think its better to pick a timeline rather than saying you are OK with any time?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see any issue. If you are uncomfortable with the phrasing, maybe ask what time is best for them and just agree.
But a time when you won't be interrupted is best, so work time seems a poor choice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: When someone gives you a list of times to pick from, **just pick one**.
Otherwise, it just takes two-three more emails to be done with it, instead of being able to close the loop with just one email from you.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: If they already offered a few options, simply pick one and be done with it.
But if the opposite happens: they ask you what time to set up a meeting (I assume that the event requires scheduling, otherwise they wouldn't ask). In this case, even if "any time is okay", make a short list of time slots for them to choose from and add that your time is flexible.
The important thing is to reply with information that leads to decision. When it comes to some decisions, people seem to prefer constrained problems than wide open ones, because the cognitive load is smaller, and simulating someone's mind and schedule is tiresome.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Since this is a question about etiquette, I would like to say that I personally find it annoying when I offer someone some specific times to select and then they reply "any time is good for me". I consider it more polite to do is to pick a definite time among the options they have suggested.
I might be biased because this kind of situation happens to me quite often. I am someone who does not mind meetings (as long as they are productive) but I really dislike the *process of going back and forth to schedule meetings*. Giving a list of times is the most efficient way to get that done with. If I take the time to look at my schedule and then identify possible times that will be suitable for me, if the person replies with another email that requires yet another reply, I find that rather annoying.
So, you might have two possible kinds of persons whom you might be dealing with:
* If it is someone like me who wants the minimum back-and-forth possible, then a reply without choosing a time is annoying. Even if the person chooses my least preferred time among all the options I gave, I am not annoyed because, by definition, I only offered times that I am willing to accept. If I had a strong preference, I would have said so in my email.
* If it is someone who doesn't mind back-and-forth and you reply with a selected time, they will not be annoyed even if you happen to choose their least preferred time, again because it is one of the acceptable choices they offered you.
So, since you are not sure whether you are dealing with a professor who is annoyed by unnecessary back-and-forth scheduling emails or a professor who does not care, the safest thing to do is to just pick a time. That way, you do not risk annoying anyone. And I think that is the intention of your question.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, you should pick a time.
The goal of the interaction is to find a fitting time slot as fast and friction-free as possible.
Saying "I am available any time" doesn't contribute much to that goal.
There are two basic scenarios:
**Professor gives you a preselection of times to choose from**
Here the Professor already gave you all information from their side. If they offer you multiple times, they probably don't care which time you choose, they only selected times that work for them.
If you now bounce that back to them with "I don't care either", you basically didn't contribute to choosing a slot, the Professor now has to choose the slot, and you then still have to confirm it.
Also, a lot of people don't like to make choices that don't matter to them. So just pick a time and be done with it.
**Professor asks you to provide a time that works for you**
If you respond here with "I am available anytime", that's even worse, because it's not true. I guess, if he picks 3am you won't be able to do that easily, and you probably also have other courses or something else, where you aren't available.
So now the professor has to chose a time that works for them, and then you'll possibly have to reject that date, because you aren't actually available.
So also here, just do as asked, and provide a list.
In general, people prefer you to do as they asked. If they say "Choose a time", then choose a time. If the time slot doesn't work for them, they will either not offer it to you, or tell you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: *(Surprisingly, none of the 5 existing answers mentioned this option.)*
**Just do both!** Choose a time (arbitrarily, if it's all the same to you) *and* state your availability for other options.
>
> Thank you for the list of time slots, I'll take 08:00-08:30. If anything changes on your side, the other options are also fine for me.
>
>
>
This solves the immediate problem of agreeing on a time **and also** conveys the information that the other options are fine for you as well.
Upvotes: 6
|
2022/11/23
| 556
| 2,451
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently completed my coursework for International Business Strategy in the UK. I have been marked unfairly in a sense where my professor has given me the feedback of not mentioning certain points from the criteria. However, it’s quite evident that I have, for which I have proof and have raised it with him. Yet, he’s quite formidable and blatant towards me on this. I quite evidently wrote about the points he said I haven’t under the umbrella of scholars which used a different term for the words and I provided citations for, which he clearly didn’t see. Anyways, he did say to use simple words which means that he didn’t understand the grammar and marked me low. He has refused to remark me. I am in great disbelief after looking at my results and I want to know what I can do to make it right.<issue_comment>username_1: You are not going to get legal advise on this forum. For that you need to talk to a legal specialist. But even if it is possible, you need to set your expectations right: A judge is not going to grade your work. It can only look at whether certain rules are followed. It is perfectly possible that your professor did not break such rules, and still got to the conclusion you disagreed with.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Typically, academic judgement is not a matter which you can appeal or take to court. The University / legal system are concerned with whether the formal rules of the assessment are followed. They may take action if there is a systemic bias or discrimination of a group of students. But when it comes to individual pieces of work, neither University nor the judge have enough expertise and time available to remark your work.
Typically, major pieces of assessment (e.g. >50% of your grade) are double-marked or moderated, meaning that someone looked at your professor's marking and checked it. Still, mistakes happen, and sometimes you find your work being marked lower than you expected. This is unpleasant and I am sorry you find yourself in this position. Try to learn from it as much as possible -- even if the learning point is that your professor is not able to appreciate a term used by other scholars and you have to use the term from the class next time. Writing down terminology used in class is definitely an excellent method to prepare for your assessment and ensure that your markers can appreciate all the right points in your work. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/23
| 771
| 3,409
|
<issue_start>username_0: I asked a professor for a recommendation letter for my Ph.D. application, and she said something like
>
> Sure, I am willing to write you a letter. Can you send me your research statement and school list by XXX date? Also please request all letters in a batch so that it is less likely for me to miss any request.
>
>
>
I understand that she needs my research statement to see what I want to work on, but why ask for a school list? I mean, she will know what schools I am applying to when she received the requests. She also doesn't need to keep track of the submission status for each school since everything will arrive in a batch.
I didn't ask her directly since the last thing I want is to annoy my referee with an unnecessary/stupid question, but I'm still curious to know the possible reasons. Is she going to review the list and suggest I refrain from applying to programs she believes I am unlikely to get into so that she won't waste time submitting a letter? Will she customize the letters for each school?<issue_comment>username_1: Only the professor can really answer this, but the most likely reason is so that she has a record *from you* of which letters she should expect to send. Submit-your-letter-here links can go astray (mis-copied email address, filtered as junk mail, etc) or just get missed. The only way she can be sure she's not missed anything is to have a definitive list from you.
There may also be a legal aspect: she wants a record that you have authorised her to send information to specific schools.
Finally, there could be an element of social engineering: encouraging students to commit to a list of schools at the outset may (be thought to) discourage last-minute 'extra' applications and panicked requests for more letters.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You are asking the professor to recommend you for admission to schools. There are two or three good reasons why she might want a list of the schools to which you are applying:
* A directed, pointed recommendation is much stronger than a bland one. If you give her the list of schools, she might know the preferences of some of those schools, or even better, she might even know some people in those schools. So, she would be able to write you more meaningful recommendation letters that would be more likely to stand out.
* Related to the last point, it is possible (though hopefully unlikely) that there are some schools with people with whom she has a bad relationship. If so, then she would decline to write recommendations for those schools since she knows that a recommendation with her name on it might do you more harm than good.
* When she receives requests for recommendations for you (directly from the schools), she can keep track that she is not forgetting to write recommendations for some of your schools requested. Remember that she most likely is writing recommendations for other students as well, so this professor might happen to be more responsible than most and she wants to make sure that she actually does what she commits to doing.
I will say that it seems that you might feel uncomfortable revealing to your referees to which schools you are applying. **You should consider the fact that they have a right to know to whom they are recommending you.** After all, they are putting their professional reputation at stake by recommending you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/23
| 949
| 4,164
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a master's student at a world-wide top business school. In one subject (a subject that related to my undergraduate specialization) I had a very good professor. He researches in the same field I want to conduct research in later, so we had quite some conversations about research, which were really interesting. I answered his questions actively in class, got one of the highest grades in his exam, he also praised how interesting my presentation was, which made up 40% of the final grade (in short, I doubt that me being 'dumb' or a bad student is the issue). In our last class together, he told the entire class that we can always e-mail him if we need career-related advice, or when we come to his hometown, he would be glad to have a drink with us, and that we should add him on Linkedin.
I added him on Linkedin, as I would have loved to keep up the professional relationship, especially when it comes to my master's thesis later, I would have loved to have him as my advisor. He then turned down not only my Linkedin request, but the whole class'. In addition, when one of us emails him about professional matters, he doesn't answer. I asked him about a certain specialization I was thinking on doing in his field, as I wanted to hear his opinion, and got ignored, but other classmates told me their e-mails got ignored by him as well. To be honest, I'm pretty disappointed, as he was the professor our class had the best relationship with. The classes were always very interactive and fun, and all of us got pretty good grades at the end, so I really don't understand his behavior and it makes me think. We also were a quite familiar group as our class is really small with only 30 students. Do you think we as a class did something wrong, or is he the one being odd?<issue_comment>username_1: Only the professor can really answer this, but the most likely reason is so that she has a record *from you* of which letters she should expect to send. Submit-your-letter-here links can go astray (mis-copied email address, filtered as junk mail, etc) or just get missed. The only way she can be sure she's not missed anything is to have a definitive list from you.
There may also be a legal aspect: she wants a record that you have authorised her to send information to specific schools.
Finally, there could be an element of social engineering: encouraging students to commit to a list of schools at the outset may (be thought to) discourage last-minute 'extra' applications and panicked requests for more letters.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You are asking the professor to recommend you for admission to schools. There are two or three good reasons why she might want a list of the schools to which you are applying:
* A directed, pointed recommendation is much stronger than a bland one. If you give her the list of schools, she might know the preferences of some of those schools, or even better, she might even know some people in those schools. So, she would be able to write you more meaningful recommendation letters that would be more likely to stand out.
* Related to the last point, it is possible (though hopefully unlikely) that there are some schools with people with whom she has a bad relationship. If so, then she would decline to write recommendations for those schools since she knows that a recommendation with her name on it might do you more harm than good.
* When she receives requests for recommendations for you (directly from the schools), she can keep track that she is not forgetting to write recommendations for some of your schools requested. Remember that she most likely is writing recommendations for other students as well, so this professor might happen to be more responsible than most and she wants to make sure that she actually does what she commits to doing.
I will say that it seems that you might feel uncomfortable revealing to your referees to which schools you are applying. **You should consider the fact that they have a right to know to whom they are recommending you.** After all, they are putting their professional reputation at stake by recommending you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/23
| 798
| 3,344
|
<issue_start>username_0: I noticed there are some related topics on the forum but my situation is somewhat unique so I'll ask again.
I completed 2 years of my Bachelor's at a Top50 Worldwide University. About 40% of the credits were in CS and Math - the rest were electives and first year requirements. I could not continue in the degree because I developed Schizophrenia in the middle (hospitalized for months + long time to recover). I am still able to work but mostly in a research capacity and not writing code / doing computations. My idea was that maybe things would be easier for me if I could get into some sort of research graduate program (in tech or finance) because my cognitive abilities are better suited for research rather than for detailing with many minute *details*.
Now it may not sound promising but the good news is that I have good work experience both before and after I became ill. 1.5 Years working entry level at prestigious tech & finance firms. And also 4 years as an independant inventor with 2 patent families and multiple of the patents in those granted (in major countries).
Part of my idea of going back for a graduate program is that from what I gather patents are considered highly in academia (I know some Universities have a research labs where they invent and license)
I am comfortable going somewhere not highly ranked - as long as its serious.
Do you think that its possible for me to get into a Masters (or even PhD) program with this background?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> "What do you think"
>
>
>
It is not easy to give a complete answer to this question. If you want to pursue a graduate degree, go for it.
The good news is that it is possible to get into PhD programs at many high-ranking universities (#50) without a bachelor's degree given that you have many years of work/research experience (with detailed documentation). It is very unlikely that you will get a scholarship.
That also implies that you can get into some good universities for a Master program without a bachelor's degree.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Don't underestimate how difficult this will be. I think it unusual to accept any student into a graduate program who has not completed an undergraduate degree. Possible, yes. Common or easy, no!
Hopefully you have your health condition under control as that might come up in an application process, though that isn't necessarily so. But you will need to function effectively in any graduate program.
Since you are long away from academia you will also need to convince the admissions system, either a professor or a committee, that you are a good candidate. And, in any "top" school the competition is fierce and from those whose suitability is much easier to judge. In some places (US) you will need letters of recommendation.
The other issue that might arise, since you mention patents, is that industrial research is (mostly) concerned with product focused things. But in academia the focus is on basic research, seldom related to patentable ideas, though that happens also.
You have a very steep hill to climb and you will need to make sure to gather resources to be successful. Depending on your background, an applied program of some sort might be an easier path, though not necessarily what you want.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/23
| 1,314
| 5,276
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am autistic and I hold a bachelor's degree but, sadly, had to quit grad school due to health reasons. I have a special interest in a subfield of hematology-oncology and have read a fair amount of research papers about that subject. I have some – hopefully – sound questions that I'd like to get answered but these are very precise questions regarding a specific subject that only a couple hundred researchers know about (so no luck getting answers elsewhere). Since I am not in academia I can't post them in the comment section on ResearchGate (which would have been more practical).
How appropriate is it for me to e-mail the corresponding author to ask for details about their paper and/or ask for their insights about a possible research gap? Should I mention that I am autistic with a special interest in their research subject?<issue_comment>username_1: It is fine to do so. I recommend that, if possible, you have some academic introduce you to the author. This might be a former professor, for example. It is harder to ignore a mail from another academic than from an otherwise unknown person.
But, for first contact, write a short mail, introducing yourself (briefly) and asking if they would be willing to answer some questions in the future.
Your mail might look quite a lot like your post here.
But, don't flood them in a first contact. Many such mails are simply discarded. If you start out slowly you'll probably have a better chance of success.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It's always entirely appropriate to email the corresponding author of a paper to ask about the details of that paper (indeed, that's what the role of 'corresponding author' is all about). The following (at a minimum) don't affect that answer, and don't especially need to be mentioned (unless you want to mention them): (i) whether you're in academia, (ii) whether you hold a research degree, and (iii) whether you're autistic. Conversely, you might want to mention that you have a special interest in their research subject, if you genuinely do - people tend to enjoy talking to kindred spirits :)
As another answer implies, the tone of the message you send them may affect your chances of getting the desired response. A reasonable formula might be:
>
> Hi <>,
>
>
> I'm <>, and I have a particular interest in <> because <> (keep it brief). I recently read your paper on <>, which I found really interesting because <> (imply that you actually put in the effort to read it in detail, and so you're not asking things that could have been trivially answered by reading it). However, there were a couple of things I didn't quite get from the paper, and I wondered if I could run them by you if you have time please?
>
>
>
>
> (not too many questions in a first email)
>
>
> Many thanks!
>
>
> <>
>
>
>
Basically, keep it brief, friendly and non-onerous for them, and you're more likely to get an answer.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I've written to authors to ask details about the diets they fed to mice in their experiments, from an entirely non-academic e-mail address and they responded very quickly.
Just don't ask them to submit a research paper to your journal! (as corresponding author that's the type of spam I always get).
From my most recent paper, altmetric score of 800, reported in 100 newspapers, I got around three real people writing to me and I was happy to respond properly to all of them.
Go for it.
If anything writing to researchers sharing your interest, could potentially be a first stop on rejoining your career working in their labs. Of course that's a very distant goal that relies on a lot of other steps. But definitely embrace your interests, and do reach out, researchers don't bite.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> How appropriate is it for me to e-mail the corresponding author to ask for details ... and/or ... insights about a possible research gap?
>
>
>
Very appropriate. Just don't write them in a presumptive or accusative tone, and be respectful. Now, you mentioned autism, which sometimes makes it difficult to adhere to the finer points of social convention; so, if this is the case for you, perhaps you should ask someone to give your email a once-over to make sure you're not being unintentionally offensive somehow. Or, indeed...
>
> Should I mention that I am autistic
>
>
>
... possibly do that. But only if it's important for them to be aware of your autism when answering your question. Otherwise, [who cares what you are](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_you%27re_a_dog)?
>
> with a special interest in their research subject?
>
>
>
If you're not an academic and are writing these authors, then you obviously have such a special interest. But you should probably write what your interest is, i.e. whether you or people you know are suffering from some medical condition the book discusses; whether you are considering about a diagnostic, therapeutic or palliative method; or whether you just find it interesting, period.
On the other hand - don't write an essay. Be relatively brief and to the point, or split off a long description-of-motivation to an appendix after the request proper.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/23
| 1,283
| 5,377
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying for a PhD in Sociology. My schools "require" scores of about 300ish and I scored 270. My reason for the poor score is that ETS requires medical tests I cannot afford (more than half my monthly income) to be given accommodations, so I was unable to use any accommodations. ETS was also very careful to say this to me over the phone, so I do not have any records of it. I am unsure of the best way to explain this. Without them, I don't see myself testing better.
I could hardly afford the test with a waiver to reduce the cost, so I am not sure I could pay for the test again. I am also obtaining my master’s degree and studying for the test has severely impacted my life. I know that is a "cost" of being in graduate school and this is a time balance issue that I should not be having. For the schools that have a "can you explain bad test scores" section, I have written out that I was unable to use my accommodations, which had a serious effect on my score.
If I have strong LORs, ten years of working experience, almost three years of research experience, am involved in multiple honor societies, have presented at multiple conferences, and am working on publishing something do I still have a chance to get in? I know that I have the potential to be a strong graduate student, but I am worried with such low scores that my applications will be tossed away.
Has anyone had a similar experience or have any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: I think you have a few steps to take-
1. prioritize schools without a GRE requirement
2. ask your advisors/mentors/letter writers to reach out to schools directly to make sure “your application gets a full look” despite the low scores
3. work with others to come up with a short one sentence explanation of why your test score doesn’t reflect your aptitude (there may be a place for “other comments” where you can include this)
At the same time, I always advise students who are looking at a PhD to get a full sense of the opportunities available to you with a masters degree and your current experience. This advice goes double for those who are having trouble with the “gate keeping” around admissions to PhD programs. It may be that you do not need a PhD to pursue your goals. Plus, the academic market for Sociology is quite dismal (you probably would need to be in a top 20 program to get an academic job), so you should also be exploring research jobs outside of academia, which may not require a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I honestly think you will be fine if you cast a broad net for doctoral programs. This would be especially true in the US, I think, where GRE is at most a small consideration among a host of others, with letters being very important. Your experience and letters will carry you pretty far and a modest deficit under your circumstances can easily be overlooked.
But don't limit your search to a narrow range of institutions, especially a narrow range of top schools. Your letter writers can help you explain the somewhat low GRE and if they project your success in doctoral study you should be OK.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The answers by @username_2 and @username_1 here are very good, but I wanted to add some examples to further the point that GREs are just a minor part of admissions, and an even smaller part of your chances of succeeding.
A good friend and college roommate got a GRE score so low that a university told him that while he had been admitted, they did not want to publish that they had admitted a student with such a score. So they asked him to retake the test during his first year as a grad student, and they'd backdate the test on their report. He did, and he's now a tenured professor at an R1. I should note that by the time he decided to do the PhD, he was already recognized as an expert in the field, so there was no risk from the university's side.
Other friends have dramatically improved their scores with a little studying and preparation for the exam. These are people who are genuinely smart, competent, and hard working, but are not used to US-style standardized testing. I think Americans underestimate how much the GRE and other standardized testing is a test of cultural competence. BTW, after improving their scores, they completed their PhDs and are now tenure-track or tenured.
Like others have said, your best option is to broaden your search. *However*, I think it's a tactical mistake to disregard the possibility that with a modest but consistent effort, you could substantially improve your score.
You didn't mention which type of accommodations you are requesting, but be aware that the issue of requesting accommodations due to learning disabilities has become a minefield. Abuse is rampant. A colleague told me that in her daughter's classroom all but 2 out of 30 students get accommodations during exams. Universities and institutions have pushed back by requiring more and more evidence, in effect just raising the cost for students with legitimate disabilities, while not stopping any rich kid from just spending more money on the right doctors. Since you have stated that you cannot afford the tests anyway, with even more emphasis I suggest that you retake the test so that your score is just above the threshold then leverage your other skills to gain admissions.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/23
| 1,052
| 4,617
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a Ph.D student who needs to take coursework each semester and also (obviously) do research. I find some of the coursework assignments particularly interesting and I end up spending a lot more time than necessary, sometimes doing extra bits that are not really required to get a full grade. The assignment problems do have this small statement at the end that says something to the effect of -"you are encouraged to provide additional observations", giving a small open-ended dimension to each problem.
I tend to go the extra-mile route often as I am a bit inquisitive by nature and provide extra observations/validations to claims.
My concern is if this practice is healthy or harmful. One school of thought goes along the line of - "Just do bare minimum on coursework and focus more on your research", which I agree makes sense, since the amount of research work in itself is a massive chunk. I do feel that my assignment has taken up a lot of my time which I could have otherwise devoted for research.
The counter reasoning from my side has has been - grad school/Ph.D programs are what provide the setting to think and do beyond what is asked, and thus I should do the extra-bits if I am compelled to.
May be I am too idealistic, I am not sure. Some perspective and advice on this inner conflict would be helpful.<issue_comment>username_1: Every person is different and so the balance will vary with each person. If you have the time for it, I think going beyond the minimum in the courses would be a long term plus if you intend to stay in academia.
An academic needs a broad view of their field and possibly related fields as well as deep and specific knowledge of their main research area. The coursework provides the former and the research the latter.
But it would be a bit of a problem (more than a bit, actually) if you get too distracted and end up with poor research results, or too slow progress toward finishing.
In the US, the major coursework comes prior to starting dissertation research, and prior to qualifying exams in most fields, so the question doesn't arise so much.
Do what you must. Do what you can.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you should try to consciously "evaluate" your learning from your "going the extra mile". By this I mean, you should ask yourself what kind of benefit the experience of doing these extra things may give you, apart from just having fun the moment you do them. In many cases I believe that this is very valuable. You train you problem solving skills and some of this may give you some information or skill that will be useful later, even if only in a rather general "having a better overview of problems/more experience in a field" way. You may later encounter problems that are similar and your experience gathered in this way may be of use. Obviously this is a bit speculative, and cannot be taken for granted. In some cases it may be rather pointless, and you may even have a sense that it is, if you consciously ask yourself. You can also ask a supervisor for their opinion about this. In any case it will depend on what exactly are you doing and how this is related to your future plans (maybe long term like staying in academia and coming up with your own research ideas).
I have done such things often and would say it has generally served me well, although I could have been a bit more selective.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a question of nuance, which general guidelines such as "do the bare minimum" rarely provide. At the end of the day, you can do more if:
* You feel you are learning a lot from going the extra mile, particularly if what you learn is also relevant to your research or your development as a researcher - or you simply enjoy doing it a lot, and see it as a hobby of sorts
* *And* you are not spending so much time on it that your research suffers (spending an hour more than necessary on the ocassional assignment is unproblematic, spending a full week on something that could have also been done in a morning is a different story).
At the end of the day, I suggest to not overthink it. You can of course spend more than the absolute minimum time on course work, as long as it's not getting out of hand and you are not just doing it because that's what you have always done during your undergrad. Nobody manages their time down to the hour and minute, and everybody does some things during a work day that are not directly contributing to their research - for you it might be extra work in course work, for me it's writing this Stack Overflow answer.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/23
| 754
| 3,138
|
<issue_start>username_0: *The title is misleading mainly because there is not much room to write a detailed question.*
I am currently working on a (Maths) paper. While doing the literature review, I first found something interesting that I would like to include in my paper in another paper (A) from a not-indexed journal. The researchers who wrote the paper come from a no-name university.
Later, I found somewhat the same thing in another paper (B) from another journal which is well-reputed in my field. (B) is better written than (A). The paper (B) was published before (A). However, I can not tell whether or not A plagiarised B.
I decided to cite only the paper (B) in my paper because of the reputation of the journal/researchers.
Is that unethical and disrespectful to the researchers who wrote the paper (A)?<issue_comment>username_1: You’ve cited the earliest reference for the results your paper is relying on, so you’ve fulfilled your ethical obligations to the readers and to the researchers who deserve the credit for those results. You have no ethical obligation to do anything else.
The fact that that earliest reference is also a better written paper than a later published paper is another reason to be satisfied that the citation serves your readers in the best way by directing them to the best written source explaining the results. But this consideration is a more minor one and not related to ethics in my opinion.
The reputation of the two journals, and the ranking of the universities the authors work in, are completely irrelevant and have no bearing on the question of which paper to cite.
You are still free to cite paper (A). This may make sense as a show of recognition to the authors of the paper if you believe that their discovery of the results was made independently of the authors of paper (B) (this happens frequently in mathematics for example). In that case one can argue that they deserve some minor credit even if they were later to publish, and even if they didn’t do as good of a job writing up their results. But this too doesn’t rise to the level of an ethical imperative, in my opinion.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> I decided to cite only the paper (B) in my paper because of the
> reputation of the journal/researchers.
>
>
>
If it wasn't the case that B had been published earlier, I would not see this as good practice. So looking at this problem from a more general standpoint, I would not let the "reputation" be the decider on who to cite. In many cases, it doesn't even hurt to simply cite both sources.
Citing a source/a researcher solely because they have "better" reputation will perpeptuate the status quo (or even make it worse): the already reputable will become more reputable (if that status can be measured by citation count alone) and the less reputable will be left behind. Even the most reputable researcher started with no citations to their name, and being at a no-name university doesn't imply inferiority (just imagine someone prioritizing taking care of loved ones over their career which makes them less mobile).
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/24
| 1,251
| 5,425
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD student in math and currently I'm stuck at a problem. But my advisor has some idea and it seems to me that he might even solve it soon.
Earlier I had an idea which seemed to be working, but a few days back we found a gap in that idea.
If my advisor solves the problem, will I still be able to include that in my thesis or be a co-author in the paper?
My guess is no, because that would be plagiarism. But I don't understand what would happen in that situation.
Having this conversation with my advisor seems awkward. That's why I'm asking here.<issue_comment>username_1: I imagine this problem is a subset of an even larger problem, and that larger problem is going to form the bulk of your thesis / paper. If so, then you'll still be able to include the result in any publication, and you'll still be an author (the only author in fact if it's your thesis), but your advisor will be a co-author (they almost surely already are going to be a co-author anyway).
Even if the problem is large enough that it can be a paper on its own, you'll still likely be a co-author because as you wrote, "Earlier I had some idea which seemed to be working, but few days back we found some gap in that idea." It's not that you didn't do anything.
Finally, there's a decent chance your advisor will solve some but not all of the problem, and leave you to fill in the gaps. If so, then you'll be at least a coauthor - your advisor might even argue you should be the first author.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If your advisor essentially scooped you and published the results on their own, then you and your advisor have much deeper issues in your working relationship than this paper.
In reality, I imagine that your advisor does consider you a key contributor to the paper. When collaborating on a project, it's not uncommon for one of the collaborators to have a key insight -- but often that insight is only possible after months of working closely together trying approaches that do not work, making partial progress, and learning from these experiences. It often becomes very difficult (and pointless) to really decide who contributed what. Additionally, there are many "routine" tasks that need to be completed in any project that you can contribute to, such as filling in the details of the argument, carefully writing and editing drafts of a manuscript, making suggestions on how best to present the ideas, and so on.
I also would not feel awkward about simply asking your advisor about this. It's completely within your rights as a researcher to ask for clarity about plans for publication of the work you are doing. And it would be quite a poor advisor indeed who did not have some picture in mind of what publications their students were involved with.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As your advisor is partly responsible for the success of your thesis, there is nothing awkward about discussing what work would you be presenting as a part of it.
But now it seems a bit early for that. Do not count your chickens before they hatch; you should be a co-author on the paper, but the story with this proof does not end there. Indeed, the results and ideas are bound to be connected to some other interesting problems, and being able to recognize these new problems and approaches is a big part of your education as a PhD student.
In other words, "I obtain proof of this theorem all by myself or I will get no PhD" is not a great approach overall. It is perfectly normal to only make a little dent in a bigger problem, to collaborate, to present a collection of smaller results as your thesis. You do not have to be unethical and lie about personal contributions; it should work out without that. And, again, there is nothing wrong in seeking advice on further research direction from your advisor - the clue is right there in the name ;)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: My answer here is intended only as an addition to the insightful answer already given by @username_1.
During the course of my own PhD, I worked with a colleague (here called Q for convenience) of my supervisor. I had collected a large body of empirical results concerning a particular perceptual phenomenon. Q is/was exceptionally experienced at the development of mathematical models to describe perceptual phenomena. I worked together with Q, largely as a provider of the empirical data for, and verifier of, the model. The model was ultimately discussed in one of the chapters of my thesis, and presented in detail in an appendix.
Critically, at the beginning of the thesis, where the declaration of originality was required by my university, I explained that the model was essentially developed by Q with some contributions from me. The model forms a very useful part of the thesis ... but the thesis itself was substantially more than the model. Moreover, just as with the thesis, the model formed a part of a larger peer-reviewed publication on which Q and my supervisor argued (as @username_1 commented!) that I should be first author.
As @username_1 also remarks, no matter the problem your supervisor is working on, and might solve, it almost certainly a subset of a larger problem, just as the model development represented only one part of the research in which I was engaged. There are likely to be many more reasons to be delighted than to be despondent.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/24
| 730
| 3,302
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in how a MSc in Mathematics, MSc in Applied Mathematics, and MSc in Applied and Computational Mathematics compare in terms of content, but also in terms of how they are perceived and the opportunities they create. Can all three make you a qualified candidate to teach math at the community college level? I would like to keep open the possibility of one day getting into a PhD program in mathematics, how would having a MSc in Applied and Computational Mathematics affect one's chances of being accepted as compared to the other MSc programs?<issue_comment>username_1: Mathematics (pure math) implies that the study is to advance mathematics itself. New theories, new areas of study, etc.
Applied mathematics implies that mathematics is being used to solve problems in other domains, business, biology, astronomy, whatever. The list is long and varied. Such study might occasionally lead to advances in math, but that isn't normally the intent.
Computational applied mathematics is like applied math, but uses a fusion of ideas from both math and computing for the solution of problems from, usually, other domains. That might be something like machine learning, for example.
There is a fourth possibility, actually, which is the use of computational techniques to solve problems within math itself. A couple of important theorems were solved at least partially in this way: The Four Color Theorem and work related to Fermat's Last Theorem.
For later doctoral study mathematics itself would probably be best, though there are some departments/universities that have a combined faculty so you can choose. For industry, computational applied math would probably be best since you learn a lot of useful tools for industrial application.
At the community college level any will probably do fine, since the coursework of students in introductory.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is my perspective as someone who was the Graduate Coordinator in my mathematics department (at University of Georgia), hence principally involved in graduate admission. It is:
I am rather clear on the distinction between mathematics and applied mathematics: the latter is a subset of the former; its complement is "pure mathematics." However one could point to some disputed territories here. I am less clear on the difference between applied mathematics and "applied and computational mathematics." In some areas of mathematics, if you put "computational" in front of it, it need not be applied: this tends to be true in more algebraic areas, e.g. computational number theory. In other areas of mathematics, appending "computational" does seem to make it applied: e.g. computational PDEs is usually considered applied mathematics. In my opinion, this again serves to illustrate that the pure/applied distinction may not mean as much as we think.
How does a master's degree in one of these three areas look? I think all three master's degrees look **virtually identical**, in particular for trying to get a job at a community college but also for every other purpose I can think of. The distinction between one institution versus another is more important than the name of the degree...and what you actually learned is much more important than both of these.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/24
| 2,725
| 11,549
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my students' behaviour just feels always disrespectful to me. A homework was due tonight, and she asked me yesterday evening how to solve multiple questions. I try to respond as soon as I can, so I replied to her this morning. She asked me a lot of questions and though I already answered her question, I guess she was confused, and kept asking the same question to which I had already answered to.
I wanted to avoid giving her the wrong advice due to miscommunication, so I told her to attend an office hour this evening, which is a couple of hours before the deadline. She then told me she has a family dinner to attend, so she can't attend an office hour by then and needs me to answer immediately. I would understand if I had a class today, but I don't, so I told her that I'm busy and cannot respond right now and that she should go check out the office hour. Was this unreasonable of me? I'm scared of being upfront with her as it may lead to a negative teaching evaluation.
1. She emails me the evening on the day before the deadline
2. She expects me to answer immediately as she cannot attend an office hour because of her family dinner.
3. I've already answered her question. She should go back and think instead of fetching the answers from me. I apologize whenever I can't meet her demands, but she keeps replying "no worries". "No worries"??? No, you have to be more respectful. When she comes to class, she also asks me questions that are not related to the work we are currently doing in class.
What are your thoughts?<issue_comment>username_1: Your action was reasonable, and she should have shown some respect. It seems she took you for granted.
I faced the same situation many times with a very lazy student. She rarely went to lectures. Before any exam, she spammed my WhatsApp with a lot of questions regarding the course material. I only gave her a partial answer for any question she asked. Sometimes, she asked me if A (a very specific question) would be in the exam. I refused to answer such a question. Once, I offered a Teams meeting to help her with problem-solving. Eventually, it became very annoying. I decided to give her non-informative answers only. It might be unethical.
I wish I could have done it differently by telling her that her exams were her responsibility, not mine. She should have gone to lectures regularly instead of cramming everything just a few days before the exams. She should have asked questions during the teaching period. Then I would have been very happy to help her.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Stop apologizing and be clear and firm. Don't make excuses.
>
> I understand that you have other obligations than your studies but
> please understand that I too have other obligations than answering
> your questions. Unfortunately, you will have to arrange a way that
> allows you to make use of office hours or deal with the issue yourself.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me be clear: you do not need to answer questions outside of normal office hours. Students are aware of deadlines and of our office hours so it’s up to them to manage their time so they are not in the situation you describe.
I am never in a rush to answer when I get such a request outside regular hours. I made clear at the start of the term that email questions are not ideal and that discussing questions in person are much more constructive academically. It is fine to try to remove last minute confusion but if the same issue comes back again with the same student I will usually politely state that I’ve already done my best with that question.
*Some* students will make it a habit of being insistent and test the pliability of TAs or instructors. I have found that being *polite* (especially early in the term) but firm usually solves the problem.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: You should discuss this student's behavior with the lead instructor for the course. They will probably agree with everyone here that this is not OK, and will take steps to back you up, e.g. sending the student in question a note to tell them to knock it off, making an announcement at the next class to remind everyone that TAs have their own responsibilities and there's a schedule of office hours for a reason, etc.
(If the lead instructor isn't willing to back you up on this sort of thing, you have bigger problems, and in your shoes I'd suggest quietly reporting the entire situation to your department's "TA coordinator" or equivalent role.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Be very careful. This type of student is likely to cause further problems, and this may even end in a law suit against you. Make sure you are very formal and transparent, but firm, towards the student and keep a written record of all your interactions with the student. You may also inform you superior or even hr already.
This may sound hard, but I have had the exact same experience in an industry context where an employee reporting to me showed a very similar pattern of behaviour and then ended up suing the company for discrimination. (the employee lost of course)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This is classic [ask vs. guess culture](https://ask.metafilter.com/55153/Whats-the-middle-ground-between-FU-and-Welcome#830421).
In ask culture, questions have low emotional involvement. You ask for something. If the answer is no then all that's happened is you've learned the answer.
In guess culture, questions have high emotional involvement. Asking something is seen as pressuring/rude. Saying no is seen as rebuking someone/also rude. To avoid that, people often hint or use smaller related questions to find out the answer to something without directly asking.
Actually this is a spectrum--it's more about where you draw the line of which questions are OK to ask outright and which questions aren't, but it's obvious that people draw that line in very different places. Since this question is tagged United States, you can probably move your line far more to the "ask" side than you have it right now.
Look back at your current situation and take your emotion out of it. Imagine your student was asking if you have a particular brand of soda, "No, I only have (other brand of soda)." Question asked, question answered, done. "Are you available at this time?" "No, only at (other time)."
This applies to your personal boundaries, too. E-mails aren't a demand, they just exist. Check your e-mail on your own schedule. Reply to the factual content of e-mails from your students and ignore the emotional content. If someone has a personal emergency they can document it via X, Y, Z steps from the university policy.
I find the best way to take emotion out of things is to *assume good intent*. That is, whatever behavior someone is doing might need to change but that doesn't mean they're a bad person. So I don't think "this person is so lazy they want me to do all the work for them", instead I think "this person doesn't understand how to use/apply the thing we went over last week". Based on that, "This is the same as ABC problem we worked on last week--which part in particular are you having trouble with?" or even "Actually, this is the same as a problem we did already--do you remember (thing) that let's you determine which category of problem this is?" This is obviously more natural when someone is asking the question in person in conversation vs. e-mail, but if students are treating e-mail as conversation anyway you might as well lean in to it. Someone who's lazy will give up and go away, someone who actually needs help will learn something, either way is fine.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: You seem to believe that if you put in extra time and effort, you are thereby entitled to being appreciated and respected by your students. (You talk about respect and appreciation over and over in your question and in the comments.) Consequently, you get angry when you try to accommodate a student's request only to receive further requests instead of an appreciative response. Particularly when they are entitled, absurd requests like working around her family dinner time.
Here's the thing:
**You are not entitled to being appreciated by your students. Not even if you are the single most attentive, available, and accommodating TA at your university. You really are not.**
You want to go out of your way to help your students? That's great. It really is. But you need to accept that going above and beyond your duties is **your own decision**. And it makes no sense to be angry at someone for your own decisions. If you are unhappy with the result, then it's not your student's request that is the cause of your unhappiness, it's your unfounded feeling that you ought to try to accommodate it.
Or, you know, perhaps you are angry with her because you would have loved to play the role of the super-attentive TA if she had displayed the slighest amount of consideration for you, but she didn't, so you can't, and that's frustrating to you. That's another possibility.
Instead of getting hung up on being appreciated by your students, here's a healthier mental frame for your interactions with students:
They are entitled to make whatever requests they like. You are entitled to reject them if you find them unreasonable, and to respond to emails outside of office hours at your leisure. It's great if students are appreciative of your work, but they have no obligation to be. A student asks you to work around her family's dinner time? No skin off your back. Just send her a one-line email in response at your leisure instead of ruminating about how disrespectful you find this.
On the plus side, you get to decide how much you want to go out of your way to help your students. It really is entirely up to you. On the negative side, you don't get to be angry with them if they are (in your opinion) not appreciative enough of your efforts. That's your own problem that you gotta work on, just like your student should probably work on understanding that the world does not revolve around her family's dinner time.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> I apologize whenever I can't meet her demands
>
>
>
It's not up to you to meet her demands. It's up to her and other students to work their schedule in line with your previously defined (in the very first class ideally) hours.
>
> I'm scared of being upfront with her as it may lead to a negative teaching evaluation.
>
>
>
There is no need to feel scared. Your superiors will understand that one or two bad evaluations more than likely is not a reflection of your ability. They are experienced educators, so they understand that a student can be disgruntled and try to shift blame. But they will look at how *all* of your students rated you.
There is also the possibility that this student may in fact be the first one to admit that she is having problems understanding the topics, *but* also understands that you have been doing your best, and she is in fact very appreciative.
I'm actually taken back by the fact that you communicate with your students and answer their queries at arbitrary times. While that may be admirable, as stated above, you should make it very clear when you can see students outside class hours. The student you speak of might be entitled, but it appears as though you may have inadvertently opened the door to this. Remember this for the next academic year.
Good luck and I'm confident you'll get good evaluations.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/24
| 827
| 3,488
|
<issue_start>username_0: My plan is to make a YouTube channel with a curriculum based on a pretty well-known textbook.
I want to reformulate and re-present the ideas in my own way. I will not take any direct quotes from the book. I will try to make money off of the videos.
The way the theory of the videos lines up completely with the theory of the book, it is unquestionably derivative of that book. I remember hearing about lawsuits where a musician sued another, even because they thought a chord progression, and maybe melody, sounded too similar to their own.
Is the nature of copyright that you own the ideas in your book, not just the words?
For example, I am pretty sure you cannot sell a book with characters resembling those of Harry Potter, even if fan fiction, a new story. Perhaps that’s trademark infringement?
Assuming I make it publicly known where I drew the information from, can the publisher claim infringement/intellectual property theft for reselling a theory?
In the modern world, what is the precise limit of what part of a book you can no longer own?<issue_comment>username_1: Ideas are not protected by copyright whatsoever, it is the expression in fixed form (usually written, sometimes audio or video recording) that is protected. So you can take ideas.
Be very careful not to copy anything from the actual book. That is difficult for some people and may require a lot of discipline. It is hard (for some people) to read something in a book and then to express it in your words without using anything from the book.
Your "Harry Potter" example is based on trademarks. You can't write a book that draws on people recognising the similarity between your book and the "Harry Potter" books. It must stand on its own. So if what you create refers to the other book, you are on dangerous ground.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: While the [answer of username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/190921/75368) has most of the main ideas, note that one of the things that copyright law generally protects is the ability to make "derived works". These rights are reserved to the copyright holder. (Caveat: copyright law varies.)
So, while the ideas are free to use and you can't use the specific expression, you also need to avoid making a derived work without permission. The way you describe your work is probably not allowed, though it is up to the copyright holder to complain.
One important consideration in copyright law is whether some use reduces the economic value of the original. If your videos make the book unnecessary then it is almost certainly infringing.
But the solution is to ask the copyright holder for permission, fairly describing your work to them. It isn't outside the realm of possibility that they will consider it an enhancement of the value of the book (or neutral) and give you explicit permission. They might even advertise your work for you.
---
Note that "ideas" per se are not copyrightable, nor owned by anyone. IP law is concerned with creative expression of ideas (or "devices" in the case of patents), not the ideas themselves.
Also note that copyright is intended to eventually expire, though that has been called into doubt recently. But old things can be reused/repurposed. You still need to avoid plagiarism by citing originals, however.
Finally (I hope), if you couldn't draw ideas from the works of others, science and scholarship in generally would halt. We build on the ideas of others.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/24
| 909
| 3,767
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to find a way to bulk-download citation data on (ideally!) all the papers published in my particular academic discipline. I want to analyse this large corpus of data using AI text classification tools, because I want to identify all papers that fit in a certain category. At the very least I want the basic citation info (title, authors, year, journal), and abstracts would be nice to have as well.
Are there tools for scraping the contents of literature databases that could achieve this objective? For example, one approach might be to compile a list of all journals that are relevant in my field, and use that list to download citation data for every single article in each of those journals. Or perhaps downloading citations of all papers that have certain keyword (even if there are very very large numbers of results).<issue_comment>username_1: There may be tools that can do this on a small scale, but you will find that most publishers will block your attempts to download data in bulk using scripts. For example, ACM's usage policies of their websites explicitly prohibit the use of scripts. I happen to know because of a colleague's attempt at understanding what a subset of ~1000 articles in their journal I co-edit provides: The publisher promptly blocked his IP address from accessing any more article pages.
The issue at hand is not that citation data is copyrighted (it may or may not -- that's immaterial here), but that you are accessing a service that costs publishers money (namely, their *websites*) and there are service conditions attached to using their service. As a consequence, unless you have a specific agreement with publishers, you will find that trawling large numbers of websites is not going to lead to much success.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First, get a corpus of all the DOIs that constitute the 'field' you are interested in. (One possible way to get the DOIs would be, first, to obtain all the relevant journals' ISSNs and then to find out all their DOIs in CrossRef's API. [Here](https://api.crossref.org/journals/1476-4687/works?select=DOI) is an example.)
Second, filter these DOIs in the COCI (OpenCitations Index of Crossref open DOI-to-DOI citations) and fetch the DOIs that are cited by the former (citing) DOIs. [Here](https://opencitations.net/index/coci/api/v1/references/10.1186/1756-8722-6-59) is an example.
Third, use each (cited) DOI and loop them through CrossRef's API so as to obtain the data you need (title, authors, year, and journal will certainly be available, in some cases even the Abstracts). [Here](https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002/ajh.23433) is an example.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: For this sort of work I strongly recommend looking into Dimensions.ai which is run by Digital Science. Dimensions is specifically designed to do what your looking for, and if you can get access to their API you will be able to efficiently pull and analyse large quantities of metadata/publications across entire fields. Ideally your institution will already have access to Dimensions and can help you out with an API key.
As for other options, it varies by database. Some subject specific databases will let you download bulk metadata but will often have an upper limit on bulk downloads (a few hundred for example).
I know Google Scholar does not like you pulling bulk metadata. If you are wanting to stick with Google Scholar your best bet is to use a plug-in like Zotero, which will let you quickly capture all the metadata (and potentially readily available .pdf's) of results on a page-by-page basis. If you start pulling too much metadata too quickly from Google Scholar you will trip their bot detection captcha's.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/24
| 247
| 1,107
|
<issue_start>username_0: My background is close to optimisation, but the position I like is closer to computer vision.<issue_comment>username_1: Strong motivation is necessary but not sufficient. There are a lot of factors in a doctoral application and others are probably more important. In the US, letters of support that predict a successful outcome weigh strongly.
The competition can be very intense, and many (most?) of the other applicants will also be highly motivated.
If you have lacks/deficits in some areas, look to shoring up those primarily.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Motivation by itself does not help. You need to show that it translates to positive action. Don't try to convince someone you are motivated about a topic. This will typically not help and at the worst annoy people.
Use that motivation to read up about the topic and include details and background knowledge in your application letter. Make sure that if you get to the interview stage you truly know as much as you can about the topic and still be aware that you probably only scratched the surface.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/24
| 1,004
| 4,229
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a professor of mathematics at a small liberal arts college in the US. My department is fortunate enough to have a wonderful group of math majors, many of whom go on to graduate school each year. Consequently, each year I write quite a few letters of recommendation for students applying to (generally US based) PhD programs in mathematics.
I only agree to write letters of recommendation for students if I believe that I will be able to write them a strong letter. In the past I would never compare students (to either current or former students) in my letters, unless it was part of some sort of superlative statement of the form "X is the strongest student in their class / that we have had for several years / etc."
This year I decided to try to be more direct, thinking that doing so might be of value both to the students and to the admissions committees reading my letters. I therefore added a paragraph at the end of my letter explaining that approximately 25% of our students go to graduate school each year, that the top student or two tend to be admitted to schools such as (elite) University X, University Y, University Z, and that the median student in this 25% cohort tends to be admitted to a school whose math department is excellent but perhaps not quite as highly ranked as the previous schools. I then say that the student I am writing the letter for is, in my opinion, most similar to recent students that went on to study at University A and University B.
On the one hand, my hope is that this kind of directness will help students be admitted to departments where they will thrive. On the other hand, there are many potential downsides to such directness. It is possible that making these sort of explicit comparisons make my letter too determinative, that places at the level of Universities A and B will view this comparison negatively, etc.
I have never been on a graduate school admissions committee however, so I am very curious to hear from people who have. (Ideally at a US based math department.) How would you interpret the sort of explicit comparisons I described above? Is doing so a mistake on my part, or does it help admissions committees distinguish between the many different types of students that all have "positive" letters of recommendation?<issue_comment>username_1: I would phrase it differently. The part about the "median student" and "not quite as highly" worries me. And the part about "is admitted to" or "went to schools" isn't really optimal.
Instead, I'd say something like "Maria's performance and academic characteristics here has been as good or better than some other recent graduates who went to places like X and Y and *who excelled there*".
Pick X and Y to be schools of similar or higher rank, and, hopefully you know enough about what happens to students later to be able to say such things honestly. Don't oversell it, though. If you say that Maria will probably be accepted at MIT (Cambridge) then some "lesser" school might decide to offer a slot to someone more likely to take it.
I'm not as concerned about the brag, though: 25% of our graduates...
However, put the emphasis on the student, not on the characteristics of your own institution, even though it is good.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is doing so a mistake on my part?
>
>
>
Yes. Forget about admission processes. Write a recommendation letter discussing the merit of the student as a scholar/academic - and that's that. Don't go into assessment engineering and statistics. If it helps, pretend your recipient is a recluse academic in another country (who doesn't know about any university system) who's looking to choose an apprentice.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think that's a nice idea. The calibration of letters by reviewers isn't always easy, and anything a recommender can do to help with that should be appreciated.
I wouldn't go over the top with it, or prioritize it over including something more important if you are, for some reason, space limited, but I do believe a sentence or two, perhaps phrased as in [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/190943/20457) would be a welcome addition.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/25
| 1,371
| 5,966
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am working on projects for which having very direct access to relevant reference materials on the subject (linguistics) is basically essential.
I have come to understand that there is no satisfying alternative to being part of a research library, as a researcher. There is no similarly convenient way to have direct access to the materials you want.
I feel like this is something I’ll probably want my whole life. I sometimes move to new countries, and I’m someone that just inherently always wants to look things up in the most authoritative reference materials.
There are workarounds / “hacks” - strategic loopholes that have the same outcome. For example, just by applying to an evening language course, I become a student at that university and gain off-campus access to databases.
That isn’t satisfying. I need a legitimate, long-term way to be part of a research library, regardless of if I am a student at that moment or not.
I can only think about trying to meet with some officials at local universities to see if they can recognize someone as an independent researcher for a good/valid reason.
Other than that, I am wondering if you can propose “research” of some kind to a university, which they can approve, regardless of you doing it as part of a program (like a Ph.D. program).
Bottom line: what is the most flexible and general way to be part of a research library, not a particular and somewhat finicky way?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know anything about Linguistics, but
there are university research centres in my field (Statistics & Machine Learning) which "external" researchers can apply to become a centre affiliate (with/without a specific project). You will have access to research facilities of the centre (university) if your request is approved.
It is not always difficult for research students (with relevant experience) and faculty members from these universities to apply for membership. There are some requirements applying to all members of the centres such as research contribution, progress reports, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: At some fundamental level, what you are asking is the following: "What is a universal way how people can access a service that costs money, but for free?" Perhaps unsurprisingly, there is no universally good answer for this question.
You have to remember that universities have to pay money to publishers -- a *lot* of money in fact, millions of dollars! -- to give their students, faculty, and staff access to scientific journals and text books. In some cases, universities in addition pay a cost for every research article downloaded from publisher websites. It may not come as a surprise, then, that university libraries are not eager (or simply not able) to give access to that service to just everyone. Equally, publishers will likely have clauses i their contracts with universities that restrict who they can give access to publications to. That doesn't mean that universities don't have way to allow others access to their resources -- for example by making someone an unpaid adjunct, or by letting people enroll in classes for credit -- but it means that you will likely not be able to just walk up to a library and say "I'd like you to give me access to all the services you pay for".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As @username_2 already mentioned, this is a question is essentially "how do I get something that costs money for free". The answer is, you don't. Its unlikely you'll find a truly free or passive solution.
That being said, in my experience, it is not unusual to request access to resources as a "guest" researcher. I would expect most major universities have an official process in place to facilitate this. I've most commonly seen this in the case of former students continuing work on an existing project or visiting students/researchers from external institutions.
In your case, since you are neither a former student nor affiliated with a friendly university, it would require developing a relationship with a professor that is established enough to request access for a "volunteer" lab member. It would also require actively collaborating with that person as long as you want access to university resources. Whether or not this is a "finicky" process or not is for you to determine.
Something like this is might be hard to establish but easier to maintain. Frankly, once you're in the system, as long as you maintain some goodwill, its unlikely anyone would ever revoke your access. I would imagine that if you contribute regularly you could be listed as a lab member or research affiliate indefinitely.
To make this a reality, I would suggest looking up researchers whose work you find interesting. Then you could try cold-emailing them and requesting to collaborate. This will go smoother if you have published some work or are otherwise established in the field. I would NOT suggest emailing anyone asking for access to library resources - this comes after someone is already interested in working with you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You're lucky.
This may depend on the country, but in many places, access to libraries is heavily subsidized or even free of charge. This often includes large university libraries. You just walk in with an ID, ask for a library membership, and pay a small fee.
Examples:
* [Vienna University Library](https://bibliothek.univie.ac.at/bibliotheksausweis-uebersicht.html): 15€/year for the general population (lower rates for students and staff)
* [State- and University Library Bremen](https://m.suub.uni-bremen.de/service-beratung/bibliotheksausweis/): 20€/year for the general population, 10€ if eligible for a social discount, free of charge for students and staff
* [New York Public Library](https://www.nypl.org/library-card) (not a research library, but extremely extensive access to ressources): Free of charge for all New York residents
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/25
| 856
| 3,914
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing my master thesis in Computer Science and AI. I am very undecided about what to put on the first place, and changed my mind many times already. Because of that, I keep rewriting the contents to fit the structure.
I have read from multiple sources that literature review must come first, then the theoretical description, however it feels wrong to me. Because how could I talk about a series of works that involve many hard and specific concepts without first explaining them first? If I have to assume that the reader is familiar with the concept, why should I have a theoretical description then?
Or am I misunderstanding the purpose of these sections?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer is partially based on the prevalent academic culture. Some places have very concise ideas how a thesis should be structured and some are much more free. In some places, it is some bureaucrat who checks your thesis for conformance to a given standard, in some places it is the thesis director, who might or might not have a certain scheme in mind, and in some places, anything that the committee agrees with is fine.
From the later perspective, a theoretical perspective in general, followed by a literature review, followed by a theoretical perspective more geared towards the problem at hand would be a nice enough scheme. The purpose of the literature review is to place your work in the context of the current state of the art, but also to show that you read what you were supposed to read (and understand). If the literature review comes first, it is more than just an elaborated list of authors - result pairs, but includes putting the thesis in context, which is very similar to a "theoretical description".
Ultimately, a master thesis has usually a very limited audience for which you are writing. Most theses will be read just by the members of the committee or the rapporteurs, or whatever it is called. There are memorable exceptions to this such as a thesis that gets converted into a book or a famous paper, but these are still numerically exceptions. If possible, address your question to them.
TLTR: Not all theses follow a boiler plate and a generic scheme is not a good idea. However, academic customs vary, and some places insist on a given scheme. It is not worth your time and effort to fight that. But maybe you can ask your advisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For a master's thesis, **you should ask your advisor and do whatever they tell you to do**. There are so many different standards and expectations that, practically, what it comes down to is that whatever the person who is going to approve or critique your thesis is the best approach to go with.
This is not a matter of "the advisor is always right"; rather, it is that there are many good choices and it comes down to preference rather than a single or even merely a best "right way" to do things. When it is a matter of preference, then it is always a good idea to go along with your advisor's preference to keep them happy.
However, if as you indicated in comments, it is not easy to get your advisor's immediate response on this question and you want to advance with your work, then I recommend that you carefully observe the structure of the articles that you are reading and then follow the patterns that strike you as clearest and most logical. You will likely find that there are many different patterns in practice, but as long as you follow a pattern that is already published, then you have some precedent to justify the pattern that makes the most sense to you. Moreover, if your advisor later questions your choice, you will have published work to refer to as a justification for your choice; your advisor would be more likely to consider your choice seriously and might even let you go ahead with your preference because of the precedent that you refer them to.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/26
| 1,522
| 6,475
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a Ph. D student. I have been fortunate to have an extremely supportive advisor against whom I have only positives and literally no complaints so far. She offers me sound technical guidance, almost always available, refines my problems, never rude, given me several weeks off when I had some personal family emergencies, and of course, helps me get my work published.
My advisor collaborates with a Co-PI from another university (for a couple of projects) who is a few years senior to her. The Co-PI is from a premier high-ranking university, has stellar track record of publications, co-founded manufacturing startups, and is an overall rock star of sorts. Co-PI has several industry connections. I have had few brief interactions with Co-PI, but never worked with him in the projects that my advisor collaborates with.
As I plan to get into industry after I graduate, I would like to further my association with Co-PI in the hopes that : 1. I could get letters of recommendation from him 2. Get contacts in the industry for internships/full-time jobs. 3. Get a peek into how research is done as competitive high-ranking universities.
My concern is, if it would be taken negatively by my advisor if I express my interest to work with Co-PI for a summer/semester. I do not want my advisor to think - "So my student thinks I am not good enough", which is certainly the farthest from the truth. Any advice on how best to discuss the subject with my advisor without complicating things would be helpful. Or if at all its a good idea to work on a different lab for a brief period.<issue_comment>username_1: I do not think this would be a problem overall.
Express your interest in building up your CV for the industry and listen to what she has to say. If you have already zeroed in on the co-PI, you might open with that.
She is great for your PhD, but not as great for some of your future goals, she does not have to feel bad for it and you do not have to be sorry. You get help from her, she gets an industry connection with a cordial relationship and the knowledge she has immensely helped someone on their path in life. All is well.
That said, there is one part in this post that seems to be bothering you and which sounds potentially capable of causing trouble. Specifically, your third point makes it sound like your current research is not "competitive", which is not a great point to make. I would not bring this bit up. Or at least try to reformulate it.
While we appreciate an "overall rock star" as someone obviously doing a lot for the society, the ability to be one is heavily personality-dependent. The history knows stellar researchers who have changed the science forever with a few dozen theorems to their name, and those who did just a couple of really really important things. One is not better than the other; you might indeed want to discover which pace and style of work suits you better. But this is just exposure to different work processes, unless you have something very specific in mind (e.g. "I spend weeks on setting up the working environment for each new experiment and want to see how they do it; clearly, it takes much less effort for them").
Importantly, the statement you want to make is about you, not your advisor. Take caution to not impose potentially incompatible values on her, especially given you are not too sure about them yourself. Be sure to make it clear how everything you bring up is relevant to your future career. And consider asking an open-ended question instead of putting her on the spot with a yes/no question. This I consider to be a more general advice: you get more cooperation and opportunities from people if you let them express themselves instead of asking them to comply with the plans you made up already.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> My concern is, if it would be taken negatively by my advisor if I express my interest to work with Co-PI for a summer/semester
>
>
>
This seems like a bit of an [X-Y Problem](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem). The real problem (X) is broadening your network, since you'll need more than one letter of recommendation when you graduate. Your solution (Y) is to work with this co-PI. But by only broaching Y with your advisor, the conversation may indeed go in an undesirable direction.
Instead, be clear about the problem you are trying to solve. It's perfectly fine to also suggest Y as one possible path forward. But this minimizes the chances of a misunderstanding, and if Y is actually a bad idea for some reason, your advisor may be able to suggest an alternative path.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Or if at all its a good idea to work on a different lab for a brief period.
>
>
>
Generally speaking, it is a good idea to work in different labs if possible. You get to know smart people and their approach to solving problems, you learn new techniques or analytical skills, other people get to know you and your approach to solving problems, etc. So it only makes sense to work in a different lab if there will be a realistic chance that indeed there will be sufficient opportunity to benefit from each other. The visit to the other lab must therefore not be too short. What is a good timeframe for the visit very much depends on what exactly you want to achieve in the other lab. I recommend that you think about that first and write it down so that you have some sort of plan which defines what you want to do when, how long each step takes, possible alternative routes when things go slightly wrong, etc. If you have no specific idea about what you want to do, how do you want to convince the Co-PI to accept you as a visiting researcher?
>
> Any advice on how best to discuss the subject with my advisor without complicating things would be helpful.
>
>
>
One approach would be to use your plan to point out how everybody will benefit from your visit to the other lab. This will be useful in discussions both with your advisor and the Co-PI. Is there a fancy technique that you could learn and import into your advisor's lab, or vice versa? Would it be possible to collect data in the other lab that you could not collect in your home lab? Things like that. Your advisor might be more inclined to agree if she also sees how she would benefit. Maybe you could discuss a roadmap how you could make it likely that a joint publication will result.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/26
| 1,026
| 4,475
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently a master's student in mathematical physics preparing my applications for PhD. I've been working on my current research topic (say A) for 3 years, and all of my publications/talks are in A. However, I found another field B really interesting, and thinking about the possibility to transit to B for my PhD. A and B are quite different and so far I don't have a strong background in B. My question is if I want to make the transition, do I need to explain my motivation in the personal statement? How can I convince the recruiting committee I will be a good candidate for field B, like other applicants who have been familiar with B?
(additional info: I indeed don't have too much expertise in B, the PhD program I'm aiming at is in the UK, so it's relatively short. Is it also a plausible idea to spend a gap year learning more about B so that I can have a better feeling about what I want to do and make my application stronger?)<issue_comment>username_1: In US research groups, at least in the sciences, its fairly common to see people who have a degree in A (either bachelors or masters) and then seek PhDs in B. Many of the skills are interchangeable, and a variety of viewpoints and skillsets is important to many research problems. However, while I'd not be surprised to see someone with a Math, Computer Science, or Biology background in my Chemical Engineering lab, I'd be rather shocked to find someone with a solely English or Philosophy background. I expect that you'll run into a couple of problems, based on the gap between your background A and your target field B:
1. Recruiting committees for B want to make sure that you have the skills to succeed in researching B. If you don't have a degree in B or a related field, *you'll have to explain to them why your A skills prepare you for B.* Lacking that connection, explain what other proof you have that you can do well in studying B. You've got research experience, but I'm not sure engineering research experience would perfectly prepare you for an English program, for example.
2. There is typically a coursework component for PhDs, and those courses assume that you have an undergraduate understanding of B. If you don't, you have to delay taking the graduate level courses in B to take effectively remedial lessons. The greater the overlap, the less remedial content you need, which means you spend more time researching and less time sitting in class, which makes your department happier. All incoming PhD students need time to learn the field, but it can be hard to get started on a good foot when you need a bunch of classes to understand the basics.
When you read papers and materials in B, ponder what frustrates you about B-researchers from your perspective as an A-researcher (e.g. a lack of statistical rigor, a lack of consideration for cultural elements, too much emphasis on the results and not on elegance of the process). Some of those frustrations may fade as you become more immersed in B, but some may stay, and those frustrations are where the difference in perspective coming from A is important. Those perspectives are valuable in the B environment.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think you have much to worry about. Yes, you should explain your motivation for wanting to switch, but provided A and B are close enough, I don't think it can be taken as a negative. In fact, rather the opposite: you are clearly already an experienced researcher (you have talks and publications), therefore you likely understand the field well and have a good perspective on both areas. Knowing yourself and not being afraid to change to work on something you find more interesting or think has more promise is a sign of both personal and academic maturity. I am sure PhD supervisors would rather spend a bit of extra time helping a thoughtful and motivated student get up to speed in a new topic than supervise someone who started a PhD without thinking in a topic they already know well just because it's "the easy route".
Personally I would not recommend taking a gap year to study B, unless you are actually taking a course and will have some kind of official certification at the end of it. It's hard to demonstrate you've gained expertise in a new subject if you take a year off just to work through a textbook, for example. Better to study that textbook during your PhD; then at least you're getting paid for it.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/26
| 1,234
| 5,241
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated with my M.S. in physics, with a focus in Quantum Computing, (course-based M.S.) last December and aim on doing a career in research. Thus I'm very attracted to doing a PhD (within the US), the experience that I had in that program really cemented my interest. However my unimpressive GPA of 3.39 along with my absence in publishing my research in doing my M.S. I think puts me behind as red flag at many schools.
(Side-note: My undergrad institution had a notably poor physics department (most underfunded department, chairmen absent-mindedly cancelled courses, poor advisement (advised to take E&M while taking Calc 2. Not a joke.), courses randomly cancelled by Chairman, very small faculty pool that were very disconnected from global physics community, etc.), and so doing my course-based MS was sort of way of me redoing my bachelors as well as "really learning physics". In so doing though, I was very ill-prepared in taking graduate coursework at a good school)
However, I noticed University of Waterloo offers two **research based** Quantum Information-related M.S. programs (fully funded) that I thought about applying for:
1. MSc Physics (Quantum Information): <https://uwaterloo.ca/physics-astronomy/graduate-studies/msc-programs>
2. Perimeter Institute MS program: <https://perimeterinstitute.ca/psi-masters-program>
I hoped that these could serve as an opportunity to improve upon my "most recent education" GPA but also work as a means for producing a professional research thesis at a reputable institution, before doing my PhD. My thinking was that this could give me great preparation.
If I could explain my motivations well in my PhD personal statement for this, would admissions committees find it less suspect?
I appreciate any advice that anyone is willing to share. Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that this plan is the best for US doctoral programs. Most applicants only hold a bachelors degree and have little if any actual research experience. Therefore prior such experience is not expected.
Most places the first objective in the program is to pass qualifying exams and the program will provide necessary advanced courses to enable that. Thesis based research might not start until that is done, though that isn't true everywhere.
With a course based masters you likely have much, if not all, of the knowledge for qualifiers. An additional masters would probably just slow you down overall, as you would still need to find an advisor and a topic that is mutually acceptable.
This might be quite different in other countries and even in a few US programs. See [How does the admissions process work for Ph.D. programs in Country X?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/176908/75368) for additional guidance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As far as applying to another masters: I would research if you can even apply to those master programs because some institutions will not admit applicants that already have an equivalent degree in that field. Although, if you can, its not a bad idea to exhaust all your options and apply anyway as a fallback. If you do attend another masters program, it is important to explain why in your personal statement/statement of objectives when applying for PhD programs later on as redoing your physics masters may be questionable without valid explanation. Additionally, if you take a lot of the same coursework again and your GPA doesn't increase or it is lower then your previous masters degree, this may raise red flags about your ability to take high level graduate courses.
With regards to PhD programs, you should absolutely apply. But as mentioned in the comments, make sure you apply to a range of programs and not just the most famous ones as you don't want to limit yourself. Your GPA (assuming its on a 4.0 scale) is not as low as you make it seem; 3.4 is a little bit higher then a B+ average. Moreover, if you apply to PhD programs, you are allowed to discuss your career as scientist in your personal statement. Here you can often describe your situation and explain your previous research experiences (or lack thereof) while describing what fields of research you are interested in and why. Descriptions of requirements for applying to top universities, [such as this one](https://lsa.umich.edu/physics/graduate-students/application.html), state that previous research is not required. Just make sure you justify your interest in the subject. Does research experience help? Yes, but I have also met someone that got a B.A in Art and still managed to get into a STEM PhD program.
Lastly, taking the Physics GRE can help make you a stronger applicant. Just make sure that the programs of interest still take it as after COVID, some universities wont look at your GRE scores. I am not saying I advocate for GRE scores to predict applicant abilities, but it is another piece of your application that can help if you do well.
Getting another masters should not be your priority. If you don't get into PhD school, explore relevant careers outside of academia, such as industry or private/government labs. All of these experiences will help you build your CV and make you a better candidate.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/26
| 2,651
| 11,537
|
<issue_start>username_0: Basically, I am working on a project which is scientific/scholastic/academic by nature, but I am not in a university at the moment. I mainly just want university affiliation so I can access a research library, plus some minor other things, such as Research Gate only allowing you to join if you have an “institution” email address.
I know some good specific places and ways to suggest a research proposal for some kind of official acceptance from a university.
I was curious, is there any general way? It would be interesting to have a single “marketplace” where people could suggest research seeking supervision or backing, or someone could suggest a topic they would like to get a researcher for. Ideally, it would be global, sort of like Fiverr freelancing, a place for researchers to connect and find partnerships.
What’s the nearest thing to this?<issue_comment>username_1: "Affiliation" means you have a job with or work as a student at that institution. There are some special cases like retired faculty maintaining university affiliation, but otherwise, no, there is not a way that you can just "affiliate" with a university based on a research proposal.
Research Gate is poorly viewed by every academic I know. It might have had some potential, but their tendency to spam in particular has given them a scammy reputation. You don't need a Research Gate account to do research.
Library access is a separate issue, which you've already asked about at [What is a direct and universal way to affiliate oneself with a university (library)?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/190956/63475)
Research is hard, and almost all people require mentorship and training to be at all competent as a researcher. If you don't already have a PhD, I think the best path towards doing research would be to look at applying to PhD programs.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: There aren't really any legions of bored researchers waiting for some idea to work on. Moreover, if you do indeed have a promising, sufficiently specific research idea, you'd want to reach the tiny, tiny fraction of people with just the right expertise - no chance for any automated filtering systems here.
The options that are available to you:
a) You seek the relevant guidance to learn how to carry out your research project yourself.
This is what a PhD programme is for. Ideally, you even get a scholarship for this, and then you can spend a couple of years getting paid to learn the skills you want from a specialist in the area.
b) You have plenty of money, and you just want someone to work on the topic you care about.
You can offer a research grant. While most of these come from government organizations, also companies and charities often offer research grants. You would invite researchers to pitch how they'd address your research challenge, and then give money to the most convincing team. Depending on how expensive the research you have in mind is, you may already be getting somewhere good for £100000.
c) You have money to spare, and you want control over the project.
In the grant situation, the researcher would execute the project as they see fit. Alternatively, you could hire a researcher on a consultancy contract and just get their input/contribution to the parts you really need help on.
d) You know your stuff, but you don't have much money to spare
If your situation is such that you can genuinely contribute to the project you have in mind, but that you just cannot do it all alone, you may try and find a collaborator who is also genuinely interested in it. Attend the relevant conference in your field, talk to people. Maybe there is a matching research group at your local institution, and they'd welcome you at their seminars? There isn't really a shortcut here, but hardly anything in the way academics usually start their collaborations with one another is dependent on being affiliated with a university,
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: One idea would be to approach a potential collaborator (call them Professor X) at a local institution who has some expertise in the area you want to work on. If the proposal is promising enough to support and this person has some extra time and money, they may be able to hire you as a staff scientist or consultant (or something of this nature); that would lead to you being formally affiliated with that university as an employee of Prof X, without necessarily being a PhD student or applying to be a postdoctoral researcher and so forth.
I want to point out that there are a few big obstacles here, mostly because time is a limited resource in academia and there is no shortage of good ideas worth collaborating on. Is the proposal well-written enough to read quickly or is it tempting to dismiss it? Does Prof X have time to spend on advising? Does Prof X have money to spend on a new hire? Is it promising enough for Prof X to think it will be worth investing time and money into? I'm flagging these for you so that you're aware of what it's like on the other side. If I were in Prof X's position these would be my primary concerns. Depending on your specific arrangement, some of these could be surmounted --- but rightly or wrongly, it's easier to ignore people emailing me ideas for research, chiefly for the reason that I simply *don't have time* to engage with them (even if they are good ideas!). Nonetheless I wish you good luck. You can increase your chance of success by finding someone who you know will be interested in your work, perhaps someone who has done similar work in the past.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A situation where one just performs good research in their spare time is exceedingly rare, at least before retirement.
One does not have to be affiliated with an university to do so, although an input from "professional" researchers could help. There is no shortage of research done in an industry setting, especially in the modern ML/AI landscape. If this is, indeed, your case, the easiest way would be to either contact a local university (similar to what [Dalton suggests](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/191007/145124)) or just do the research on your own entirely. You do not have to be employed by the university, either - one option would be to invite an university researcher as a consultant on your project, as per [Arno's third suggestion](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/190995/145124). More specifically, they would help you with access to literature and provide insights about the field from an academic perspective. I have found these arrangements to have good potential, they are also not uncommon.
Some industry labs are better equipped to do certain kinds of research than universities these days, and universities are always open to proposals that are money-neutral for them at least. If you are not hiring professors as consultants or fresh graduates as regular workers, your "sales pitch" instantly becomes weaker.
One other major thing you can lure researchers with is providing them with access to unique data they would not have otherwise. If you are performing large-scale experiments they could only dream of in an university setting, that is enough for a collaboration: they make sure the design is sound and get to play with the results; win/win. To achieve that, you could just show up on their doorstep with a proposal (well, not exactly, you just e-mail them asking if they have relevant expertise to help you with the project which they often would). This cross-pollination often happens at exhibitions and conferences, so make sure to participate in those, if applicable. Does not take that much to register and attend, and many cities/universities host local events.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: There are some ways (in NAmerica at least) of getting “adjunct”, “affiliated” or “honorary” status in a department, which would usually get you access to most university resources.
Presumably different units have different requirements, and those are laid out in some policy somewhere. Many units, especially in smaller institutions, will *often* have adjuncts as a way to broaden the research or course options for students.
Typically, you can expect to have to show how getting such status will benefit the unit, and “getting in” is highly dependent on precedents and the history of the unit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Researchers aren't seeking research proposals, they're proposing
----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> someone could suggest a topic they would like to get a researcher for.
>
>
>
As a rule of thumb, almost every researcher has far more interesting research ideas than they have the capacity to pursue. The main competition of research ideas is prioritizing which ones to work on and which ones to postpone or abandon. Researchers do take on supervising ideas from e.g. students as a "service activity" or a job requirement (i.e. to facilitate the training of those students), because doing that is useful to others at the expense of the researcher's time, who has their own research priorities and interests. Researchers do work on ideas of others if they are paid for that, so the way of suggesting topics is through institutions (academic or commercial) who fund research; but in general researchers apply for resources (often highly competitive, with low acceptance rates) to try and fund their own research ideas.
Research proposals are evaluated based on execution, not only ideas
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Usually "research proposal" doesn't mean proposing an *idea*, but rather proposing a *project* - i.e. a specific plan for specific activities by specific people with a specific timeline and outcomes. Purely saying "hey, this would be neat, somebody should do this" is something you can effectively do as a side remark in a research conference filled with relevant people, but a research proposal should be far more fleshed-out.
The organizations evaluating research proposals (in general, for purposes of assigning funding, and thus researchers' time) do not evaluate the idea in isolation, as a major factor (IMHO far more important than the idea) is the specific research teams' ability to execute that idea. Ideas are important, but there is an abundance of good ideas, the ideas are discussed in public in the research community, and whenever it is clear that an idea is worth pursuing it could (and perhaps should!) be pursued by multiple teams, so the question of "are you the right person/team to do this" is as relevant as "is this worth doing compared to other options".
Research organization is decentralized
--------------------------------------
>
> It would be interesting to have a single “marketplace” where people could suggest research seeking supervision or backing
>
>
>
Research is heavily decentralized. Almost all opportunities for research backing are limited nationally or regionally (e.g. EU funding), and opportunities for research supervision are evaluated by people and organizations who are willing to offer that (e.g. research universities or various industrial contests).
There are some efforts to summarize (and in some cases globalize) the available options (e.g. various mailing lists, special-interest-groups, etc), but those tend to be split by research areas, because those are the communities in which researchers work, communicate and self-organize.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/26
| 1,050
| 4,497
|
<issue_start>username_0: Do math departments require the math GRE primarily to weed out applicants? Or is it predictive of completing the program?<issue_comment>username_1: This answer applies to the US, and maybe not universally even there.
Graduate admissions in the US are broad based with many factors to consider. GRE may be one of them but less so since the onset of COVID. In particular, letters of recommendation have high value.
The GRE, by itself, is a poor predictor of success in mathematical *research*. It shows that a person with a good score has some background knowledge that is fairly broad based and is a good problem solver in those areas that they have studied. But that isn't the same thing as actual research in mathematics: the ability to extend the field into the unknown. Other mathematicians who have worked with a person are a better predictor for that.
It isn't an either/or in this case. It can be both/neither, actually, or even an orthogonal.
Doctoral admissions committees often get a lot (a lot!) of applications. The problem is to have an idea where to spend the effort needed to select good candidates. In some (many?) places a first effort might be made to separate applications into two piles, with only one being focused on. That separation might use GRE or GPA or a combination, since it is quick and easy. Time is spent on the applications that get through that first gate. If a class can be built on the higher scoring applicants there is no need to go back to the other pile. If not, the range might be extended somewhat.
However, many places will spend some effort in looking within that secondary pile for people whose letters are outstanding and the writers trusted. So, a poor GRE might still not be exclusionary even in a place that uses them. Nothing can be guaranteed here. Rules might even require that someone go through each application and, perhaps, assign it a score to guide further action.
But doctoral study is about research, not about retaining lots of information or about problem solving. At best, the GRE shows that a candidate has the necessary background and skills to *begin* the journey, rather than a predictor of success in achieving the goals.
---
Personal note: I took the exams more than 50 years ago and don't remember my scores. They were pretty good, I think, and I was a pretty good "test taker" at the time.
What I do remember, however, is being extremely depressed on completing the advanced exam since there were many questions for which I'd never even heard the terminology used. In the US, undergraduate programs differ quite a lot in the upper level courses, so the test has to be very broad so as not to disadvantage people because their curriculum wasn't "typical". I remember the scores being surprisingly good after my initial disappointment.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Supplementing @username_1's good answer:
In the last 10 years or so, and especially stimulated by the (im)practicalities of Covid, many math depts have found incentive to stop believing that math subject test GRE scores are useful at all. Yes, as has always been the case, the "most elite" places can use scores as a filter, because they'll still have lots of candidates who pass a (somewhat, but not entirely) meaningless filter.
In my R1 U.S. univ, for a few years now (even before Covid), we'd stopped looking at (or requiring) GRE subject tests... or any other GRE tests, for many reasons.
Quasi-ironically, already many years ago, our grad admissions people realized that we could not compete for potential students with the absolute highest numbers (whatever that might mean). Thus, as in pretending to make subtle intelligent choices in investing in under-valued stocks in the stock market, we deliberately chose to look at students who had "bad numbers", but who had stellar letters of recommendation, etc. One extreme case was a person who was in the bottom 6th percentile on the GRE, but finished her Written Prelims and Oral Prelims and thesis on a faster track than her "peers".
Returning to the specific original question: it is slightly misguided, in the sense that grad programs cannot pretend to only admit "the very best" students, because (by whatever standards) those students will have other offers. Yes, it's difficult to sort out the huge pool of applicants... and, yes, at the same time, it is a logistical failure to make many grad admission (and funding) offers that are rejected.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/26
| 5,027
| 21,113
|
<issue_start>username_0: We recently held online midterm exams at my institution, where I am a manager. (We were forced online just before the exams.) The exams included a range of subjects, and were typically less than 2 hours.
There are indications of cheating (e.g. exam scores much higher than offline performance, answers that seem to be copied from each other, etc.). So I am planning to send the following message to the students:
>
> *During the next few days, some students will be informed by subject teachers that there is indication of academic dishonesty in their midterm exam. The student will have the option of responding to the teacher's message to schedule a confidential teacher-student video interview of approximately 15 minutes, in which the teacher will determine whether the student's exam score is reliable. If the student schedules and passes the interview, then their midterm exam score will be accepted. Otherwise, their midterm exam score will not be counted in their semester grade, and their final exam grade will count as both their midterm exam and final exam grade. If the student would like to know details about the indication of academic dishonesty, these can be discussed after the interview.*
>
>
>
During the video interview, the students will be given oral questions about the topics covered on the midterm exam, to assess whether their exam score is reliable.
**Question: Is this fair?**
As far as school policy: Before the midterm exams, the students were given a set of rules and consequences about the midterm exams: camera and microphone activated, hands visible, etc. But these rules cannot completely prevent cheating. (A student's hand could be briefly off-camera, and it would be unreasonably harsh to give them an automatic zero for that.)
My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.
**UPDATE**
I decided not to do the follow-up interviews, because they are not in the school policies. (If they were in the school policies, then they would have been fair, to the extent that standard anti-cheating policies are fair.)<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think you have a good likelihood of success with this or with other similar processes. You will have both false positives and false negatives in your analysis, being unfair to lots of people. Some who did well on the original (honestly) will do worse on a face to face interview if they think it is accusatory. Some who did poorly will do a bit more study. You don't have any control.
The problem is your methodology, not the students per se. Yes, some will cheat but you don't have an effective way to detect it or prevent it. Technology has blinded you to that fact. You don't actually have evidence, apparently, about any individual who cheated, nor any way to back it up. You have a "feeling". The solution is not to accuse everyone implicitly and make them prove their innocence. Some of your best students will be offended. It is likely to show up in course evaluations.
If your overall grading scheme is competitive in any way, such as curving, then you have already got an impossible situation.
My best suggestion is that you admit to yourself that you've made an error and just wipe the marks from the book altogether. You could give another exam under more reliable circumstances or find some project that students could do for some marks. I don't care for basing the entire grade on the final but that may be all you are left with.
You don't have to admit your error to the students, but you might want to give them a reason for wiping the marks, making everyone equal again. Discovering that the test was unreliable as a measure of learning is a good reason. If your grading isn't competitive, then this isn't really unfair to anyone. Yes, some will be disappointed that they still have to prove themselves, thinking they already had.
---
Let me add a personal note. As an undergraduate, long ago, I took a required course outside my math major. I found it very hard. There were five exams during the course. My grades, in order, were F, D, C, B, A. I worked very hard and made progress over the course, of course. Luckily for me the prof didn't just give me the average grade. Even better, he didn't question my honesty just because I improved.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a fraught situation.
>
> Is this fair?
>
>
>
I think you know it is not completely fair. For example, consider a not-so-far-fetched student named Bob. Bob isn't doing very well in your class, so he works hard and gets an A on the midterm. But precisely because his grade is so high, he gets this e-mail from you. During the interview, he's nervous and can't think clearly and has forgotten some of what he learned. So, you tell Bob that his A was "unreliable" and so you will not be accepting it. Bob really got screwed here: you have called him a cheater (even though you're not prosecuting him for cheating), and all his excellent work is for naught.
>
> My motivation for doing this is to protect...the honest students from being disadvantaged....
>
>
>
So now we come to the real question: is this fair *enough*? In other words, are the downsides of this scheme outweighed by the advantages? I say no. I understand your willingness to accept a few false positives or false negatives if your scheme works most of the time. If this were a research dataset, it might be a good idea. But since this is essentially a judicial process, the burden of proof is much higher. If students cheat on an exam despite your reasonable countermeasures, that does not reflect poorly on you, whereas falsely accusing students of cheating absolutely reflects poorly on you, even if most of your accusations are correct.
So how do you protect the honest students from being disadvantaged? The exam design itself. Perhaps you give all students different questions, or a different subset of the questions. Perhaps you change the numbers in each student's version. Perhaps you can avoid exams altogether in favor of projects. Perhaps you can make this oral interview a part of the exam, rather than something that's done after-the-fact in an arbitrary way. Most of these solutions entail more work for you, but they are likely to cause fewer problems in the long run.
**Edit:** For more on my reasoning, see my related answer [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/191072/79875). In particular, my assertion about the burden of proof is based on the fact that OP is inventing this procedure after the fact and is playing both judge and jury. On the other hand, if OP's institution's policies already endorse this investigative procedure, then my answer would change considerably.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> **Question: Is this fair?**
>
>
>
**No.** What would be fair is for you to assign grades based on the grading policy described in your course syllabus, and based on your university's general policies — nothing more or less. I assume that subjecting students to a mandatory post-exam interview that puts their exam grade at risk of cancelation based on your arbitrary decision that their interview answers are not consistent with their written exam performance is not a grading methodology that is either described in your syllabus or condoned by your university's policies. Hence, it is not fair and not reasonable.
If you have evidence that a student cheated, you should deal with it according to your university's standard procedures for dealing with academic misconduct (for example, at my university that would mean referring the student to our Student Judicial Affairs office, giving them the evidence and letting the office handle it from there). The evidence would either be strong enough to find the student guilty of misconduct and mete out a grade penalty or other disciplinary consequence, or it wouldn't be. In the latter case, you're out of luck — as strong as your suspicions may be based on vague "indications of academic dishonesty", you have to grade the student based on their exam performance and nothing else.
>
> My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.
>
>
>
This is noble and commendable, but irrelevant to the question of whether your approach is fair.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: *I will focus on your mitigation measures here because the ship of exam design has already sailed in your case.*
Your solution may sound adequate in theory, but I see some considerable problems in application, which also affect fairness. Some of these depend on the subject, how your student body is composed, etc., so you need to be your own judge whether they apply:
* How related is your oral exam to the actual exam?
One extreme would be to check whether the student can explain the solutions they submitted, but then that’s much more easy than coming up with the solutions and they can easily prepare for that.
The other extreme would be to ask general questions on the subject (unrelated to the exam), but then you have an increased variability due to
favourite topics, daily performance, nervousness due to the pending cheating accusation, etc.
And I don’t see things becoming much better in the middle ground between those extremes.
* In a related manner:
Where do you draw the line for somebody’s exam score being not reliable?
Letting somebody fail in a short oral exam is a tough decision to make.
How will you decide when somebody is close to the threshold, because that will very likely happen?
This is something you should clearly think about beforehand, and even then it might be very unreliable.
By contrast, evidence of cheating can be very clear cut.
Also consider how likely it is that any of your interviews will allow you to identify a cheater with reasonable certainty.
If I would do something similar, I would expect that chance to be very low, to the extent that I would just avoid the hassle and rather spend my time on something else (e.g., finding solid evidence for cheating in the exams I have).
* It appears that you only plan to annul the exam if you detect cheating.
Retrospectively, this may be seen as validating cheating as a strategy.
If you are a bad student at the time of the midterms, cheating in the midterms gives you a free shot to improve your grade.
If you get detected, you either get a bad grade in the final exam (neither winning nor losing) or you get a better grade in the finals (because of learning better, luck, etc.).
Either way, you can only win by cheating.
* What about students who underperformed in your online exam, e.g., because they were under constant video surveillance (imagine doing an offline written exam, with the proctor standing right in front of you staring at you the entire time), apparently even with rules about where they could put their hands (some students will spend a considerable amount of their mental capacity on paying attention to this)?
Could such students request an oral exam to annul their bad midterms?
Or could they even benefit from retrospectively admitting to cheating, although they didn’t?
Why have the midterm exams at all, if you only count them if they confirm your offline assessment (or are worse)?
Why not use whatever your offline assessment is?
* >
> My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.
>
>
>
Unless you are grading on a curve, the main possible practical disadvantage to honest students will be that their degree or grade is devalued by being obtainable through cheating.
Now, depending on the structure of said degree, cheating at one exam is not getting you the degree, but rather setting you up for bigger failure later (e.g., because you don’t have the prerequisites for more advanced courses).
The problem only arises if a relevant part of your exams is online or if everybody gets the degree and it’s mostly about grades in written exams (which is problematic anyway).
Mind that there are some potential group-psychology issues here if some people cheat and get away with it, but this is really for you to estimate and can be avoided by a clear statement that cheaters did not gain much and you want to avoid extra hurdles for the honest students.
I think in most cases, the only reasonably fair options are (minding that those may be horrible options for other reasons):
* Only penalise those where you have clear evidence for cheating with the regular punishment for cheating at an exam (which is hopefully more than annulling the exam).
* Annul the exam for everybody.
* Make oral exams for everybody and have only those count.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: ### Frame challenge: why would you even care?
Mid-term exams are normally a guide to how well students are currently doing. They're just one of several assessment tools, albeit one which lets you put numbers to that assessment instead of just a "gut feel" in the classroom. But they aren't actually something which affects teaching or learning. Nor in most cases do they contribute anything to the student's final grade for the year.
So you screwed up and set them a test which they could maybe cheat on. It happens. There's no long-term consequences though, so suck it up and move on.
You've got the rest of the term to carry on teaching this module. If your gut feel tells you that the exam was unrepresentative of class progress so far, rely more on your gut feel for class progress when you're teaching the rest of the term. And when it comes to the next exams which do count towards their grades, you've learnt a useful lesson in what does and doesn't work.
If the midterm results do count towards their grades though, then of course some people have got a little boost they don't deserve. But then these results are just a small fraction of the final grade, and performance in future exams is going to bring their net result more in line with reality. Over the long term it's not going to help them that much.
But what's *really* not going to help is a witch hunt. At that point the entire class, to a student, will turn against you. Many students will lodge formal complaints, so your colleagues will also turn against you. If you're really unlucky, you may even get into trouble with whatever governing body oversees your exams or education system. There is literally no way this can end well for you or your institution. All for a crappy little midterm test which doesn't matter.
Why would you even consider this a hill to die on?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: After the online teaching and online exam experiences that the covid pandemic has forced upon the world, I, as a teacher who has grappled with similar issues, have strongly affirmed the conclusion that I held even before the pandemic: **it is impossible to certify that students do not cheat when doing online exams**. The numerous "tips" given to try to minimize cheating usually cannot prevent a dedicated cheater (e.g., scrambling questions). Even worse, not only do they fail to prevent dedicated cheating, but many of these tips stress out honest students to the point that they perform worse than they would without such artificial restrictions (e.g., reducing time for the exam to give less opportunity to cheat). Personally, I have chosen to draw the line there: **I refuse to apply any "anti-cheating" measure that unnecessarily stresses out honest students, and I am willing to accept online cheating as a consequence.**
I have reconciled myself to the accept the following:
* Only an in-person exam with human surveillance provides the highest confidence of cheating prevention. (This includes computer-based exams with secured computers: they still need human surveillance.)
* When an in-person exam with human surveillance is impossible (e.g., because of covid safety restrictions), then we teachers are unable to certify the honesty of any exams we administer. That is covid's fault, not ours.
* In that case, then as a teacher, my responsibility is to do my best to give the students the best learning experience possible with a course adapted for online delivery. It is possible to give them the full learning experience despite online restrictions.
* With this scenario, the students who seriously and honestly want to learn can receive their full-quality learning experience. However, we cannot certify their learning with a grade (that is, with the dubious assumption that grades are even able to certify learning). For students who are willing to cheat if they have the opportunity, then covid gives them the opportunity. Whether and how much they learn is their responsibility, not ours.
So, for your situation, **I recommend that you do not risk falsely accusing any honest student of cheating and simply accept that with online restrictions beyond your control, you are not able to prevent some students from cheating.** Blame covid, not yourself.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: This looks very much like *preventing piracy in the media industry*.
Using a harsh kind of DRM has an ill-fated design as it mostly only annoys honest consumers.
>
> During the next few days, some students will be informed by subject teachers that there is indication of academic dishonesty in their midterm exam
>
>
>
That does **not look fair** to me. As the **selection will always be tainted with your bias**. It isn't humanly possible to do without. And you'll even think that you'll be more fair to honest students.
A fair way might be **to tell your students upfront** that there will be a **survey of 30% randomly chosen students** that will have an extra oral interview to **explain their paper.**
Therefore, each **student will need to understand what they are writing**, even when cheating. And that is **the desired outcome anyway!**
Just be sure to have a very provable non-biased random selection process, that you can show in case someone complains. After the fact, you don't even need to interview 30%, but a smaller number if time doesn't permit.
The fair idea being that **every student** shall have a **reasonable doubt** about being subject to **be interviewed later**.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: >
> Question: Is this fair?
>
>
>
No. Not only is it unfair, but it would be perfectly legitimate for a student to refuse such an interview and demand that, unless you have specific evidence of them cheating, you stick to your published grade derivation scheme.
The fact that some students may have cheated does not grant you the right to treat arbitrary students as criminals and subject them to interrogations.
If cheating on exams bothers you so much, avoid exams in which people can cheat, or avoid exams, or avoid giving out grades.
>
> My motivation for doing this, is to protect (as much as possible) the honest students from being disadvantaged by their honesty.
>
>
>
Your motivation is inappropriate and invalid. It's invalid, because as mentioned above, you're hurting the students who did not cheat, not protecting them. If you think that ensuring a lower grade for cheaters "protects" non-cheaters - you're mis-identifying their interests.
Which brings me to the point about propriety. You're a teacher. Your motivation should be for students to learn, broaden their horizons and deepen their understanding and perceptive skills. Grades are an artifice of industrial mass processes, either in academia or in the commercial economy; and what numbers students get as grades should be of a secondary consideration to you - if at all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> As far as school policy: Before the midterm exams, the students were given a set of rules and consequences about the midterm exams: camera and microphone activated, hands visible, etc. But these rules cannot completely prevent cheating.
>
>
>
You were aware that the rules - as in place - cannot completely prevent cheating. Unless you have proof or at least a strong, reasonable suspicion ("They always had a bad grade, now they have a good one" is **not** enough - "Ten people wrote the same 100% identical sentences several times" probably is) to call a student you would be **very unfair** to them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: It most certainly is not fair. If you think someone has done something against your schools policy you bring evidence forth and you give him/her a chance to defend him or herself in whatever tribunal your institution has for dealing with academic dishonesty. You don't have the right to expect people to prove there innocence to you.
It just seems like you want to make accusations but you have insufficient evidence so you want to fish for an admission of guilt. I hope you are willing to explain at the discrimination hearing that will inevitably follow why if you had evidence of misconduct why you did not use the appropriate channels that are there to deal with it.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/27
| 1,180
| 4,847
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm in the process of applying to graduate school.
Previous to this, I published an article under the name "<NAME>". At the moment, I'm working on my second article. My MSc supervisor told me to use my legal name instead of my preferred name.
The problem here is that my full name is "<NAME>" and my legal name is "<NAME>". As it is the name of my extended family, I prefer to use "Ayasrah". This is a matter of personal preference.
I know I wasn't consistent, but I want to fix this right now. Should I use my legal name with a twist, like "<NAME> (Ayasrah)"? What will I say if someone asks me about my first article?
The case is further complicated by the fact that my email address is (usama.qasim@..) and I refer to it in the last publication.
I'm trying to finish the in-press process for my publication as soon as I can.
I'd appreciate any suggestions that relate the previous article to the current one - taking into account how I feel about the name of my family.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: There is no need to use your legal name for publication. You can use pretty much any name you like as long as you don't impersonate someone else. It isn't good to fight with your advisor, of course, but you want a long term "name" that will make it easy for people to find your work consistently.
The name you use here and in your first publication is fine. But if you want to use another, make it happen soon so that there is a minimum of confusion. You can put a note on a personal website if there are early publications under a different name, but some confusion is likely no matter what you do.
There have been scholars who have published under a name with no relation at all to their personal or legal name.
Don't be concerned about the email you use. It isn't the same as your "Professional Name".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There are famous examples of people getting spectacular results attributed to their pen name: see, for example, that of [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sealy_Gosset). In academia, the default level of trust is, perhaps paradoxically, fairly high, and unless there are serious reasons to doubt one has authored an article, it would not be put under extreme scrutiny.
Most certainly, I do not wander around conferences demanding people present me their IDs to verify that their badges are not deceitful (and conference organizers usually comply with requests about the names/affiliations on the badges, within reason!). This comes from the understanding that we all work towards a shared goal of advancing human knowledge. Providing a fake name when publishing your own result does not benefit one much, and more impactful fraud is severely punished, usually being career-ending.
Also, from your comments - you might need to explain why the name under which you are filing the documents is different from the name on the articles when you apply for funding, but this does not seem impossible in your case. It depends on the agencies you are dealing with. However, I do not see them outright denying your claims to those papers, but it can get annoying very quickly. What universities and funding agencies care about the most is a proper listing of affiliations and funding details.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to all the other remarks that have been made about the use of one name, or another, it is worth noting that many of the citation databases (for example Scopus) allow one to link more than one name to the same identity.
If, for example you have published as *<NAME>*, *<NAME>* and *<NAME>*, Scopus will allow you to link these names together so that a person who searches for you under one name will also be directed to the articles that you have published under a different name ... and the calculation of *h*-index will also reflect the totality of your publications.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: These days people get rated based on scores that have been compiled by bots. These bots struggle to put together all the credit that you are due if your name appears in various forms and spellings.
With ORCID or similar unique identifier this problem should be alleviated and in time dissipate. So making sure you are recognisable to the bots as one and the same person should be your priority.
In the mean time, it remains important that your name appears in exactly the same form on all your publications.
So **<NAME>** it is, going forward!
If your MSc supervisor has a problem with this, I don't know what that might be. I did MSc supervision at a top uni for decades and I can't really imagine that I would have denied a student the use of their preferred name.
Upvotes: 0
|
2022/11/27
| 2,175
| 9,803
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm currently in my second year of chemistry bachelor, which I love for giving me interdisciplinary insight into the world around us. My favourite course is quantum mechanics and recently I became fascinated by the whole quantum computing research. However, when I find any summer school/scholarship/internship offer, the requirement is mostly cs/physics/maths/engineering degree:(
Should I change my degree to have any chances to go far? Because honestly I have a lot of both physics and mathematics courses during my degree and I'm learning Python on my own, so I don't feel like I'm far behind compared to other degrees. Do you think putting in the extra effort like online courses and learning to program can be enough alongside my chemistry degree (probably with physics or cs minor, haven't decided yet) or should I really consider changing my major?
edit: I'm from Poland but studying in the Netherlands<issue_comment>username_1: Sometimes a "CS/Physics/Engineering-degree"-requirement will mean that they just sort out everyone not having one of those; something they'll be willing to consider your argument for why you are actually qualified after all. It is hard to predict just how many more opportunities you'd have with a more fitting major.
Since you are still quite early in your degree, you should certainly consider changing major if you are confident that quantum computing is what you want to do.
Some questions to ponder for that:
1. How much time to graduation would you actually lose when changing now? (My guess would be just a year.)
2. What are the courses you'd take in the third year of your chemistry BSc? Are any of those relevant for quantum computing at all?
3. Would you be doing an MSc or a PhD after the Bachelor? What are the requirements to get into those? Once you have the "right" postgraduate degree, a not-quite-right undergraduate degree wouldn't really matter anymore.
4. How sure are you that quantum computing is your "one true love"?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you are from chemistry then the details will be with your chemistry degree.
If you do a lot of biochem or organic chem, then you will be lacking in background, and you may struggle. On the other hand, if you do a lot of physical chemistry or quantum chemistry, then you will have an easier time of it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: When you see a requirement that's fairly broad like "cs/physics/maths/engineering", that's already an indication that the requirement is not very precise. Another way to express that rough area would be "STEM" (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math).
This means they'll be looking at the similarity between your degree and the needed skills. Chemical Engineering will be better than Civil Engineering, and both will be better than Medieval History.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: There are a few relevant questions here:
* How will your future grad school applications be treated if your eventual degree is chemistry
* How do you get to know better that quantum computing as a field will be where you can best pursue your career
* How do you prepare yourself better for pursuing a career in quantum computing
I am going to talk about the last one.
I'll organize the things you can do into 2 categories: research & study.
You should try to find research internship in quantum computing. Various countries have their own scholarship system for undergrad participating in research where the funding contribution requirement from the PI is minimal. Look those up. Often, even if you study in Netherland, there is no restriction for you to apply to, say, a Canadian department via NSERC's scholarship program.
Your eventual goal (while in undergrad) should be to have publication(s) before the end of undergrad or come close to it. If you are one of the authors of a good quality paper, I would hazard to guess that your degree title won't be a problem with any admission committee. (Do check with ppl with actual admission committee experience. I don't.)
With that, as you search for research groups that interest you, you can ask what background a specific research group would need from you for you to do an undergrad project with them. Between the PI and the department, they will also be able to tell you how you can be competitive in getting the scholarship and the placement.
Typically, good overall grade at your current program is required. And then there will be other things. So, keep your grades good. Drop courses you strongly dislike early to avoid tanking your grade, for example. Those other things likely include courses relevant to the research topic you will propose with the PI. That's why your course load should likely be different from a typical chemistry major. A side-effect is: if you missed some chemistry courses that another student would have at the same year at your institute, it won't be noticed.
If and when you do interact with researchers in this manner, do specifically ask what review paper or conference presentation or other introductory materials they would recommend for you to understand the related areas for quantum computing -- in order for you to guide your study before switching degree/institution. For example, obviously theoretical computer science is related. Theoretical computer science, however, is a large and diverse field. Studying theoretical computer science topics broadly will get you nowhere in terms of pursuing a career in quantum computing (other than getting you smarter, which I suppose could be limitless in itself; but let's not be pedantic here.)
The second half about mentioning that you would like guidance before switching degree/institution leads to the next point I will comment.
Switching degree/institution for an intellectual pursuit is admirable. Hopefully people will relate to that. They will also hopefully understand its gravity and therefore understand why you would need their guidance in the first place -- as opposed to from your own institute and your own degree program.
The gravity part should be understood by yourself as well.
How do you know quantum computing is for you? How do you know more whether you will be successful in quantum computing?
I'll leave that to yourself and others. I think getting to know more about quantum computing and the contributing disciplines will help. So let's talk about those.
I would suggest you start taking some math courses: linear algebra and real analysis. Linear algebra courses can often be matrix algebra in reality. You need exposure to the theory side of linear algebra.
As with any other subjects, you can potentially take a more applied course and supplement with your own study to gain exposure to the theory side. And you can ask subject-specific questions separately. e.g. "which textbooks are good if I want to understand the theories behind linear algebra with an eye on applications to quantum mechanics and quantum computing". And then people may answer: Friedberg, Hoffmann. etc.
You should also try to take quantum theory courses. Your introductory quantum mechanics course likely focused on hydrogen atoms and the solution to Schrodinger's equation with harmonic potential. You should ask separate questions on what "quantum theory" would entail. But say, why should Schrodinger's equation even be valid in the first place and why does it have the form it does? Maybe a quantum theory course would cover materials necessary to answer such questions.
I would also suggest taking some lab courses in physics. Many things in that umbrella can help actually. You should ask a separate question as usual.
Some computer science courses may help. Same with information theory. Statistics. The list can go on. The issues with these subjects though is that I would expect the relevant courses for you have tons of pre-requisite that are *not* relevant for you. That's why I don't recommend them. You can also ask a separate question like "what computer science courses should I take to help pursue a career in quantum computing" etc.
Note that thus far I have not mentioned anything about alternative degree. One quick tip first: keep an eye out for degree programs at your institute that have requirements that are close to the courses that you eventually shortlist for yourself. That could be how you find the degree to switch into.
Other than the above tip, my advise is actually: you do not have to switch degree before you start to prepare. You can first prepare and explore before you eventually switch degree or even institute.
You prepare by knowing more about quantum computing and gaining hard skills/knowledge that are foundational to quantum computing. The eventual goal (in undergrad) for you should be to get research scholarship**s** and be a part of a research publication.
The emphasis on plural here is intentional. Research can be hard. It can take you a few internship to be productive eventually.
So start prepping early!
I guess, that's a good ender.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: If you have a background in *computational chemistry* you are qualified to work in the field of *quantum information* (the software side of quantum computing).
If you have a background in *physical chemistry experiment* you are qualified to work in the field of *quantum computing hardware*. There are further subspecialties, such as nanofabrication and optics.
A background in organic chemistry, analytical chemistry, etc. will be of no use to you. If you just have a general chemistry bachelors degree, I would suggest getting a more specialized bachelors degree.
A standard degree in physics, computer science, math, or engineering is also not very relevant to quantum computing. It's a very specialized business.
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/11/27
| 973
| 4,214
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am expected to teach a large (80-100 students) graduate level class in AI this spring. The class is offered exclusively online, and students from various backgrounds are expected to join. It is not possible to meet face to face, as they are spread all around the world. Office hours are also virtual. I am very interested in learning about effective ways to manage and motivate this class.<issue_comment>username_1: From my own (limited) experience with teaching online and offline, I found that the number of people that are really engaging with you, showing initiative and asking questions is mostly a small fraction of the whole group and when moving to online teaching, that fraction decreases even further.
But what seems to work in terms of engaging the students and adding interactive elements is incorporating surveys or quizzes into the teaching structure, the latter could even be used competetively (who solves it the fastest?), adding a gamification element. There are great online tools to use for that prpose, e.g. [this](https://quizizz.com/) or [this](https://kahoot.it/).
Another issue with online teaching is that people often aren't as concentrated and tend to do other things on the side or even stop listening altogehter. I recently participated in an online conference as a speaker. That conference was organized by a university and students could get credit for attending the whole conference. To get the credits, they had to take a short survey at the end of each block that asked several questions regarding the content of the lectures of that block, ensuring (to some extent, as a system like that doesn't prevent cheating) that the students actually listened to what was said. Maybe a similar solution can also be introduced when teaching a class.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Some things will be very similar to in-person. Don't speak in a monotone and such-like advice. Speak neither very fast nor very slow, but find that "sweet spot." And so on. All the little things that make speaking to a group more than just reading off your slides. Make sure they have time to write down stuff if they need to.
Pick your software and learn the quirks. If you wind up spending 20 minutes of a 1 hour class messing with the software it will be annoying. Make sure you understand how to make your camera and microphone work and other mundane stuff. Make sure you are reasonably well lit so you can be seen, if you are using a camera. Make sure in advance that your microphone works. If you are recording make sure you understand how to start and stop that. And other such "mechanical" stuff.
Usually you want to mute everybody else's microphone during your presentation.
With 100 people it might be a problem to have questions during. Or maybe not. Some software lets a text chat go on during the presentation. Maybe they can ask questions and answer each other. Keep an eye for it becoming disruptive.
Make sure you know how to distribute extra material, files and such. Email to the group? Stick it in the chat? Make sure you know what works so it does not delay the class.
If you are going to show computer screens of info, or show them how to do stuff on screen, make sure you know how to show your screen, and how to get back to your camera.
Make sure your location is free from interruptions. If the dog and the cat and the toddler wander through, each getting their 15 minutes of fame, it uses up time that presumably your students paid for.
After that it's how to fit stuff into a computer screen so that it is interesting, informative, and covers the class material.
My personal bias is avoid PowerPoint and anything that looks like it, but that's just me. Every PPT presentation winds up looking like every other one, rows and rows of bullet points.
Make use of drawings, tables, graphs, etc., as makes sense.
With a group of 100 you might need an assistant. You might not see a question while you are busy explaining technical details. Your helper can keep an eye on the chat and whatever your software uses to indicate a raised hand. They can nudge you when there is a good time to stop and answer questions.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/27
| 1,936
| 8,400
|
<issue_start>username_0: During the postdoc phase, at least in math, it's usually a very short period, like 1 or 2 years. Isn't it really important to write something and get it out there, even if it's of no real significance or interest? The reason I ask is that a postdoc *could* spend more time working on a more significant paper, but if you have to apply for a job in one year, if you don't do something to put something on your CV, people will look at your publication record and say, "This applicant didn't do anything!" I don't want to give people the impression that I haven't done anything if it's not true!
If a postdoc is actually doing something, but it doesn't appear on the CV, does it count? A postdoc could be working on a project that will take several years, but if people look at the application and there's no string of papers, people may automatically reject it. "Invisible work" appears to not matter.<issue_comment>username_1: A two-edged sword, perhaps. Writing "impactful" papers in math, short or not, isn't an easy task or one that can necessarily be time limited.
Papers of low quality aren't going to help you. People won't just count your papers and assume they are good. The market is too tough for that to work.
The alternative is to have a section on your CV for *Work in Progress* in which you name projects that you are working on. This is worth having in any case.
If you are collaborating with people, they can help you in your job search, indicating your work and the quality of your ideas. If you're not collaborating, then consider starting.
But if you can, indeed, whip out short *impactful* papers, then, by all means do that. But you won't likely get published within that year's timeframe in any case, so at best you may have some submission(s) in process.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I disagree with one point made by username_1. People will absolutely count your papers. Whether it is a job interview panel or a promotion, the number of publications is going to be a metric everyone will take into account. In some less research-focused places the number of papers is going to be the only measure of research performance people are going to be concerned with. In more prestigious and research-oriented Universities some people on the panel might have a better understanding of how good the journal is. And only in the top-tier places someone on the panel might actually have the expertise and time to bother reading the papers and evaluate the quality of your research.
* Boosting the number of your research outputs (e.g. via salami slicing, proceedings, short articles with bloated list of authors, repeating the same research with minor modifications) is grumbled upon. But it will get you through the majority of doors in your career, except a few most challenging ones. People do it, and in most places they absolutely get away with doing it. This is generally a safe and reliable strategy to move your career forward -- see <NAME>'s [Google Scholar](https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=Ptx0xPkAAAAJ&view_op=list_works&sortby=pubdate) as a notable example.
* Focusing on quality and ending up with less publications might close many doors (as your CV will be dismissed without exploring the quality of your papers), but may potentially get you to the top-tier places. This is a high risk / high reward strategy. People who attempt it are usually perfectionists or idealists, for whom writing a sub-par paper is not an option.
This highlights a poor state of academia these days, with simplest metrics of performance being predominantly in use. As the number of people competing for place in academia increases, and the number of available positions shrinks, the change towards a more rigorous and nuanced evaluation of research efficiency seems unlikely.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: You are still in the beginning of your career, and writing good papers is also a skill that takes time to learn. You don't specify whether how much experience you have with getting papers published so far, but it's likely at most a couple of papers, possibly none as first author or the main writer.
Getting your first paper all the way through the publication process will teach you a lot, and will improve the chances of timely publication of your later, more important results. If you already have that basic experience, there is still more to learn from comments from new reviewers, and trying to get the papers through to higher rated journals.
Whereas if you focus on purely research for a few years, it may be that your eventual results don't get the attention they deserve due to poorly written paper.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The job market in pure mathematics is extremely competitive.
If you don't have an impactful paper out of your postdocs, you won't get a permanent research-oriented job, no matter how many short unimpactful papers you have.
The job market essentially is forcing everyone to gamble.
For further postdocs, what matters is convincing people that you have that impactful paper in you - in pure mathematics the value of postdoc to a hiring department is mostly that they can say 'This excellent mathematician was a postdoc here.' (Pure mathematicians do collaborate, but postdocs are usually working on their own projects in collaboration with permanent faculty, not working on the projects of the permanent faculty.) Having some moderately interesting papers does give evidence of potential for future productivity. Publishing worked out exercises does not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: **Is writing *lots and lots and lots* of unsubstantial papers is a career booster in academia?**
Hell yes, it sure works for *some*.
**But does this not undermine the efficacy of academia in the long run, degrade public trust in science, and create an environment in which hiring and promotion decisions are increasingly made by people who never contributed anything of substance themselves?**
Yeah... what do *you* think?
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: I am a professor in a mathematics department at a state research university (University of Georgia). We do not have requirements on the publication rate (or record) of our tenure track faculty, but we have some informal expectations. Two or more papers per year is pretty good. Less than one paper per year is not so good, unless these papers are exceptional in quality: in mathematics, the very top journals are so elite that the majority of lifelong research mathematicians never publish in them.
On average, a postdoc has a lower teaching load than a tenure track job, and even when the numbers are equal, postdocs mainly teach less demanding courses. (For instance, several of our postdocs are currently teaching two sections of first semester calculus. I am currently teaching undergraduate real analysis and graduate algebraic number theory.)
So the following conclusion seems reasonably inexorable: if you wish to attain a job as a tenure-track professor at a research-intensive institution, you have to show during your postdoc that you can attain the quantity as well as the quality of research that will be expected of you in that tenure-track job. Many postdocs are still finding their research footing and, in some cases, really just beginning doing their research in a largely undirected way. Such people may not be putting out multiple strong papers a year. But I can assure you that the tenure track job interviews are full of postdocs who are hitting those marks.
In 2022 an assistant professor of mathematics is not really a "journeyman" who is just starting to do business for themselves; rather these are people who already have a research program with some successes in their rear view mirror. To get to this point takes time, and as mentioned in another answer, multiple postdocs totaling 4-6 years are becoming increasingly common.
I do want to end by mentioning that we are also not looking to hire people who are in the practice of writing papers just to have publications. If half of your publications are in journals that are not especially reputable (or worse, conference proceedings or other venues where the rigor of the peer review is less than clear), you will not be an attractive candidate.
It's a competitive world out there, for sure. Good luck to everyone.
Upvotes: 4
|
2022/11/28
| 1,330
| 5,797
|
<issue_start>username_0: During my masters I experienced a burnout and as a result of that my masters took 3 years instead of the usual 2 years. I will have an interview soon for a PhD position and one of the questions that could come up is why my master took longer than usual. Should I tell this reason? Or should I just say it took longer without further explanation
Pros of telling:
* it is more honest and it could be relevant for the position
* it gives a valid reason for the delay
Cons of telling:
* it could be considered oversharing or not appropriate to mention at that time
* it could possibly negatively impact my chances of getting the position
The question
[Should I mention mental condition?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/80655/75368) is similar to this but talks about a CV instead of an interview.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a judgment call that you might consider making at the time it might seem advantageous or not to do so. I wouldn't decide in advance to do it, but would retain the option.
Burnout is pretty common and the reasons are varied. I had the same issue and know that my own reason was overextending. Too many courses, too many important outside interests. Not health, per se, but just exhaustions with some loss of focus. In my case, however, the issue never arose and I was lucky to have advisors who recognized the issue but still supported me. You might have that same advantage.
There shouldn't be any "shame" around burnout, but it can also seem like a facile excuse for poor performance.
I wonder, also, how common it is for students to take an extra year where you are. If it is moderately common then it probably isn't an issue.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I recommend making honesty and candour a general part of your dealings with others, so I would recommend being open to disclosing limitations and obstacles in this type of situation. But before you even get to that part, agonising over whether you should or should not disclose this information is jumping forward a step. The more important preliminary step is to *ask yourself* why you think you will succeed in a PhD candidature when you experienced burnout even over a substantially shorter Masters program. Presumably you have thought about this and have a view about it, so either you have some good reason to believe that you will do better this time, or you are likely making a bad decision for yourself by pursuing a PhD candidature at this time.
Start by engaging in this type of introspection and have a think about what, if anything, has changed since you did your Masters program. What caused the burnout in your Masters program? How did that affect your life? What, if anything, has changed since then that would make you more resilient to this type of burnout (or less susceptible to its cause)? If you were to eschew a PhD candidature right now, what are your other options? Is a PhD candidature a good pathway for you right now relative to these other options? Would you benefit from some other opportunity at present (e.g., experience in the workforce, etc.)? If you can think sensibly about these questions and make the right decision for yourself, that should significantly reduce your anxieties about explaining your position to others. Often anxiety over disclosing true information in such cases stems from a lack of confidence that the problem raised by that disclosure is actually solved.
Now, assuming you decide to go through with your application and you get to the interview, what can you say if the matter is raised? Firstly, you can point out that you finished your Masters program successfully, albeit in a longer timeframe than initially planned. This shows that you can experience an adverse circumstance and push through it to successful completion. Secondly, you should have done some introspection on this experience and learned from it, so you should now have a set of methods (perhaps including taking longer) that will allow you to get through a PhD candidature even if you experience burnout again. Once you are able to explain your pathway adequately to yourself, you should be able to explain it to others.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I don't think there's a right answer for how to proceed, just different strategies, and you have to pick the one that feels best to you.
An alternative to the "completely honest" strategy, is the "selectively honest" strategy. You want to be honest (and of course you must not *lie*), but you aren't obligated to go into details of your personal life in an interview.
Taking one extra year to finish a master's degree seems fairly innocuous to me. I don't think a big explanation is required. I think you could say that due to a personal matter, you were delayed in completing your studies. Or you could say that you decided to take an extra year to complete the program, rather than rushing, to ensure that you achieved your best possible performance. I think these are true statements that should sufficiently explain a year gap to an interviewer, without revealing details of your personal life that you might not be comfortable sharing.
One last piece of unsolicited advice... it's good to have a strategy for questions that could come up about sensitive topics. But, don't overfocus on your response to the point where you neglect to prepare in other areas. If this issue really is a big deal to the PhD program, then maybe that program isn't a good fit for you. If it is not a big issue (which I suspect it probably isn't), then your performance on questions they will ask you about your knowledge of the material and field, and your interest in their department, will be much more important for how your interview performance is judged.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/11/28
| 822
| 3,148
|
<issue_start>username_0: Are citation mistakes and mistakes in paraphrasing considered plagiarism?
I read opposite opinions on if this could be considered plagiarism or it is simply something else.<issue_comment>username_1: This is a very clear-cut case.
Taking someone else's work and presenting it as your own is plagiarism, full stop. No amount of paraphrasing could ever save that, and teaching the connection between paraphrasing and plagiarism is quite terrible, honestly. These are two separate things entirely - one is proper credit attribution and another is an ability to synthesize and interpret information from different sources.
Misrepresenting others' work is also bad, of course, but it is yet another topic. Going by the example by <NAME> in the comments:
>
> Kittey et al says "Lions are cats"
>
>
>
* Proper representation: "Lions are cats (Kittey et al)".
* Proper representation with paraphrasing: "Lions are large cats of the genus Panthera (Kittey et al, wiki)".
* Plagiarism, naïve: "Lions are cats" (no attribution).
* Misrepresentation, benign: "Lionesses are cats (Kittey et al)" (may come from misunderstanding, errors in translation etc.).
* Misrepresentation, severe: "Zebras are cats (Kittey et al)" (Kittey et al would likely be offended at the very suggestion they have ever stated that nonsense).
* Plagiarism and misrepresentation combined: "Lions are cats of the species Panthera" (no attribution).
Only two of the above are acceptable.
If the last one could be traced to its origin with a high degree of certainty, this is a pretty serious offense of trying to steal others' intellectual work and cover the tracks. There is also being too sloppy to do so convincingly, probably for the better.
If anyone makes mistakes in citations out of the desire to paraphrase in order to avoid plagiarism, they need to go way back and understand what plagiarism is. And also figure out why are they even paraphrasing in the first place.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: An action needs to have an element of will for it in order to constitute plagiarism. A honest mistake
* "cats are lions" (Kittey et al.)
is not plagiarism, nor is an accidental citation error
* "Lions are cats" [5] -- when it should be [4].
They still reflect negatively on the writer and they run the risk of being taken for plagiarism as many engaged in plagiarism talk excuse their bad action by a "honest mistake".
There has been at least one high profile case where an academic committee decided that an action was not plagiarism because the idea of someone else made it through iterative versions of lecture notes through years of teaching, evolving, and finally being made part of a text book. Somewhere along this line, the author forgot that it was not his work only. That is an exception, but shows that in practice, plagiarism is usually not so well defined.
Another source of confusion is the rediscovery of certain facts. It is quite common in the Engineering field or in Mathematics to rediscover the same fact. Some well-known theorems suddenly get different names because of this.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/28
| 515
| 2,133
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am applying to graduate schools this year for a master's degree.
I've read that some universities will reject some "strong" applicants because they believe this student would be accepted by a "top" university and would rather go there.
I am specifically interested in a particular university (which is not considered a "top" university) because their profile in my area of interest is quite strong, and the location is much more preferable as per personal interests.
How do I make sure they won't reject me on the basis that I'd rather go elsewhere?
Is this not even a problem - and I'm worrying too much?
Should I mention in my SoP that this university is my "top" choice?<issue_comment>username_1: I wouldn't phrase it exactly like that and I wouldn't spend too many words on it but it is probably fine to mention it briefly.
But if you can say *why* you are *particularly interested* in study at this university it won't hurt and might have a small impact.
But, as always, focus the SoP on what you intend to study, to accomplish in study and in your career.
The "location" being important isn't going to help you however. Certain professors on their faculty would be more impactful. Or a research seminar that continues there.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I won't say something obvious, like "I'm interested in your school because of its strong reputation in x,y,z". The SOP is an opportunity to say something really specific about how your research interests align with their school/faculty/department ethos, etc. Do some digging on each school and the professors you want to work with, and say something that demonstrates a unique and sincere connection, e.g. "Professor XXX's research on xxxxx strongly relates to my current studies in xxxx. If admitted to XXX University, I hope to xyz.... You can sprinkle in really specific details simply by looking on their professional website or looking up talks they've been a part of, etc. Also, the passion for their research should be sincere. I only include the names of professors that I genuinely would like to work with.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/29
| 1,266
| 4,879
|
<issue_start>username_0: Where do we draw the line between *suspicion* and *evidence* of cheating on an exam?
For example, on an online timed essay exam, in a student's essay, 99% of the sentences are identical to sentences found in an online essay (not written by the student). That's evidence of cheating, and warrants consequences, right? What if it's, say, 12%? That's (highly) suspicious, and does not warrant consequences, right? Where do we draw the line between suspicion, and evidence, of cheating?
I know there are academic honesty committees that are designated to deal with this question: so where do they draw the line?
I am looking for an answer that is:
* justifiable
* as non-subjective as possible
* practical
This is a follow-up to [Is it fair to have follow-up interviews after a test following suspicions of cheating?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/190996/is-it-fair-to-have-follow-up-interviews-after-a-test-following-suspicions-of-che/191055?noredirect=1#comment515521_191055).<issue_comment>username_1: There are basically three possible burdens of proof:
* **Preponderance of the evidence.** This is what is used by the [University of California](https://deanofstudents.ucla.edu/individual-student-code#:%7E:text=J.-,Standard%20of%20Proof,of%20which%20they%20are%20accused.0). It needs to be "more likely than not" that the misconduct occurred.
* **Clear and convincing evidence.** This is what is used by [New Mexico State University](https://arp.nmsu.edu/5-10/). It needs to be reasonably clear that that the misconduct occurred -- i.e., not just more likely than not, but substantially likely.
* **Beyond any reasonable doubt.** This is required for criminal convictions in the US, but from a quick search, I cannot find any universities that use this standard.
So, either of the first two seem to be justifiable. Personally, I prefer the second, but it probably varies by school; some schools have so much cheating that more drastic measures have to be taken.
The key point, though, is that the burden of proof and the investigation procedure is to be worked out **in advance by the institution as a whole.** In my answer to your linked post, I advised you against single-handedly inventing an investigatory procedure after an exam had taken place. My objection to your scheme was not that you were being "too unfair"; rather, my objection was that individual instructors should not be inventing schemes on-the-fly. Your institution's policies should provide guidelines for how to approach such cases. For example, under the University of California's guidelines, it looks like you would be allowed to subject your suspected cheaters to a technical interview, but you would have to offload your findings to a third-party committee for a determination of guilt, rather than playing judge and jury yourself.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If a professor strongly suspects a student of cheating but doesn't have solid proof, I think it's better to do more investigation and follow up instead of just reaching a "yes" or "no" conclusion:
* The professor can set up a meeting and **ask the student a few questions about the assignment**. Like if it's an exam, to further explain some of their answers. If the student then has no idea what they wrote it is likely they are cheating. Downside: see the related post, [Is it fair to have follow-up interviews after a test following suspicions of cheating?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/190996/is-it-fair-to-have-follow-up-interviews-after-a-test-following-suspicions-of-che)
* When multiple students are suspected, some professors **send out an email to elicit confessions**: something along the lines of "we know that some of you have cheated. If you confess, you will get a 0 on this assignment, otherwise we will give you a 0 for the class". Downside: not all students who've cheated are known, not all will confess, and those who are unknown and haven't confessed will get away with it. IME a lot of students are well aware of this and won't take the bait
Personally I don't like those approaches. What I recommend is, if you strongly believe a student has cheated but don't have solid proof, **let them get away with it, but ensure they are monitored much more closely next time**. The reason being, students who cheat *rarely* only do so once, and if a student is cheating to keep up in your class, they likely won't keep up once the cheating is no longer possible. Especially if the assignment in question is not really important in the final grade. Downside: there's still the possibility that the student shapes up for future assignments and just gets away with it. But the fact you suspect cheating but can't confirm it means that, besides potentially prosecuting an innocent student, you don't have many good alternatives.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/29
| 770
| 3,387
|
<issue_start>username_0: I wrote a paper that invalids a previous result. The referee heavily attacks "minor points" such as typos, misuse of jargons, overall "hard to read", and some story-telling or speculation could be off. The referee avoids direct commenting on the main result.
My question is, in an academic debate, how to deal with people rejecting or attacking a paper not for its major contribution but for "minor" things?
Or, should I convince myself that those "minor things" are not actually minor?<issue_comment>username_1: It is unclear from your question what the context is for a referee to be offering comments on your paper. You refer to it as an "academic debate" but refereeing of a paper for peer review is not a debate --- it is a process where referees seek to identify problems in a paper that ought to be fixed before publication occurs. If this is the context then I would recommend that you be thankful that you have referees who are doing a through job of reviewing your papers and pointing out shortcomings.
In cases where a paper is hard to read or understand, the reviewers will sometimes want this aspect of the paper fixed before proceeding to a substantive review of the ideas in the paper. That can occur when there are problems with the writing that obscure the main idea in the paper or distract from the main idea to such an extent that the referee does not wish to review that aspect of the paper at the present time. From your description it sounds like these issues are a barrier to publication and are possibly even a barrier to substantive review of your main argument, so I would not consider them to be minor issues (based on your description). Even if you were to conclude that the points raised are "minor", where does your evaluative labelling of the referee comments get you?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Right now - fix those issues.
You can disagree with reviewers and offer counter-arguments at any time during the review process. There can be an irreconcilable difference of opinion, usually concerning stylistic choices; ultimately, it would be up to the editor and authors to resolve. But outright disagreeing from the very beginning is almost never a good idea.
You see, reviewers are not your enemies nor the obstacles standing between you and another line in your CV. They are fellow researchers who spend their unpaid time trying to help you improve the article and offering the perspective you do not have. They are among what is statistically likely to be very few people who will ever read this work, and they are generally more representative of the potential reader than you, the authors. If you fail to convince them, what makes you believe this paper of yours would be good at convincing anyone at all? And also, if the reviewer agreed with your main idea, would you be any more inclined to address these "minor" issues?
Try your best to understand the criticism and improve the manuscript. If you believe there is a conflict of interest or genuine stubbornness, claims along the lines of "the old result is flawless, the paper is wrong" are generally dismissible if the reviewer can not be bothered to elaborate on their stance. Of course, you should respond in a civil way, explaining that you have provided arguments A, B, and C, neither of which was challenged in any way.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/29
| 1,763
| 7,248
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an assistant professor in an engineering field, and my wife is a PhD student in a physics-related field. We live in an eastern European country and work in different institutes. I am quite happy with my colleagues and boss, and I really enjoy working with them. They are very friendly, and we come along pretty well.
My wife, however, has some serious issues with her supervisor, and honestly, I have no idea how I should get involved and the handle the situation. Her supervisor is a (around 40 years old) guy who is willing to get habilitation. Since he does not have enough publications, recently he has been trying hard to have some papers published.
Two years ago, he published his first paper with my wife, and he put himself as the first author. This was understandable, because, as my wife told me, he had the major contribution. Without disclosing it to my wife, he then continued working on the topic, which is supposed to be my wife's PhD dissertation, and published a single-author paper. He thanked my wife in the acknowledgment, as a way to keep her silent. My wife was totally mad about this and even asked the guy to remove her from the acknowledgment, but he refused and justified his action.
This year, my wife worked pretty hard on a paper, and when the first draft of the paper was ready, she sent it to him to work on it and supply his contribution. He did so, but also put his name as the first author. Therefore, they had a big argument, and he rationalized this by saying that his contribution is more important, he has devoted his familty-time to this. and he needs to be the first author because he has to get habilitation, etc.
So, my question is: how I should handle this situation? She is very frustrated now and this is seriously influencing our life. Since she is in her last year of PhD, I don't want her to take a wrong action and jeopardize her PhD. On the other hand, this guy has to know that he is not allowed to abuse others to compensate his years without publication.
**Clarification 1**: My wife has not asked me to handle the situation, neither I have no intention of making a *direct* interference.
**Clarification 2**: Habilitation is a high scientific degree (before professorship) in some European countries that allows one to be the supervisor of a PhD candidate.
**Clarification 3**: The question is not "how to make my wife feels better?" rather "how, as a spouse, advise her to do the right thing in this difficult situation?"<issue_comment>username_1: Firstly, I see no reason why your wife should not deal with this issue directly, rather than acting through her husband. When a student has a problem with their supervisor there are actions they can take, either through direct discussion or by elevating disputes to the Head of School. Having an aggrieved spouse come in to "handle the situation" is unusual and it begs the question of what exactly your role in that process would be. (It sounds faintly menacing, but maybe I'm reading more into it than is intended.)
Now to the substance of the problem. As a general rule, disagreements over authorship can be lessened substantially by negotiating authorship arrangements *prior to commencing research*. In cases where there are repeated disputes over authorship there should be some prior agreement made for future work or your wife should seek to change supervisors --- she should certainly avoid sharing any more research with him without a prior agreement on authorship of that research. If your description is accurate then it does indeed sound like this academic is using irrelevant issues to claim greater authorship than is warranted (i.e., his need for habilitation, his family time, etc.). This sounds like it could arguably amount to an abuse of the supervisory process. Since your wife has not had any success discussing this directly with her supervisor, she could raise this with the Head of School and seek a resolution there. She could ask to have an independent senior academic review the existing authorship dispute(s) and offer a binding resolution, and she could also ask to have a process put in place for future work, to ensure that she is not "gazumped" in her research project by her own supervisor.
In regard to your own involvement, I recommend that you encourage your wife to take actions on these matters directly. At most you might be included as a "support person" in relevant meetings, and you could give her advice and help behind the scenes, but it would be unusual to involve yourself beyond that. Professionals operating in academia are expected to be able to manage workplace disputes like adults, without calling parents/spouses to act for them.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There is one option which is that your wife can change supervisors. Even changing to another institution.
The reasons can be many and I have seen it done by several friends. One moved country, institution and supervisor. The new supervisor was really helpful.
While it may not be easy for your wife, it may well cause many more issues for her current supervisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Clarification 1: My wife has not asked me to handle the situation, neither I have no intention of making a direct interference.
>
>
>
Well, there you go. Do not get involved.
Feel free to support your wife in personal ways, as you would for any issue that a partner is going through.
But this is not your concern to place yourself in. It’s not even clear what you believe “handling this situation” looks like from your position as an outside, uninvolved third party.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Clarification 3: The question is not "how to make my wife feels
> better?" rather "how, as a spouse, advise her to do the right thing in
> this difficult situation?"
>
>
>
Please define the right thing. Or better, let *your wife* define the right thing to do.
What do you know?
You are a male and you are already assistant professor.
It should be clear to you how difficult is getting "up" there, how much support you need and how powerful [is statistic](https://www.nature.com/articles/d43978-021-00037-2).
Given all these premises, the right thing to do is doing nothing(\*), apart from giving her unconditional support. Even if tomorrow they say "screw the PhD, I take a job as a gardener 30 km from the city".
(\*) disclaimer, ethics may vary, so take what I say with a pinch of salt...
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: I am going to say
1. Invest some time on the issue together
2.remain calm, even when she is not.
2. Make sure she is comfortable with you showing up to her education department since I doubt you would want him over your house.
3. Answer any questions that he might have about the situation fair and moderate any changes that may have happened since their last talk
4. Have him and her notice that the situation bothers you and it a issue at home.
5. Trust that the issue will remain identified as a problem not as a here and now issue.
6. Exchange any information that may be handled by your prospective as a directive doctor
7. Don't yell or make a issue out of hand and keep your inside voice at all times.
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/11/29
| 765
| 3,175
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am geographically limited in my academic job search. I have seen some jobs I am qualified for, but might not be 100% fit. For example, I have the qualifications but only a few papers on the topic whereas most of my work is in other areas. Any insight would be appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: Not applying is suboptimal and self defeating. It is the university that you apply to that makes the determination of your "fit". They know things that you don't and there may be factors that make you seem better to them than you do to yourself.
Yes. Apply. Put some effort into it.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: If it's somewhere that you could envision yourself being successful and somewhere that you would like to work then you should apply.
Often the research areas specified in an advertisement are the result of an internal negotiation with different people having a different opinion about what is needed (or would benefit them the most). So they are not necessarily rigid requirements. Depending on how specific the requirements are there may be few, if any, people who are a 100% fit.
The panel can ask for anything they want but ultimately they will need to choose from the applications they receive. Just make a solid case for why your experience/future plans complement the department/university (and are viable there) in the application.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Being a perfect perfect fit is unreal.
Many applicants may have abilities/experiences that you lack, and you may have many other abilities/experiences that they lack.
Applying is the only way to be considered to get the job. Skills that you need to get the job done may come with some time in the job.
Apply, and if you don't get the job, apply for the next offer you find.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: “Don’t put limitations on yourself. Other people will do that for you.”
— <NAME> ([2010 TED Talk](https://youtu.be/PVfd6fg7QsM)\*)
\*The quote is at the 16:10 mark, but do yourself a favor and watch the whole thing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes.
----
Assuming you are actually interested in that job.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: You should read the job ad in the *broadest* possible sense.
If you are working in a field, there is a natural tendency to read things like job ads (or other descriptions of qualification) in a very narrow sense: While you know something about X, you certainly know a few people who know significantly more about X. Nevertheless, you might be a real expert on X - not compared to those few people, but those might well not apply, but compared to the vast majority of other applicant - which might well make you both an expert on X, and the most qualified candidate.
Of couse, it also depends what the people who wrote the job ad had in mind. There is always the possibility that they had someone specific in mind, or a very specific field. But another possibility is that they thought that field X is fashionable, but they will be rather happy to hire someone who knows lots about X, even though he/she is not among the 10 leading researchers in the field.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/29
| 1,551
| 4,900
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm working on a project to analyze PubMed abstracts over a given period. I'm using the PubMed API (Entrez) to get PMIDs over a given period. I'm submitting queries looking like this:
2001/06/03:2001/06/03[dp]
This would result in all PMIDs with a publication date of the 3rd of June in 2001.
However, for some days, over 10.000 PMIDs were generated.
What can I do to ensure that I get all PMIDs that were generated in a day?
If I could download them from another source, that would be perfectly fine for my application.<issue_comment>username_1: From [their help pages](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/help/#download-pubmed-data) one finds:
>
> **Download PubMed data**
>
>
>
>
> Once a year, NLM releases a complete (baseline) set of PubMed citation records in XML format for download from our FTP servers. Incremental update files are released daily and include new, revised, and deleted citations. The PubMed DTD states any changes to the structure and allowed elements from year to year.
>
>
>
So it seems you should be using their FTP server.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: To overcome the 10,000 record limit, use EDirect. The *[E-utilities in Depth](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25499/)* page, says:
>
> For PubMed, ESearch can only retrieve the first 10,000 records
> matching the query. To obtain more than 10,000 PubMed
> records, consider using [EDirect](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK179288/) that contains
> additional logic to batch PubMed search results
> automatically so that an arbitrary number can be retrieved
>
>
>
By downloading the UNIX based EDirect utilities you can run a command line search similar to the following:
>
> esearch -db pubmed -query "2001/06/01 [dp]" | efetch -format uilist
>
>
>
which will produce many more than 10,000 records. Please note, however, that when I ran this particular command (without having particularly studies the documentation) I received the following error:
>
> Actual PMID count 31242 does not match expected total 32637
>
>
>
I don't imagine that it will take much effort on your part to discover the source of the error and overcome it. The important thing is that the command line utility `esearch`, along with the other EDirect utilities, gives you much more flexibility than using the direct HTTP interfact.
An alternative approach, of which I give only a bare-bones outline here, is often referred to loosely as "divide and conquer". Note that this is different from the formal, recursive, [divide-and-conquer algorithm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide-and-conquer_algorithm) common in some areas of computer science.
By *divide-and-conquer*, I am referring to the idea that if you cannot directly solve the problem you want, then break it down into a series of (preferably mutually exclusive but jointly complete) sub-problems, each of which is solvable. For example ... and forgive me, but I am about to illustrate my point with a division method that will not actually work ... consider the possibility that you wish to download the PubMed identifiers (PMIDs) for documents published on 2022-01-01. Assume also, hypothetically, that there are 34,567 such records. You would know that there were 34,567 records because PuMed would return a result that included the string:
>
> 34,57620
>
>
>
Your next step would then be to ask yourself what sequence of queries you could submit to PubMed which (a) taken together give you all the records you wanted, but (b) taken individually would each return fewer than 10,000 results. One obvious (but, as I said, unfortunately unworkable) approach would be to submit the following 26 queries:
>
> 2001/06/03:2001/06/03 [dp] a\* [au]
>
>
>
>
> 2001/06/03:2001/06/03 [dp] b\* [au]
>
>
>
>
> 2001/06/03:2001/06/03 [dp] c\* [au]
>
>
>
... and so forth. That is, you'd that search for all records published on 2001/06/03 that also had an author whose name began with 'A', and then 'B', etc.
Unfortunately, although this illustrates the divide-and-conquer idea, it will not work for the reason that PubMed requires truncated names (i.e., those where a wildcard `*` is used), to be given with at least four (!) initial letters. However, you might experiment, ***as I have***, with submitting queries that use the record creation date (CRDT) as the way of slicing and dicing the records for a particular publication date. For example, whereas
>
> 2001/06/01 [dp]
>
>
>
returns 32,637 results, the diced queries:
>
> 2001/06/01 [dp] 2000/01/01:2001/06/01 [CRDT]
>
>
>
followed by:
>
> 2001/06/01 [dp] 2001/06/01:2001/06/20 [CRDT]
>
>
>
chop the large, unobtainable, parcel of records into downloadable bundles that contain fewer than 10,000 entries. Clearly, you would need to submit further queries with a CRDT range beyond 2001/06/20.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/29
| 1,542
| 5,045
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the middle of an authorship dispute and need some help. Raw data was shared with me by a Master's student, and we re-analyzed the data for the publication. I was going under the assumption that the data were already published. Summary statistics (e.g. mean and standard deviations) are all publicly available in the thesis. We re-analyzed the data so that it we could combine with our own data.
If summary statistics of data are freely available online (and not subject to copyright issues) what does this mean for the raw data? Any relevant links will be much appreciated. Note the dispute is with a previous advisor of the student, not the student themselves.<issue_comment>username_1: From [their help pages](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/help/#download-pubmed-data) one finds:
>
> **Download PubMed data**
>
>
>
>
> Once a year, NLM releases a complete (baseline) set of PubMed citation records in XML format for download from our FTP servers. Incremental update files are released daily and include new, revised, and deleted citations. The PubMed DTD states any changes to the structure and allowed elements from year to year.
>
>
>
So it seems you should be using their FTP server.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: To overcome the 10,000 record limit, use EDirect. The *[E-utilities in Depth](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25499/)* page, says:
>
> For PubMed, ESearch can only retrieve the first 10,000 records
> matching the query. To obtain more than 10,000 PubMed
> records, consider using [EDirect](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK179288/) that contains
> additional logic to batch PubMed search results
> automatically so that an arbitrary number can be retrieved
>
>
>
By downloading the UNIX based EDirect utilities you can run a command line search similar to the following:
>
> esearch -db pubmed -query "2001/06/01 [dp]" | efetch -format uilist
>
>
>
which will produce many more than 10,000 records. Please note, however, that when I ran this particular command (without having particularly studies the documentation) I received the following error:
>
> Actual PMID count 31242 does not match expected total 32637
>
>
>
I don't imagine that it will take much effort on your part to discover the source of the error and overcome it. The important thing is that the command line utility `esearch`, along with the other EDirect utilities, gives you much more flexibility than using the direct HTTP interfact.
An alternative approach, of which I give only a bare-bones outline here, is often referred to loosely as "divide and conquer". Note that this is different from the formal, recursive, [divide-and-conquer algorithm](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide-and-conquer_algorithm) common in some areas of computer science.
By *divide-and-conquer*, I am referring to the idea that if you cannot directly solve the problem you want, then break it down into a series of (preferably mutually exclusive but jointly complete) sub-problems, each of which is solvable. For example ... and forgive me, but I am about to illustrate my point with a division method that will not actually work ... consider the possibility that you wish to download the PubMed identifiers (PMIDs) for documents published on 2022-01-01. Assume also, hypothetically, that there are 34,567 such records. You would know that there were 34,567 records because PuMed would return a result that included the string:
>
> 34,57620
>
>
>
Your next step would then be to ask yourself what sequence of queries you could submit to PubMed which (a) taken together give you all the records you wanted, but (b) taken individually would each return fewer than 10,000 results. One obvious (but, as I said, unfortunately unworkable) approach would be to submit the following 26 queries:
>
> 2001/06/03:2001/06/03 [dp] a\* [au]
>
>
>
>
> 2001/06/03:2001/06/03 [dp] b\* [au]
>
>
>
>
> 2001/06/03:2001/06/03 [dp] c\* [au]
>
>
>
... and so forth. That is, you'd that search for all records published on 2001/06/03 that also had an author whose name began with 'A', and then 'B', etc.
Unfortunately, although this illustrates the divide-and-conquer idea, it will not work for the reason that PubMed requires truncated names (i.e., those where a wildcard `*` is used), to be given with at least four (!) initial letters. However, you might experiment, ***as I have***, with submitting queries that use the record creation date (CRDT) as the way of slicing and dicing the records for a particular publication date. For example, whereas
>
> 2001/06/01 [dp]
>
>
>
returns 32,637 results, the diced queries:
>
> 2001/06/01 [dp] 2000/01/01:2001/06/01 [CRDT]
>
>
>
followed by:
>
> 2001/06/01 [dp] 2001/06/01:2001/06/20 [CRDT]
>
>
>
chop the large, unobtainable, parcel of records into downloadable bundles that contain fewer than 10,000 entries. Clearly, you would need to submit further queries with a CRDT range beyond 2001/06/20.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/30
| 1,878
| 8,061
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently applied for a postdoc position at a research institute in the UK via their job portal. I didn't contact the PI in advance because the job advert was already posted. However, after 3 weeks, I still didn't hear back from them & when I checked my status though the job portal, the status was indicated as "closed". I emailed the HR yesterday and was informed that I was not shortlisted as they felt I do not have the skills or experience for the position. Technically, I would say that my skills are probably around 70% of what was required for the position as the field is quite different (viral immunology in PhD VS cancer immunology in job application) but I'm really interested in the potential projects in the lab and I want to learn the new methods to be introduced there. My question is:
1. Should I have contacted the PI before submitting my application?
2. In such research institutions, how involved is the PI in screening applicants? Or does the HR first pre-screen the applicants before passing them to the PI?
3. Should I email the PI now to inquire if he/she is open to discussing my application?
4. Additionally, would a higher expected salary affect my application? I was required to input the expected salary in their online form, and I stated quite a higher range than what they offered but indicated it as negotiable
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: This is based on my experience as a former physics postdoc in the US and Germany, and advice I got from my advisors.
>
> Should I have contacted the PI before submitting my application?
>
>
>
Probably not. There are some cases where it makes sense for you talk to a PI before submitting an application -- for example, if you or your advisor are collaborators with the PI, you might mention you are applying for the position. However, in general, you don't need to send emails to PIs when you submit an application, and PIs aren't expecting to get personalized emails from everyone who applies.
Your advisor probably has more sway here anyway. I mean that in two senses -- (a) their advice will be better than generic internet advice, and (b) them contacting the PI will probably mean more than you contacting the PI, in the cases where it makes sense for either of you to do so.
>
> In such research institutions, how involved is the PI in screening applicants? Or does the HR first pre-screen the applicants before passing them to the PI?
>
>
>
What I have heard from professors is that they go through all of the postdoc applications by themselves. There is usually a first "minimum cut" to weed out applications that are obviously irrelevant. Maybe in some cases that minimum cut is easy enough that it can be farmed out to an HR person, but I doubt it since there is usually some nuance in what is most relevant for each position.
>
> Should I email the PI now to inquire if he/she is open to discussing my application?
>
>
>
No. If you've been rejected for the position, then that's the end of the story. Sending an email to the PI is at best awkward, but could be seen as unprofessional or like you are harassing them.
>
> Additionally, would a higher expected salary affect my application? I was required to input the expected salary in their online form, and I stated quite a higher range than what they offered but indicated it as negotiable
>
>
>
Almost always a postdoc salary is limited by available funds, so you normally only have a very limited range where it's possible to negotiate a postdoc salary, if at all.
I would guess that in all likelihood, the professor reading your application didn't consider salary when making a decision, and was more interested in whether you would make a good fit for their research group. If you asked for a truly outrageous sum, there's a chance the professor rejected you based on that, but I suspect that if they really liked you for the position they would at least talk to you to see how firm your salary expectations were.
I doubt it was a deciding factor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The term "research institute" spans a lot of possibilities: if this is a glorified research group within a university, then the usual considerations about getting a fixed-term postdoc in academia will apply - see username_1's answer (mostly).
However the process for a PSRE or industrial facility will be very different: e.g. commercial organisations will not be keen to discuss ongoing and future projects and funding. There are still outposts of the Civil Service where any direct *a priori* contact with individual candidates will be seen as improper.
I would be very surprised if the hiring manager within *any* large organisation actually got an unfiltered pile of CVs, just because of the number to wade through. You should assume that a generic HR person will sanity check all applications, with variable results (I've heard of people being invited by the PI to apply, but their CV never getting through the system!).
If a salary band is indicated in the advert, specifying a higher number implies that you're not really interested in the job as advertised which is exactly the excuse the front-line staff will have for a rejection. In my experience, getting any sort of feedback at all is doing well - 75% of my applications (through portals in response to posted vacancies) never got *any* reply. Unis and state institutes are generally better.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Should I have contacted the PI before submitting my application?
>
>
>
There is no reason to believe that preliminary contact would have made you any more qualified for this position. The PI will typically try to stay at "arms length" from applicants prior to the actual assessment of applications, so it is unlikely they would give you any additional information of assistance. At best they might have been willing to let you know in advance that you do not appear to meet the qualifications (though usually they would be reluctant to do even this).
>
> In such research institutions, how involved is the PI in screening applicants? Or does the HR first pre-screen the applicants before passing them to the PI?
>
>
>
This depends on the institution and may even vary by department. In cases where there are a large number of applications there might be a pre-screening before it gets to the PI. In cases where the number of applicants is small then the PI might review all applications from the start of the process.
>
> Should I email the PI now to inquire if he/she is open to discussing my application?
>
>
>
Since you have been rejected, you should not seek any discussion re-assessing your application. If you were rejected by a pre-screening prior to getting to the PI then this means that you are a weak applicant compared to the ones that went through pre-screening. (If there was pre-screening, this exists for a reason; the PI is not going to want to review applicants that did not get through this phase of the process.)
If you would like more information on the weaknesses in your application, you could ask for more feedback on this, but it is unlikely to involve an actual discussion. At best they might elaborate a bit on your rejection, but even this is unlikely. (Modern HR systems are quite averse to giving much feedback on failed applicants, in case they say something that is open to challenge.) In any case, you seem to already have a reasonable understanding of areas in which you did not meet the selection criteria, so this is probably not going to be helpful.
>
> Additionally, would a higher expected salary affect my application? I was required to input the expected salary in their online form, and I stated quite a higher range than what they offered but indicated it as negotiable.
>
>
>
Yes, this would be a factor. If you ask for a salary above the stated range then they would be expecting a high-quality applicant, and even then, it might not be possible for them to expand their budget for the position.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/30
| 1,086
| 4,556
|
<issue_start>username_0: In our PhD class, we have to present a paper. However, just 24 hours before the day I present a paper, the professor gave me a new version of the paper.
This new version has a similar motivation but is different in methodology and results – so pretty much they are different things.
He asked me to present the next day.
What can I do in this situation? Should I write an email to the dean? He is not even my advisor.
**Update:** Thanks everyone for your answers. The presentation went well since I spent a lot of time preparing for it. But before that I sent a super aggressive email to the professor. I think the email somewhat helped. This is a professor who has a reputation of exploiting students (asking them to do stuff for him like checking for typo in his papers/lecture notes).<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you ask for some kinds of extension\*, in my opinion, what you should do in this situation is to read the paper as soon as possible.
I don't know why you are so stressed about giving a bad presentation, but (1) it does not have to be perfect. It is not even worth it, in my opinion. Perfection is (my) productivity killer, and (2) maybe you will not even do a perfect presentation, but you can always avoid giving a bad one. Your task is to give a decent (or detailed - take more time) summary of relevant information from the paper. And that is what you should do. You can do it.
Also, please take a rest. Start working when you are ready. Your mental health is important.
\*which is also a good decision, but I only do it when I do have no other choice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You have your old presentation. You can present that with minimal modifcations I will now explain.
In the introductory part, you can say "this is the presentation I prepared in the past months, but we decided to include a comparison with some of the very latest developments" and then you go on presenting the old method and the new method and then the old results and the new results.
Finally, present a qualitative comparison of the old and new method (qualitative: it can be also just switching back and forth the two groups of results slides).
It probably looks bad to your eyes, but all alternatives you presented are worse, so enjoy the stormy sailing in the exam, there will be calm sea afterwards.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am trying to look at this from the perspective of your professor.
Here is a benign interpretation of what happened from his side
(I can obviously only guess here, so you have to be the judge to what extent it applies):
Your professor happened to notice a new version of the paper you were going to talk about. He did not have time to check how much was actually changed, but assumed it wasn’t much (which is reasonable for many papers). Knowing that you are about to speak about the paper, he sent the new version to you, so you can update your talk where appropriate, assuming that it wouldn’t be much and you would have the capacity for it.
With that in mind, here is how I suggest you approach the situation:
* Finish preparing the talk, as if you never received your professor’s e-mail.
* Treat everything involving the new version of the paper as bonus. This is probably how your professor sees it as well. Practically, only consider some small additions to your talk if it’s finished otherwise.
* Inform the professor that the differences of the paper are substantial – assuming that this is news to him. You don’t have to do that now, but can do that at the talk.
* Also state that you were occupied with other things on the day before your talk and thus did not have much or any time to handle the new version. Being a good student, you worked ahead and had already mostly finished the talk when you got the new version. (This is probably not even a lie. You don’t need to say that it was anxiety due to the e-mail that occupied you.)
When you are given, e.g., two weeks to work on this talk, it is your freedom and responsibility to allocate your work on the talk within these two weeks as you like. You cannot be expected to be fully available in the 24 hours before your talk.
* Should this fail and you are still incapacitated by anxiety, try to postpone the talk due to sickness (which is accurate). If an additional selling point is needed, mention that you can use the time to incorporate the new version of the paper. (Details really depend on the context here, e.g., whether you can or need to obtain a sick note, etc.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/30
| 1,037
| 4,324
|
<issue_start>username_0: I premise that my University does not indicate a precise guideline for the typographic rules to be adopted; so I'm wondering if it is a good practice to expand the acronyms only in the abstract and then in the first chapter or if it is bettier to expand them at the beginning of each chapter. I also use a list of acronyms before the table of contents. Can you tell me what is the best choice for a good readability?
P.s. I read some questions very similar to mine and I premise that I need to use acronyms because there are many occurencies in my thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: Unless you ask for some kinds of extension\*, in my opinion, what you should do in this situation is to read the paper as soon as possible.
I don't know why you are so stressed about giving a bad presentation, but (1) it does not have to be perfect. It is not even worth it, in my opinion. Perfection is (my) productivity killer, and (2) maybe you will not even do a perfect presentation, but you can always avoid giving a bad one. Your task is to give a decent (or detailed - take more time) summary of relevant information from the paper. And that is what you should do. You can do it.
Also, please take a rest. Start working when you are ready. Your mental health is important.
\*which is also a good decision, but I only do it when I do have no other choice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You have your old presentation. You can present that with minimal modifcations I will now explain.
In the introductory part, you can say "this is the presentation I prepared in the past months, but we decided to include a comparison with some of the very latest developments" and then you go on presenting the old method and the new method and then the old results and the new results.
Finally, present a qualitative comparison of the old and new method (qualitative: it can be also just switching back and forth the two groups of results slides).
It probably looks bad to your eyes, but all alternatives you presented are worse, so enjoy the stormy sailing in the exam, there will be calm sea afterwards.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am trying to look at this from the perspective of your professor.
Here is a benign interpretation of what happened from his side
(I can obviously only guess here, so you have to be the judge to what extent it applies):
Your professor happened to notice a new version of the paper you were going to talk about. He did not have time to check how much was actually changed, but assumed it wasn’t much (which is reasonable for many papers). Knowing that you are about to speak about the paper, he sent the new version to you, so you can update your talk where appropriate, assuming that it wouldn’t be much and you would have the capacity for it.
With that in mind, here is how I suggest you approach the situation:
* Finish preparing the talk, as if you never received your professor’s e-mail.
* Treat everything involving the new version of the paper as bonus. This is probably how your professor sees it as well. Practically, only consider some small additions to your talk if it’s finished otherwise.
* Inform the professor that the differences of the paper are substantial – assuming that this is news to him. You don’t have to do that now, but can do that at the talk.
* Also state that you were occupied with other things on the day before your talk and thus did not have much or any time to handle the new version. Being a good student, you worked ahead and had already mostly finished the talk when you got the new version. (This is probably not even a lie. You don’t need to say that it was anxiety due to the e-mail that occupied you.)
When you are given, e.g., two weeks to work on this talk, it is your freedom and responsibility to allocate your work on the talk within these two weeks as you like. You cannot be expected to be fully available in the 24 hours before your talk.
* Should this fail and you are still incapacitated by anxiety, try to postpone the talk due to sickness (which is accurate). If an additional selling point is needed, mention that you can use the time to incorporate the new version of the paper. (Details really depend on the context here, e.g., whether you can or need to obtain a sick note, etc.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/11/30
| 759
| 3,101
|
<issue_start>username_0: During my masters I spoke with my research guide and he seemed to be interested in taking me as a PhD student afterwards. I joined a job and want to start my PhD after a year.
My research guide mailed me recently asking if I am joining back as a PhD student, as he is getting a new project, and looking for someone capable like me. I was very happy getting a mail from my guide and with my gladness, probably I spoke too much. I told him that I am not completely happy with the work I am doing currently, so I will be happy to work on his project on my free time, but since I am getting salary from my current job, I can work on the project only when I get time out of my job. I also told him that I am appearing in the PhD entrance exam in 1-2 years.
After this he was silent for a week, then replied back that I mistook what he meant, he is looking for someone who can start PhD work and join later in the institute as a PhD student through examination. If I know any such person, I can let him know.
I am not able to understand what went wrong here. I replied that I am appearing in exam and interested to join back my institute, but since I am in a job I can't start PhD full time, but once I get recruited as a PhD student in the institute, I will start full time work. After that he didn't reply back.
He definitely was checking if I am joining PhD, otherwise he wouldn't have mailed me. He was also aware that I am joining a job. Then what went wrong in my answer that he changed his mind, I am unable to understand.
Can anyone point this out?
Also, any suggestion, how can I amend the situation now?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I can work on the project only when I get time out of my job. I also told him that I am appearing in the PhD entrance exam in 1-2 years
>
>
>
Your advisor isn't looking for someone to work on the project in their free time and to maybe start a PhD after at least 1-2 years, they are looking for someone to work full-time on the project *now*.
Your response indicated you wouldn't be available to work on their timeline and stated your priority is your other job instead.
It maybe would have been kind for them to reach out and clarify this with you, to make clear that the position is only available to you if you can take it now. However, it's also reasonable that they look for another candidate since you've told them you're not available on the timeline they are looking for.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A phone call is the only way to fix the situation.
Call him and clearly express that you are not going to drop your job before having confirmation of the PhD. Ask them if you can still apply for the position.
However, with the first mail they offered you the position and you rejected.
Instead of what you write, it would have been smart to ask if that mail was a concrete offer or an informal communication (sorry, I know that the horse has left the barn, keep in mind this for the future)
You must make very clear that you did not take the first email as an official offer.
Upvotes: 1 [selected_answer]
|
2022/11/30
| 1,638
| 6,297
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a law school research paper where one of the sections describes multiple legal cases, each under a separate heading. For each case I am describing the factual history of the case, then the holding, noting specific areas of interest to the paper topic.
Should I have a separate footnote for every sentence, as each is pulled or inferred from the case I am referencing? If not, how should I rephrase?
Current my cites look something like this, and I'm concerned:
fn.1 - [case]
fn.2 - Id at x.
.
.
.
.
fn.10 - Id at y.<issue_comment>username_1: I once have asked this my supervisor. He said that no one will - or can - critize you if you *do* add a reference for each sentence, while you might be critized if you *don't* add a reference for one critical sentence. So, following this logic, it's better to have more citations then less.
However, this is theory. In practice, I personally would follow a more pragmatic rule now: If multiple sentences are taken from the *same* source (or case in your case), I would only add a single footnote for the first occurence; but in that footnote, I would say something like "The case is described following Smith (2000)" or similar. The important thing is that the reader always needs to be able to distinguish which thoughts are from you and which are taken from literature.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In contrast to @username_1, I recommend that you cite every single instance, as you have suggested, with reference to the particular location in the original.
Despite one's sense that the page would be less cluttered without such a density of citations, you should follow the standard (tradition?) of citation in your domain of practise. In law, pinpoint citation (even repetitive pinpoint citation) is the norm in many jurisdictions; see, for example, the [decision](https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep410/usrep410113/usrep410113.pdf) from the Supreme Court of the United States in [Roe v Wade](https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep410/usrep410113/usrep410113.pdf) or the [decision](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2020/12.html) of the High Court of Australia in [Pell v The Queen](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2020/12.html).
It is particularly easy to see the repetitive pinpoint citation in [Pell v The Queen](http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2020/12.html). If you scroll to the end of the very long web-page, you will see the long list of references accumulated in a way that is more difficult to see when they appear as page footnotes.
My impression, from following transcripts of proceedings in both courts, is that repeating pinpoint citations is absolutely vital in oral argument when the possibility exists of an interrogating justice on the bench asking "Where, *exactly*, <NAME>, does the case say what you say it does?"
The approach in most of the law journals I have seen is to follow exactly the same approach as one finds in the case reports themselves.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Put yourself in the shoes of your reader and think about the information they will need to easily check your assertions and verify that they are correct, or to go back to the source for more information. The reader will want to know the citations of the cases you are referring to, but will also want to be able to find the specific pieces of information you refer to in those cases, without having to read the whole case to find them.
In order to assist your reader to find the necessary information, typically you would give an initial citation to the case when you first start discussing it, and then you would give judge-paragraph references for each new assertion about the content of that case. Depending on how quickly you are running through information in the case, the latter might be required for each sentence, though in some instances you might get away with having several sentences describing an aspect of the case with a judge-paragraph citation for all of them at the end. Nevertheless, you should make sure that it is simple for the reader to locate and confirm the relevant parts of the case for each of your assertions --- do not make them read then entire legal case scouring for confirmation of one of your assertions.
To see why this is helpful, I'll give a short example discussing a recent legal case. Depending on the specific legal citation conventions you are using, this looks something like the following:
>
> The *High Risk Serious Offenders Act 2020* (WA) (hereafter called the "HRSO Act") allows the State Government to apply to the WA Supreme Court for an order in relation to a "serious offender" under a custodial sentence. The High Court of Australia recently considered a challange to the consitutional validity of parts of the Act ([*Garlett v Western Australia* [2022] HCA 30](http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/2022/30.html)).
>
>
> This case related an offender in custody, <NAME>, with an extensive criminal history and a history of drug abuse (per Kiefel CJ, Keane and Steward JJ at paras 1-3). The WA Government applied for an order under the HRSO Act in relation to <NAME> and he responded by challenging the constitutional validity of the Act, leading the High Court to consider a limited aspect of this initial challenge (paras 6-8). The argument advanced by Garlett was that the exercise of non-judicial powers under the HRSO Act is inconsistent with the WA Supreme Court being invested as a repository of federal judicial jurisdiction (paras 39-42).
>
>
>
From the above description, the reader can find the legislation and the case I am talking about, but they can also find the relevant paragraphs for each part I discuss. In particular, they can verify that the applicant has "an extensive criminal history and a history of drug abuse" (at least according ot the court), they can verify the scope of the challenge, and they can verify the nature of the argument advanced for that challenge. In each instance, the reader is told to relevant paragraphs of the judgment that discuss this part, so they don't need to read through the entire case to find it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/11/30
| 1,095
| 4,170
|
<issue_start>username_0: According to [academicpositions.be](https://academicpositions.be/career-advice/phd-professor-and-postdoc-salaries-in-the-united-states), which quotes the New York Times, PhD students earn 15000 and 30000 dollars per year. But according to [Educationdata](https://educationdata.org/average-cost-of-a-doctorate-degree):
>
> In 2012, the average cost of a full year in a Ph.D. program was $21,400.
> Of the $21,400, the net price for the student was $8,480.
> Of the $21,400, roughly $12,920 was covered by grants.
> 39.2% of surveyed Ph.D. students offset the cost of their degree with teaching assistantships.
>
>
>
Why do these sources seem to contradict each other?
Does this also differ by country?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't confuse cost with price.
The following applies in the US. There is also some difference by field and by university. Generally, though,...
I think $57K sounds a bit high, though it probably includes such things as health insurance. The stipend is set to cover modest living expenses of a student in that locality, recognizing that many are married. Enough for frugal living, but little enough that you want to finish ASAP.
And for almost all doctoral students, a TA or an RA will come with forgiveness of almost all costs. Those costs are borne by the institution or the government that supports it. But a privately funded student will have high cost of tuition. Again, I'd guess $99K is at the top end of the scale, and those are total costs over the multi-year program, not annual costs. And, most students in doctoral programs have a TA or (fewer) an RA. Both provide valuable service to the institution, especially in making the faculty more productive.
But yes, the costs are high, since in some fields the labs are costly and the professors are well paid. Even building maintenance isn't free.
You aren't normally paid for *your* research. A TA means you assist in teaching (normally) undergraduates. An RA probably means that you assist in someone else's research, though your project might grow out of that. You are paid a stipend, not normally a "salary" (US). The tax implications of that difference might be important, but most likely taxes will be due.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's kind of both. When you study, you (or someone) has to pay the university the tuition fees. However, in many countries, the professor/department/scholarship will have funding to pay the university *and* pay you a stipend.
* If you don't have funding, then the net result is you pay the university.
* If you do have funding, then the net result depends on how much funding is provided. Quite often, the net result is you are paid. If the funding is only partial, you still might have to pay the university.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I am now living in a country where generally PhDs are not paid unless you find a grant and where a lot of people do a PhD for free.
In my country this can also happen, however it's now getting more and more common to require actually having a grant or some kind of compensation before being able to start a PhD, thus most people over there earn a salary.
I'm paid a salary for my PhD as I'm employed outside of university.
Generally around here doing a PhD does not cost money, outside of registration fees and stuff like that, which is generally quite low and definitely below 1000€ for the whole PhD. If you get a grant these fees are generally covered by the grant. Of course, if you're not paid you'd have to account for how much it costs you not to have another jobs that pays you.
I do not know about you, but I'd never accept to work for free. Doing a PhD is a job in my mind, since you're doing something that takes your time and generating useful research for other people to use (which is quite different from what a student does for example during his master), thus I'd never accept to do a PhD for free.
On a side note, I personally disapprove of people who accept to do unpaid PhDs or to work overtime; this because you're basically lowering the salary of other people doing a PhD by accepting to do the same job for free.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/01
| 2,087
| 8,300
|
<issue_start>username_0: As its quite apparent from many online discussion forums and also in-person conversations, a lot many Ph.D students seem to have impostor syndrome, of course in varying degrees. We hear statements like:
1. I don't think I am cut out for research, although my advisor thinks I'm quite capable
2. The paper that I worked on and got published - I don't think it deserves to be published, although my advisor was quite impressed by the work.
3. If only someone smart had a crack at this problem, they would have figured out a workable solution much faster
and so on.
My theory on this is that, this should be a recent trend largely influenced by sites such as LinkedIn/Google Scholar where academic and research achievements are now publicized and easily accessible, giving room for a lot of unnecessary self-critical evaluations and comparisons. I'm curious to know from senior researches/academics if the imposter syndrome was common among students even, say in the 70's or 80's, or is it just a recent trend.<issue_comment>username_1: TL;DR
=====
**Imposter syndrome for scientists isn't weird. The pressure upon scientists nowadays have probably led to unprecedented levels of imposter syndrome though.**
There have been massive shifts in expectation, including managing science by quantifying output (and putting targets on output numbers). On top of that, the world has become much more competitive - scientific output increases exponentially, as Lodinn pointed out in their comment. That points to a lessened effect in earlier times.
On the other hand, the nature of a scientist is not to be sure, but to question their knowledge continuously. That points to a still-existing effect in earlier times.
Overall, I'm sure imposter syndrome in science has been around ever since it was called science. I would also argue that the changes since the 80s/90s/2000s have led to a much more industrialised and competitive approach to science, in which imposter syndrome would be *much* more common.
---
(1) The environment changed
===========================
You wonder about how things were in the 70s and 80s. I would argue that that is not a fair comparison, given how the world has changed. The world is massively more connected right now, and there have been foundational shifts in how academia is governed - at least, in some countries, but I wager in most. Case in point: full professors used to be appointed by the Queen in The Netherlands. That made it impossible for their host institution to fire them - you cannot overrule the Queen. So they got rid of that rule, somewhere in the 80s I believe.
More pertinent to your question: there has been an enormous increase on managing quantifiable aspects of research. I am not positive when that started. Likely, it varies from country to country - my guess for Netherlands (where I know the academic system reasonably well) is that this started in the 90s. I know of a full professor sent on early retirement due to lack of publications in mid-90s at least.
Again in The Netherlands, managing academia by quantification received an enormous boost around the end of the 2000s. The Minister of Education reapportioned a large part of science funding from institutional funding to project-based funding.
Before that change, research groups in NL had funding to appoint PhD students and postdocs themselves. Afterwards, they only had funding for permanent staff; money for temporary positions was contingent upon project acquisition. This led to a very competitive environment - not just for grants, but also for staff positions. Universities started setting quota's and expectations on scientific output and (later, after the former was being gamed) on scientific impact.
Such changes lead to increased pressures on PhD students. E.g.: the better the PhD student performs, the better the project turns out, the easier to attract further grants, the more secure your job, the better your chances for promotion, etc.
Now that's all a Dutch perspective; nevertheless I wager that similar processes occurred elsewhere. For example, <NAME> (after whom the elementary particle was named that was found by the LHC) said in an interview that he'd probably been fired for lack of output if he hadn't been nominated for a Nobel prize [(in the Guardian)](https://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson-academic-system).
(2) The nature of science is to question knowledge
==================================================
A second aspect is that the nature of science is to question knowledge. A famous example of not doing this happened in 189 by famous scientist <NAME>, when he said "[There is nothing new to be discovered in physics now. All that remains is more and more precise measurement](https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna52111904)." He lived to regret his words with the advent of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics...
Side bar aside: scientists are trained to question knowledge - even established knowledge. Basically, the internal monologue "is that truly so? If so: show me the proof!" should be ingrained into a scientist early in their career. It is not at all weird to then apply that to other aspects than merely the research one is performing. That can easily lead to questioning the validity of one's career. The tough part is that while there is likely evidence that someone is a decent scientist, that is not the same as conclusive proof. Add to that the hyper-competitive world we find ourselves in nowadays, both within academia and without, on social media, and it is not weird for anyone's best available evidence against imposter syndrome not to be convincing to a scientist whose *basic nature it is to question if the evidence is sufficient*.
My conclusions
==============
I cannot give you a complete account of how the academic world functioned in the 70s/80s. However, in the 70s and 80s, *far* less papers were published. Moreover, universities weren't (at least, not everywhere) run as if only offering a desk for permanent staff to set up their own grant-attracting shop. While it is in the nature of scientists to doubt (and thus: doubt their own value), I do think the societal and managerial changes since the 70s have changed science careers such that they continuously have to validate their own existence nowadays.
In short: Imposter syndrome for scientists isn't weird. The pressure upon scientists nowadays have probably led to unprecedented levels of imposter syndrome though.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Almost 30 years ago, after my defense (or defenCe -- for it was in England), I felt so ashamed of my dummy self and my research that I didn't even celebrate.
My complexes were amplified by the fact that in the country of my origin the standards for PhD dissertations in STEM were, those days, extraordinarily high -- a tradition established by [Kolmogorov](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrey_Kolmogorov), [Gelfand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Gelfand), [Landau & Lifshits](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Course_of_Theoretical_Physics). and other titans. This contributed a lot to my misery.
It is only some 5 or 6 years down the road, and after more publishing, that inside my mind I pronounced myself PhD.
Years later, after I found that my PhD research was still being cited, I realised that my inferiority complexes were unfounded. Also, having been on several defense committees in several countries, I eventually came to peace with myself and gave to my thesis a fair grade: not outstanding but passable.
My case was not unusual. I knew a fellow who was so ashamed of this PhD research that he STOLE his thesis from the university library (it was before the digitisation era). He eventually became a well-cited scholar, but his impostor complexes were at that time even stronger than mine.
I conclude the story with [Whitney Young](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitney_Young)'s quote which, in my opinion, explains why we should never yield to the impostor syndrome:
“The truth is that there is nothing noble in being superior to somebody else. The only real nobility is in being superior to your former self.”
Keep on with your work. Do not measure yourself against others. Do what you can.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/01
| 1,660
| 7,003
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have recently enrolled in an elective course from our degree program. There is something that sometimes annoys me, namely the English used by the professor.
He is not a native English speaker, but it is not about his accent or pronunciation. These are decent. The problem is that he keeps applying the grammar rules of his native language to English. Sometimes, things he said in lectures were **logically** (sometimes, mathematically) nonsensical to everyone. The meaning of what he said was not always what he intended to convey (from a mathematical perspective).
That is also the type of English that we will see in the final exam. I have seen some past exam papers, and there is an inconsistency between the written requirements (in English) and his proposed solutions (mathematical translation of the requirements).
Normally, it is not a big deal for me. However, I occasionally gave him some suggestions in a very polite way instead of accusing him of using incorrect grammar, so it will be easier for students to understand during the lectures (and also during the exam). He always responded with something like "**well, it is natural to use this in real life**" and suggested that I should familiarize myself with his English instead. It disappointed me.
I want to take the matter further in a polite way *(is it even a wise thing to do?)*. What should I do in this situation?
*PS: I feel bad for asking this question as I quite enjoy his lectures*
*Update: We have reached a temporary solution with the professor. We will try to learn his English (through past exams), but he will also need to explain his "terminology" in detail. During the exam, we can ask him questions if there is anything ambiguous. It is something that we have to deal with.*<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I occasionally gave him some suggestions in a very polite way
>
>
>
So you have already tried offering him unsolicited advice...
>
> He always responsed with something like "well, it is nature to use this in real life" and suggested me to familiarize myself with his English instead
>
>
>
and he responded poorly.
>
> It disappointed me.
>
>
>
Yes, this is disappointing; you would expect that anyone speaking a foreign language would be pleased to get feedback from native speakers. Still, it is not really your role to provide this feedback, and he has made it clear that he is not open to receiving it. So, you should not broach the subject again unless you are invited to (e.g., in an end-of-course evaluation).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Considering that
>
> He is not a native English speaker, but it is not about his accent or pronunciation. These are decent.
>
>
>
the problem is not with understanding his pronunciation, but that
>
> Sometimes, things he said in lectures were logically (sometimes, mathematically) nonsensical to everyone. The meaning of what he said was not always what he intended to convey (from a mathematical perspective).
>
>
>
So the information he conveys is confusing and hard to, conceptually, understand. Since you also mention that
>
> That is also the type of English that we will see in the final exam. I have seen some past exam papers, and there is an inconsistency between the written requirements (in English) and his proposed solutions (mathematical translation of the requirements).
>
>
>
it seems that the communication issues also happen in writing. Now, if the issue with wording in assignments (or even in class) **is recurrent and several students agree with your take on it**, then it might be worth letting the professor know that **you all are having a hard time understanding**, without telling him what to do. Simple questions by a few students during class such as "could you explain that again, I'm not quite following?" or "are we supposed to do X or Y in the assignment?" will help you all conceptually understand what he is trying to convey at the same time that no one ".. [gives] him some suggestions ..." and be perceived as nit-picking his phrasing.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Academia is an international environment, so part of the skills you will learn is dealing with people who speak another language than you do. Remember that you are extremely privileged: you can speak your own native language and expect others to understand you. All you have to deal with is other people not speaking your own language perfectly. Most people around the world have to deal with speaking English as foreign language to other people who also speak English as a foreign language, and try to make sense of the resulting chaos...
So I would just treat this as an exercise of an important skill you will have to have in your later life, and be thankful that the trouble you have is a lot less than the trouble other people around the world have.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: 1. Find support. Surely you are not the only student in your class with this problem. A request coming from many students has more leverage than one from a single person.
2. Make practical suggestions. For instance, suggest that he gets the final tests reviewed by a colleague for grammar before giving it to you.
3. Be polite. Phrase it as something like "Sometimes we have a hard time understanding the requirements", not "your English is weird". And, since you enjoy his lectures, start with a positive word.
4. If this second attempt fails, escalate the matter: get student union reps involved if you can, and speak to the head of studies.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Like username_4 [wrote in their answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/191157/38554), getting more students behind the cause will make it much stronger.
You have attempted to improve their lectures, but failed. Speaking correctly is very hard since you have think about the subject matter and language at the same time. They are not willing to make that effort.
Give up on that and concentrate on what is important:
The Exam
--------
The exam should be clear, unambiguous and correct.
If you have examples from previous exams that have failed any of these goals, that is where you should take the fight. Be very concrete: "This sentence states X, but according to the suggested solution, you actually meant Y."
Make clear that students can actual fail because of the professors incorrect language.
Writing correctly is easier than speaking, since they can first think about the content and then go over a second time and look at the language.
You should suggest that they consult a native speaker to help them.
The exam is very important and should be worth the extra effort.
I am afraid you might have to take this fight twice. First before the exam. Then, when they haven't listened, repeat the fight so that people don't get bad grades because they misunderstood the questions.
After all that, warn the next year students they might have to repeat the fight.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/12/01
| 1,673
| 7,137
|
<issue_start>username_0: *This might sound silly for those who know how to do it and do not see that it is a problem but for some people like me it is.*
Since I started working in academia, I have had the problem of building collaborations, or to be more precise, of maintaining the collaboration and making it fruitful.
I know how to take the initiative and start the collaboration but that's it. For example, if I meet someone at a conference who is working on something exciting for me, I usually communicate with them and even schedule a call but that is the end of this collaboration (can we even call it that??). In the call, I explain what we are doing and I hear what they are doing but do not know how to move to the next step or even what is the next step.
There are people/researchers who have a magic ability to build collaborations and most importantly accomplish something out of them. Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: As you suspect, you haven't even started collaborating.
The next step is to figure out what you want to work on together (and whether you do indeed want to collaborate). I see three different types of choices for a project:
1. One of you has a nail, and the other one a hammer.
This could be the combination of one person having identified an interesting question, and the other one being an expert of a technique that might help solve it; or one person having a data set (or the means to create it) and the other person the know-how for how to analyze it, etc.
2. By our powers combined!
As you talk, you realize that by combining your speciality methods / rare equipment / other know-how the two of you together might be able to accomplish something new. Maybe the contribution is the sheer novelty, the creativity in coming up with it. Maybe you tackle a challenge that neither of you alone would have even dreamed of.
3. Hanging out is just fun!
Sometimes, what you do together can be something either of you could have done alone - but you work together, because that's more fun (and probably somewhat higher quality in the end, too). This obviously relies on a strong drive to collaborate, and may not be the motive you should aim for.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It is harder to join someone else's project than to invite someone to join yours. Another idea is that you need to have more than "interest" in someone's work. You need to bring something of value to the conversation.
The conversations that lead to collaborations can be either local, at your university or in a small region with several universities, or at conferences where people with similar interests gather. But you have to offer ideas.
One way to make collaborations continue once started is to gather some funds to invite people to your place (or for yourself to travel elsewhere) to give talks on a topic of mutual interest and use the co-location to explore ideas.
A phone conversation or short zoom session isn't going to do it. You need to find ways to explore what each can contribute. That takes a bit of time. And once started, find ways to keep it going. This may also require some funds. At some point grants might be possible to fund co-located activities leading to collaboration, but it would probably be hard to do that as initial steps.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't have any evidence for any of these observations, but I think most of the keys to a successful collaboration need to be in place before it starts.
##### 1. Make sure you (and they) have the time and energy to commit.
The fastest way for a collaboration to fail is for one (or all) of the collaborators to be overextended. If you barely have time to do your own research projects, how will you be able to be a fruitful collaborator? I regularly politely decline collaborations where the time ask is too great. Likewise, it might sound exciting to collaborate with a Nobel laureate, but if they don't have time to actually bring anything other than their name, is that what you want?
##### 2. The best collaborations are when the different parties contribute meaningfully novel expertise or resources.
Almost all of my successful collaborations have been a match between two or more parties that have expertise or resources that the other parties just don't have. The access to something collaborators can't easily replace motivates them to pull their weight in the project.
Examples:
- They are experts in a particular disease, you know how to use machine learning.
- You have interesting genome sequencing data, they know how to do *de novo* assembly.
- You have 50 participants with a rare condition, they have 10 more participants with that rare condition.
##### 3. Make sure all parties are excited about the project.
I tend to avoid collaborations where the parties are not excited about the topic. I find that collaborators that just want to "pay the bills" so to speak struggle to deliver high quality products. The same goes for oneself. Is it worth it to work on a project that doesn't excite you just to get another publication?
##### 4. Clearly agree on authorship and funding early.
This is key to avoiding drama later. Obviously, as the project goes on, things can change, but it's vital to have a baseline that everyone expects. [One of the comments](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/191158/how-to-sustain-and-realize-a-collaboration#comment515835_191158) suggests that collaborations are frequently only productive when there is transfer of funds. That has not been my personal experience, although I admit that I have been privileged to conduct research in high resource settings.
##### 5. Set [realistic, measurable, and time-bound](https://advising.ucmerced.edu/resources/smart-goals) deliverables for each member.
The best collaborations, in my opinion, are when clearly defined deliverables are agreed upon at every meeting and the team members complete them or are agree to be accountable for why they can't be delivered. At the end of each meeting, we "go around the (often virtual) room" and agree to our "homework".
Examples:
- By next meeting, username_3 will write a draft for the introduction to the manuscript
- By next meeting, Nasir will commit the code for training the deep learning model to the Github repository
- By next meeting, Linda will write aim 3 for the R01 submission
Also, it's important to schedule the next meeting before concluding the current meeting. For bonus points, the meeting could automatically recur.
##### 6. Don't be afraid to end a collaboration if it's not working.
At some level, collaboration is like dating. They don't all work out. If you or your collaborators aren't able to meet or aren't able to make progress on the deliverables, I think it is reasonable and necessary to end them. I've started collaborations where others weren't able to meet when they agreed multiple times, and that just had to be the end. Sometimes collaborations can just drift off into the night, but sometimes you need to just say "I'm very sorry, but I don't think I can continue this collaboration".
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/12/01
| 1,531
| 6,368
|
<issue_start>username_0: I supervise an employee who insists on being called Dr. in emails and on social media, but is ABD (all but dissertation) from about a decade ago. How have people handled such situations?
I was promoted from within my government organization into a supervisor role of a separate directorate in December 2020. Recently, one of my employees has increased use of the title "Dr." in email correspondence. Looking over archived emails, the person had a signature block of "XXX XXX, PhD(ABD)" since at least 2018 when I worked in different directorate and was not a supervisor. They seem to have taken that off their email signature block when I became their boss and started using PhD in my signature (defended dissertation and earned my PhD in May 2020), but they keep sneaking in the title "Dr. XXX" in their emails.
Now I'm not one to ever demand to be called Dr., especially since this is not a medical or academic office. However, today I received an email from our HR department addressed to "Dr. XXX and Mr. Supervisor-Me" and it set me off. Previously I chalked it up to arrogance and considered it unimportant. But today's email from HR using their "Dr." and my "Mr." seemingly set them as senior to me, the supervisor (we work in DoD, it's very hierarchical). I thought this might be now crossing the line between just arrogance into affecting other people's perceptions or potentially influencing personnel actions and such.
Employee XXX is currently out of the office for an extended period on an unrelated matter, so my ability to directly confront them is limited to email. My only plan so far was to ask via email "Hey XXX, I noticed you are using 'Dr.' Did you complete your dissertation? Can I add your diploma/degree to our system?" I wasn't planning on making a formal complaint to HR as I can't document any consequences, but it is an option. Has anyone dealt with such an issue before, and if so, what are your recommendations?
Note: As I was not the original hiring authority, I have no idea whether the ABD was misrepresented as a degree during the hiring process or if it even entered into the original hiring decision. It is not a requirement for continued employment either. In our internal HR system, they only list a master's degree. That's why I haven't treated it as fraud and only chalked it up to arrogance.
However, I do note that "PhD" (no mention of ABD) and "Dr. XXX" are all over the person's LinkedIn profile. As that's not an official resume, that may be a gray area since I suspect it wouldn't be obvious fraud unless and until they actively submitted a resume or claimed the title on official hiring or HR documents. This is a weird one as a personal social media page is outside my purview as supervisor, but it is ongoing misrepresentation to say the least.<issue_comment>username_1: As a supervisor, this is an inter-personal conflict for you.
If you want to stop this, you need to use the tools at your disposal to stop them.
Here are the steps I would take (each one has an *off-ramp* and solves the problem for you.):
1. Talk your supervisor to see if they care. They might tell you this is not worth the fight and this is an off ramp for you.
2. Verbally and informally, ask your subordinate to stop using a title they do not have. If they listen, this is your off-ramp. Also, listen to what they tell you. Perhaps they honestly think they can be called "Doctor". Be firm, but diplomatic.
3. If step 2 does not work, follow your HR procedure (and work with HR) to formally request they stop using a title they did not earn. HR might tell you they do not support you. This would be your off ramp.
4. Work with HR to take appropriate steps for insubordination (i.e., your subordinate does not follow directions). This would ultimately be termination if they refuse to follow your order and stop mis-using a title they did not earn.
You need to decide if this the proverbial hill worth dying on and spending your political capital on at work. But, that's a different question.
**Edit, based upon a comment:** I would also send a polite email to the HR person clarifying your title and ask that they be consistent in using title.
**Edit 2, based upon multiple comments:** The OP's original question implies the person did not complete their PhD. Step 0 could be verifying this assumption through a polite email, such as *I see you're using "Dr." congrats on finishing your PhD! When did you finish?*
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't know the laws in your country, in mine it is definitely a crime to sustain you have a title or pertain to a profession you actually don't. If someone else claims you do it's your duty to clarify you don't as failing to do so might be sanctioned as well.
It could be that this person honestly thinks they are a doctor, in my country you officially become a doctor when you obtain a bachelor degree for example.
Now, coming to the real issue which appears to be the fact that this guy appears to be arrogant and condescending towards you. This issue doesn't really seem to be regarding the official title, which as you said in the end really counts nothing. If he's working there and he's working well the title is quite irrelevant. The main problem here seems the relation among you too and the fact that you see this as an arrogant attack towards you (which might actually be true, but it may also not be so).
If this is the problem, taking this to HR would probably escalate and worsen what's happening, leading you two to an open conflict. I don't know what kind of relation you have with this person, but since you're his boss I guess you work together in a way or another. If possible, I would suggest talking over it informally at first and if you actually believe this is an inappropriate conduct to inform them to cease claiming such title.
Since you are the boss you have all the authority you need to do such request, even violently if you prefer; however being polite while interacting with other people generally leads to better and long lasting results.
Regarding the social media, that shouldn't really concern you unless you're ready to take this small incident to court.
Indeed as advised by someone else, letting HR know they should address you as Dr. would also solve the problem with the undermining.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/01
| 822
| 3,676
|
<issue_start>username_0: My university recently required all professors to attest that they do not consult nor are employed for more than one day per week. This statement is required to ensure the professors are engaged in research or educational activities.
Curious if that is pretty standard in other universities?<issue_comment>username_1: This is standard in the US and is more or less required to comply with US federal laws that require evaluation of potential conflicts of interest for people working on federal money. Since money is fungible and every institution gets federal money, that can potentially apply to anyone.
From what I understand of regulatory compliance in general, the government tends to give pretty broad leeway for *how exactly* institutions comply with this sort of regulation, though they'll also issue more specific guidance from time to time. Institutions tend to copy each other with how they comply so that they can defend their systems if ever challenged. That means that your institution may change exactly how they implement policy even when laws stay the same.
Some further reading (certainly not exhaustive):
<https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-42/chapter-I/subchapter-D/part-50/subpart-F>
<https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-45/subtitle-A/subchapter-A/part-94>
<https://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/coi/index.htm>
Typically, if you have potential financial conflicts of interest, the institution will work with you to develop a plan to deconflict those interests, which can include additional oversight but may also include banning you from certain activities. For example, professors who receive money from pharmaceutical companies for research may be banned from making any patient decisions or being a responsible physician for anyone receiving drugs made by that company or their competitors. There could also be less severe restrictions like merely requiring disclosure or more severe restrictions like ending an employment with the university.
As an addendum, because this seems to come up every time "conflict of interest" is mentioned here, note that "conflict of interest" literally means that interests exist that are in conflict. You have conflict of interest whether or not your behavior with respect to those conflicts is in any way unethical. A conflict just means a conflict. If your child is a student in your class, there is a conflict between fair evaluation of students (an interest of the institution and all of their instructing staff) and success/future of your child (hopefully an interest of every parent). If you receive money for consulting, there is a conflict between your interest in working for whoever you consult for and your interest as a neutral academic. Conflicts are in the *interests*, not the behavior. Universities maintain integrity by mitigating the appearance or potential influence of conflicts of interest, not merely by punishing behavior demonstrated to be unethical. There is a danger of falling into the trap of not *reporting* conflicts of interest and therefore failing an ethical duty to report those conflicts when someone judges their own behavior with respect to those conflicts to be ethical. The whole point is that the person with the conflict is not the appropriate person to make those decisions.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In addition to @BryanKrause's accurate description of the "conflict of interest" aspect, there is indeed the aspect of not wanting faculty to put lots of energy into outside activities... rather than their teaching, research, and service on behalf of the university. (My perspective is U.S. R1 places...)
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/01
| 599
| 2,689
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper that has now been reviewed four times. In the first revision the two reviewers had comments, which I addressed. On the 2nd revision the reviewers had fewer comments, which I also addressed. On the 3rd revision only the one of the two reviewers had comments, which I again addressed.
On the 4th revision the same reviewer (and only him) made comments about issues that he did not comment on in the previous 3 previous revisions.
What is going on here?<issue_comment>username_1: The simplest explanation is that reviewers are humans like everyone else. How often have you re-watched a movie or TV show and recognized something new you didn't notice the first time? Yes, perfect reviewers would capture everything their first time through, but no one is perfect. It's very good that the reviewers looking at your paper are going through it carefully each time they see it - they're investing a lot of time in your paper!
It's also possible that other events throughout the review process revealed further issues. For example, if a step or statement is unclear, clarifying that statement might reveal that something comes after it is problematic.
The importance of resolving a potential issue with your manuscript doesn't really depend on when that issue is discovered - you're publishing a manuscript to be part of the academic record where it can be read by a broader audience (whether or not a broader audience does read it), not just passing your manuscript through a test or gate.
Generally (though it's up to the editor), papers are only sent back to reviewers when there are fairly major issues left to address where the editor feels they need expert review to evaluate the changes. Simpler changes are usually just seen by the editor who will also read your response to the reviewers. I definitely feel sympathy for your situation, I'm sure it's very frustrating to have a paper you think is almost through the publishing process get returned to you with more comments. However, it does seem that at least the editor feels that there were still sufficiently open issues with your paper to justify sending it back to the reviewers, even if some reviewers are satisfied.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In addition to username_1's answer, I'll add that it's a good thing your reviewer noticed problems on the 4th revision. If your reviewer had noticed problems after your paper is accepted and published, it could be retracted. For example, the issues listed in [this retraction notice](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2047487317723212) are things a reviewer could have (should have?) noticed.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/12/02
| 580
| 2,539
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have sent a manuscript to Optica, I have published there before and in other high-impact journals. This time my submission was first sent to 5 referees (I listed three names as requested). I thought that is reasonable since some will not be available etc. One ref agreed and the other said they were unavailable. Then the editor sent it again to 6 more referees. Now, 2 months later, I'm expecting to have 6 referee reports (5/6 agreed). This is still round 1.
I have never had this number of reports, including Nature or Science. It was usually 2-4 referees.
Besides the inefficiency and time consuming process for all involved, what's the point? Is there a cap limit on this? Should there be? Has anyone had a similar experience?<issue_comment>username_1: Here's a hypothesis that nonetheless explains what you're seeing and fits closely with my experience handling a journal. Your journal has a requirement that there must be at least 2 reviews per paper. Now some invited reviewers will decline, or accept and fail to submit a review. Since you also need to a reasonably short turnaround time, the only option is to invite more than 2 reviewers per paper to start.
In your case the editor invited five reviewers, only one of whom agreed to review. Since one review is not enough (note there is no guarantee that reviewer will actually submit a review as well), the editor invited another batch of reviewers (six of them). This time the editor got lucky, and most of those reviewers agreed to review your paper.
So you end up with 6 reports. Huzzah.
If there was a guarantee that every invited reviewer will submit a review, then this will never happen, but since there is no such guarantee, every now and then what you're seeing will happen. Every now and then there'll be other failures as well, e.g. a paper with only one reviewer report (because the editor judges they can't invite new reviewers from scratch given the average turnaround time of the journal).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: username_1 in their answer describes exactly a situation I found myself in as an editor recently. I felt sorry for the authors for having to deal with this many reviews, though in practice they ended up being quite similar and pointed out overlapping issues.
In my case, I actually had only 4 reviewers from elsewhere accept, but I had also asked two of my grad students to write reviews because I think that's an important part of their education. So we ended up with six.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/02
| 7,548
| 31,216
|
<issue_start>username_0: Large language models (LLMs) are complex neural networks that can capture and represent world knowledge present in the human-generated text as their weights. LLMs are trained on a large collection of textual documents; for example, billions of webpages that are crawled from the web by the Common Crawl project's web crawler. Moreover, an application of LLMs is to generate text in response to a query which can be a set of keywords, a question, or even a simple sentence.
For example, the conversation in the image below is generated by an LLM called ChatGPT, created by OpenAI (a startup company working on LLMs).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/V6WB6.png)
The text in the box with a slightly darker background is generated by ChatGPT in response to the question on the first line.
As you can see, the generated response is similar (or even indistinguishable) to a reply that a human might have given to the question on the first line.
Now, my question is: is it OK to generate parts of a research paper, for instance, background or parts of the introduction section, using an LLM such as ChatGPT? Naturally, I would give appropriate credit to the creators of the model.<issue_comment>username_1: As long as your text is clear and your research is sound, you may use any tool you prefer to aid you in the writing.
Indeed you'll have to proofread the text and make sure that everything is correct.
You'd have to check if the license of the particular model you wish to use permits you to use it in such a way or if there are some limitations/attributions required.
If you believe that the text generated by such models is good enough, I don't see why you should not use it.
EDIT: as pointed out by other people these kinds of models may have licensing issues with the data used to train them, this is indeed a big problem. Also as pointed out by others, these models may plagiarize other authors if they have little information about a topic.
This said, I stand by the idea that if the final text is a publishable text, with a sound research and that satisfies all the requirements to be publishable, you may use any tool you prefer to write it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think, right now, it remains fairly dangerous to do so, at least without extensive oversight. I'd apply similar logic to other software tools that have been around much longer, like grammar or spellchecking software - it's okay to use the software to *suggest* or assist the author writing, but at the end of the day the author needs to be able to take responsibility for what is written and make the decisions.
LLM AI-generated text has gotten quite good at mimicking real human writing, but it isn't capable of doing the sorts of logical checks that humans need to do when they write. I'm especially worried about writers who use these tools because they do not feel confident in their own writing ability, particularly in a language they're less comfortable in. They may know their topic, but not understand the generated writing well enough to verify it.
Remember that research is meant to be somewhat novel; an AI can only be trained on what already exists. It might generate good summaries of topics that have been summarized many times before, but that doesn't mean it's equipped to actually synthesize knowledge in a forward-looking way. In my experience reading examples so far, I've certainly seen some impressive language constructions, but they feel to me a lot more like a novice university student trying to smash together an essay at the last minute, especially one trying to inflate their word count to get as close as possible to some instructor-mandated length. They have the essay *feel* down, but not the content. The example you posted seems representative of that - the first sentence, even:
>
> The main difference between (adjective) (noun) and (noun) is (adjective)
>
>
>
Whoa, that's like, profound. Note that none of what is written elaborates on what it means to be "deep" in the context of reinforcement learning. It would be absolutely worthless to have any of this in a paper introduction. Even if the text were better, without citations to where the work came from, you have to admit that you're just trusting an AI's compilation of some library - that's not the same as you personally reading and trusting and vouching for the information. It's not merely the creators of the *tool* that need to be referenced, but the creators of the *knowledge*.
As others have mentioned, I do think disclosure and credit is important, but right now I think there are more serious issues to be concerned with.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: It's difficult to give a conclusive answer. AI-assisted writing is fairly new, and the legal and ethical understanding of it is in flux. I would caution against using AI-assisted writing in published work for a few reasons related to plagiarism and copyright.
AI tools are trained on large datasets, often including published, copyrighted material. You can cite the tool itself, but what about the publications it learned from? Should those be cited as well? Are you certain that it won't produce a paragraph similar enough to a former work to constitute plagiarism? Do authors have a responsibility to ensure that the tools they use aren't plagiarizing or infringing on copyright, or does that responsibility lie solely with the developer of the tools?
At the moment, there are no clear legal answers. It would be prudent to wait until AI technology—and legal and ethical opinions of it—mature.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There are some aspects of academic writing that you need to consider if you want to use AI-generated text passages. I'll address four of them in my answer: **Licensing**, **Plagiarism**, **Argumentation**, **Referencing**.
Licensing issues
----------------
Language models are trained on source texts, and these source texts are typically harvested in great volumes from publications (online or print) without much concern for the license under which the text was published. Thus, the input for the language model may containmaterial that is not licensed for this type of processing. Consequently, the status of the model and of the work generated by the model is a legal gray area. [Here's an article](https://www.siliconrepublic.com/machines/ai-generated-images-legal-risks-copyright) that discusses this "legal minefield" for AI-generated images, some of which are based on the OpenAI software. Much of the discussion applies directly to AI-generated texts.
Accusations of plagiarism
-------------------------
To my understanding, AI-generated content depends on associations between training data and classification data. Input data might be for instance a collection of photographs together with a classification matrix. This matrix expresses whether each image contains e.g. a car, a bicycle, a staircase, a zebra crossing, a traffic sign etc. Training an AI basically means to develop a mathematical model that expresses the learned associations between the images and the classifications. The resulting model can make a prediction whether an image that was not part of the training data also shows a bicycle. In this way, the model functions as a classifier. But you could also reverse the model logic by asking the model to generate an image that contains a bicycle. The AI model will use the learned associations between image information and classification to produce an AI-generated image of a bicycle.
A potential problem in this process may arise from data scarcity. If the training data contains only very few images of a bicycle, the generated image will be very similar to the input. This means that if e.g. the prompt for your text generator is highly specific, the output text may be very similar to the few input texts that the AI can draw from to generate the text. This is called [AI plagiarism](https://aicontentdojo.com/gpt-3-ai-plagiarism-and-fact-checking/).
So, the AI-generated text may be a direct plagiarism of another published text. But to you as the end user, there is no way of knowing how similar it is, and there's no way of checking the actual texts that the model used to generate the text based on your prompt. This means that if you publish an article that contains AI plagiarism, and if somebody realizes the similarity between your article and other published material, they can rightfully charge you with plagiarism. Your only excuse would be that you didn't write that section, the AI did. But in an academic context, this will still ruin your academic reputation.
Argumentation
-------------
Academic writing depends on coherent and cohesive argumentative elaboration. While AIs have made huge progress in that regard, this is still something that needs to be checked very carefully. AI models don't understand the argumentation of an input text in any sense that relates to human understanding. At best, an AI model generalizes over argumentative patterns recurring in several input texts, and it uses these generalizations to create a text that resembles these argumentative patterns. It is your task as an author to ensure that the generated argument is indeed valid. You can only do this if you know the subject matter well enough – but you can ask an AI model to generate a text for a topic that you're completely ignorant of. Much responsibility is required at this point.
Your example text illustrates this. To me as someone who isn't an expert in reinforcement learning, the description sounds reasonable. But I can't judge whether it's actually correct. I would never dare to use this passage without reading up on the difference in detail so that I can verify the passage. But then, I could just as well write the section myself.
Referencing
-----------
One rule that every first-year student should learn is that academic writing needs proper referencing. If you make claims, you should back up the claims by references. If you report previous work, you need to provide sources.
However, an AI model doesn't know about referencing. It may learn that after particular text patterns other typical text patters occur. So an AI may learn that sentences from the academic genre very often end in sequences like `(ABCDE 1234).` because very often, the input texts will provide references for a statement in a sentence at the end of the sentence, and the format of this reference is often `(Author Year)`. However, the AI doesn't know what this pattern means. It doesn't know that you can't use the most probable letter-number sequence here, but that it has to refer to an existing source. Obviously, this is less than useless – it's actively invalidating the academic quality of your text.
Alternatively, the AI may *not* produce any reference, which is also unacceptable and requires your intervention as the author. The generated text in your example doesn't contain references – but it contains many claims for which I as a reviewer would ask for sources to back up the claims. Again, it would be your task as the author to find sources for each of these claims. And since the AI didn't use sources in any sense of term "source" as used in academic contexts, it may even be impossible to provide appropriate references for an AI-generated text that satisfies the very strict standards for referencing.
Summary
-------
AI-generated texts are an interesting development, but it's a topic that is so novel that there are many unresolved issues (both legal and ethical), and also many aspects that ask for a high degree of responsibility and knowledge from the author.
My assessment may change in the future, but as of today I'd advise against using AI-generated texts in academic writing.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: *#GivingCreditstoChatGPT is an act of supporting plagiarism!*
I am not familiar with legal/copyright issues, so I will not address them here.
Inspite of its capability to generate well-structured "informative" text, ChatGPT is far from being intelligent (and consistent). It is very dangerous to blindly rely on this tool.
For example:
What is p-value?
>
> A p-value is a statistical measure that is used to determine the likelihood that a given result occurred by chance if the null hypothesis were true. If the p-value is low, it suggests that the null hypothesis is unlikely to be true. On the other hand, if the p-value is high, it suggests that the null hypothesis is likely to be true.
>
>
>
Another answer for "What is p-value?"
>
> A p-value is a statistical measure which is used to indicate the probability of a given hypothesis being true. It is calulated by dividing the observed results of a test by the expected value of the test. The lower the p-value, the more likely the hypothesis to be true.
>
>
>
The best answer (the 4-th try)
>
> A p-value is a numerical value used in statistical hypothesis testing that represents the probability of obtaining a test statistic at least as extreme as the one observed, assuming that the null hypothesis is true.
>
>
>
If I have a student, and he/she keeps giving me a different answer (ranging from *far from being correct* to *very close*) everytime ask him/her the question "What is p-value?", I would say that this student *just scrapes the entire internet, and gives me whatever the first result that he/she finds "useful"* without knowing what it is. That is the problem of ChatGPT. It does not know. It does not understand. **AI is not intelligent.**
Also, that also implies that it is hard for others to locate the source that you get information from. The answer you get for asking the question above on ChatGPT is not fixed. Eventually, it will be impossible to do that.
Last but not least, in my opinion, ChatGPT could be an useful tool for productivity, and there is no reason why you should not use it if you found it helpful for your work as long as you acknowledge its shortcomings. Don't trust it blindly.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: An answer to the literal question in the title, "Is it OK to generate parts of a research paper using a large language model such as ChatGPT?", is probably yes. At least if your research paper happens to be about LLMs, trying to understand how and why they work and how to improve them.
A fairly recent and somewhat extreme example is [this article](https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03701250v1), mostly written by GPT-3. The (co)authors asked the LLM to write a paper about itself (using multiple queries). As a consequence, that paper contains a lot of sections written entirely by the LLM.
Whether or not something like that really is acceptable (or should be) is, just as mentioned in the other answers, still up for debate. This particular paper is still in peer-review (or it was at least in June 2022, when the (co)author wrote an opinion piece on their own paper and the ethical and moral questions it poses in [Scientific American](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/we-asked-gpt-3-to-write-an-academic-paper-about-itself-mdash-then-we-tried-to-get-it-published/?amp=true)).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> No, it is not acceptable to use a language model such as ChatGPT to generate parts of a research paper. Research papers are expected to be the original work of the author(s), and using a language model to generate part of the paper would be considered a form of plagiarism. Additionally, research papers require a high level of accuracy and attention to detail, and a language model may not be able to provide the level of accuracy and precision that is needed in a research paper. It is always best to do your own research and write your own paper.
>
>
>
This is the answer given by ChatGPT.
It doesn't recommend using itself for generating a research paper.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_8: The example in the question body generates the impression that large chunks of text are to be generated automatically and submitted without editing. However, I'd like to approach the question as asked in the title and more from the perspective of what I consider acceptable usage of AI models as *tools*.
Summary
-------
* I think such AIs can be valuable tools to help generating initial draft texts, once the current hype is over and they get to be used for what they are good for. Though under much closer human supervision than the question envisions: These models are giant autocompletion engines, and could/should be used as such; they are not trained to predict reality or truth (other than the reality of what may occur in a text).
* We are already using deep models - possibly without realizing - for several tasks during research and paper writing without particular concerns.
* Whether we find it acceptable or not to use such tools to help with *proper* scientific writing, we'll anyways have to learn how to deal with auto-generated spam papers.
---
TLDR
====
First of all, I'm in STEM (for this question: as opposed to sciences/disciplines that are more working directly on language such as literature or also law). The science I generate is partly experimental and partly computational (as in crunching the numbers of those experiments). Fields whose core is in the language may need to develop their own standards.
(Also, I'm into machine learning, but not into natural language processing.)
However, keep in mind that we are already using automated tools:
* [Automated theorem proving in maths](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_theorem_proving)
* [Google uses a natural language processing model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BERT_(language_model)) in their search engine.
* Translators such as [deepl](https://deepl.com) come to mind as well. Particularly in case you're not a native English speaker and look for translations of sentences explaining your thoughts in your native language.
* Spell checkers are state of the art. Thesauruses or synonym and antonym dictionaries have been around since ever, nowadays there are also rephrasing tools. Newer tools like [grammarly](https://www.grammarly.com/) were explicitly recommended in a scientific writing course I lately attended. Note that grammarly can rewrite sentences to make them shorter and more legigible.
* I happily use tab completion, including the variety that predicts what word I want to write next when writing a text.
* Similarly, speech (voice-to-text) or character recognition (OCR) software uses deep learning.
* At my secondary affiliation [JKI](https://julius-kuehn.de), colleagues develop [cadima](https://www.cadima.info/) for helping with systematic reviews. Behind the scenes, they work with (and on) natural language processing AI models for that tool as well.
AFAIK, using such tools is not considered questionable.
As a side note: when I worked on my very first paper, I was at an institute that still had a secretary/assistant. She drew the illustrations about our methodology according to our instructions and got properly acknowledged similar to how one would acknowledge who helped with field or lab work, but did not contribute intellectually to a paper. There is nothing ethically questionable in this practice, neither.
*I'd tend to "acknowledge" models like other software relevant for the paper: either in the text or as reference if there's a scientific publication about it. Since that is done not only for, say, the package that computes a statistical model but also for packages like ggplot2 that produce diagrams and figures, why not for packages that generate (parts/early drafts) of the text.*
---
The aforementioned scientific writing course discussed a work flow that has distinct steps for deciding which content, text generation (and recommended [freewriting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_writing), possibly using voice-to-text software) followed by editing, revising (and reorganizing) the produced text chunks.
[GPT-3](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPT-3) and similar models predict how a given text continues. This is IMHO important to understand:
It's not answering questions in the sense we'd discuss question and answer, for those models, answers are text that is predicted to come after a question.
It also means that some behaviours that may be considered less desirable are actually what follows from the precise prediction task of those models.
In particular, since the "answers" are in a sense extrapolated from the initial text/keywords, we should expect that this process is unstable (see the [different "explanations" of p-values in @edelweiss' answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/191214/725)). (I also wouldn't be astonished if this extrapolation behaviour turns out to be related to the possibility of the model generating abusive or heavily biased language: such extrapolations have a tendency to amplify things)
I think we also need to keep in mind that when talking about writing a scientific paper, we're talking about *novel* (as in new), but real (not fictional) content. This means we're asking for even more extrapolation: what we want to write about must be outside the body of text known to the model.
And, GPT-3 is not a domain-specific model for predicting how a scientific text goes on, its training base comprises all kinds of text, including invented ones such as fictional or even fantasy texts. Note that the AI generated content has often been described as dream-like - which may be how we humans perceive such instability in the prediction. (It would be interesting whether such a model trained purely on scientific texts and textbooks would produce less fantasy)
(We also should not wonder about "fake news" being produced; and it should by its set-up be able to predict also how fake news stories go on.)
This suggests to me that these models may best be used as very sophisticated auto-completion tools (with tight control by us of the content - and that possibly tighter control is needed for generating/auto-completing parts of a scientific text than for, say, a web page or blog post on some well-known topic), and maybe as a tool for the free writing stage, generating (even a variety of) sentences or paragraphs from maybe a list of bullet points.
I'd gladly use an AI tool with a voice-to-text of my talk as starting point, applying a "scientific paper" language style to generate an initial pre-draft version of a manuscript. *...\*dream\*...*
**When writing a scientific paper, *we* provide (and are responsible for) the knowledge content.** I care less about "who" puts the thoughts into nice-to-read English, and personally find the use of also very sophisticated tools entirely acceptable.
---
relevant blog posts and papers
------------------------------
* [Artificial intelligence is getting better at writing, and universities should worry about plagiarism](https://theconversation.com/artificial-intelligence-is-getting-better-at-writing-and-universities-should-worry-about-plagiarism-160481)
* [Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism?](https://edintegrity.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s40979-016-0013-y)
*I'd expect the observed indicators (which are mostly rather clumsy) to vanish rather soon as the tools become more sophisticated*
* [In an AI world we need to teach students how to work with robot writers](https://theconversation.com/in-an-ai-world-we-need-to-teach-students-how-to-work-with-robot-writers-157508)
* [OK computer: to prevent students cheating with AI text-generators, we should bring them into the classroom](https://theconversation.com/ok-computer-to-prevent-students-cheating-with-ai-text-generators-we-should-bring-them-into-the-classroom-129905)
* [‘Tortured phrases’ give away fabricated research papers](https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02134-0) and the original [Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals](https://arxiv.org/abs/2107.06751)
*From the nature news (haven't yet read the arXiv preprint) it is not clear to me whether spam papers were newly generated (by AI) or whether plagiarism was tried to hide behind automated forth-and-back translation.*
(One of these posts mentions that also plagiarism detection software will become more sophisticated, establishing "writing fingerprints" of people. Unless these fingerprints are transparently computed, and based on proper science, I'd have the same type of concerns with plagiarism accusations on such a basis that I have about predictive policing, in particular based on intransparent (and likely not well validated) models.)
---
I don't want to speak (much) on the licensing issues:
* If ChatGPT is found to have been trained on material that was not properly licensed (see @AustinHemmelgarn's comment on the respective [lawsuit](https://githubcopilotlitigation.com/)) it will likely be taken down. A different AI model trained on a legally available body of text will likely be developed (possibly by someone else) and provide similar functionality - so the rest of these answers is not affected.
* As username_4 discusses, copyright of *content* generated by AI is not clear.
* However, I'd expect for an AI model (software) that's used basically as autocompletion tool, i.e. under close (intellectual) supervision of humans, that the copyright lies with those humans. This is IMHO the more relevant and realistic scenario for a proper scientific text being written using an AI.
(Consider: if Microsoft were to loose a lawsuit for copyright infringement for something incorporated in the Word software. Whatever happens to the future of Word, your text produced with the help of Word stays yours.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: I'll add to the other answers that some conferences explicitly forbid some use of language models, so if you plan to use some language models you should make sure it doesn't violate some policy of your publication target.
E.g., <https://icml.cc/Conferences/2023/llm-policy>:
>
> The Large Language Model (LLM) policy for ICML 2023 prohibits text produced entirely by LLMs (i.e., “generated”). This does not prohibit authors from using LLMs for editing or polishing author-written text.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I am surprised that no one else has mentioned that **OpenAI expressly forbids using their AI to generate content without clear attribution including how the AI was used.** This is in addition to the ethical and legal issues on the publication side that the other answers discuss. From [OpenAI's website](https://openai.com/api/policies/sharing-publication/) (emphasis mine):
>
> ### Content co-authored with the OpenAI API policy
>
>
> Creators who wish to publish their first-party written content (e.g., a book, compendium of short stories) created in part with the OpenAI API are permitted to do so under the following conditions:
>
>
> * The published content is attributed to your name or company.
> * **The role of AI in formulating the content is clearly disclosed in a way that no reader could possibly miss, and that a typical reader would find sufficiently easy to understand.**
>
>
> ....
>
>
> **For instance, one must detail in a Foreword or Introduction (or some place similar) the relative roles of drafting, editing, etc.** People should not represent API-generated content as being wholly generated by a human or wholly generated by an AI, and it is a human who must take ultimate responsibility for the content being published.
>
>
>
The website also has a suggested blurb that can be used:
>
> The author generated this text in part with GPT-3, OpenAI’s large-scale language-generation model. Upon generating draft language, the author reviewed, edited, and revised the language to their own liking and takes ultimate responsibility for the content of this publication.
>
>
>
I suspect that other large language models will have similar use policies.
**In short:** it's not just up to the venue and the authors. By using a large language model published by some company, you are obligated to read and follow the terms of use for that model, which may include proper attribution.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: No, using language models like ChatGPT to generate parts of your research paper is not advisable. Several issues arise from the direct usage of artificial intelligence services such as OpenAI ChatGPT, BingAI, BardAI, and so on in the education sector. Some of the common issues are:
**1. Plagiarism Accusations,
2. Licensing Issues,
3. Referencing Issues,
4. Originality of the Sources Issues**
If you are confused about any concepts, you can ask these services to explain the meaning. However, after grasping the concepts, you should do your own research, learn from it, and use it in your research papers.
One more thing. Someone once said, "In your life, all kinds of troubles will come looking for you all the time. You don't need to go out and look for them."
A legal team in New York City recently got reprimanded by a Federal Judge for writing a legal brief with the help of ChatGPT. Turns out, none of these cases that ChatGPT had cited to the lawyers actually existed.
[NYC judge scolds lawyer for using ChatGPT to write brief full of ‘legal gibberish’; attorney swears robot ‘duped’ him | Yahoo! News | Friday, June 9, 2023](https://www.yahoo.com/news/nyc-judge-scolds-lawyer-using-224100051.html)
To conclude, I think that it is okay to use ChatGPT within ethical and code of honesty constraints, but beyond that, you are going to attract all kinds of negative attention and consequences you never expected to receive.
Good Luck to you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: Times have changed. These days [the answer is broadly "yes"](https://publicationethics.org/cope-position-statements/ai-author), but 1) you can't list the AI as an author, 2) you must disclose where you used AI, and 3) you are still responsible for the content of your paper, even if it was written by AI.
>
> The use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools such as ChatGPT or Large Language Models in research publications is expanding rapidly. COPE joins organisations, such as WAME and the JAMA Network among others, to state that AI tools cannot be listed as an author of a paper.
>
>
> AI tools cannot meet the requirements for authorship as they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. As non-legal entities, they cannot assert the presence or absence of conflicts of interest nor manage copyright and license agreements.
>
>
> Authors who use AI tools in the writing of a manuscript, production of images or graphical elements of the paper, or in the collection and analysis of data, must be transparent in disclosing in the Materials and Methods (or similar section) of the paper how the AI tool was used and which tool was used. Authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/02
| 1,443
| 5,953
|
<issue_start>username_0: How should a person with 110 IQ approach studying? Particularly with math and physics. What are the methods (if any) that can be employed to compensate for my inherent inability to understand very advanced topics? Perhaps focusing on rote memorization in such a case? I'm looking for personal experiences and sources, if possible. Feel free to speak frankly.<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to be interpreting the IQ test as an absolute unbreakable block to your understanding. It is no such thing. Don't try to excuse yourself from the need for hard work to understand deep things.
I was once told, based on a test, that I had the "ability" to do well in a junior college but would probably be frustrated if I tried to go farther than that. I later earned a PhD in mathematics.
No, rote memorization isn't going to take you terrifically far, though some of that may be needed. For the very young it probably is (6\*7=42), but not later once the brain develops along with the ability to do abstract thought.
The key to success for most is to work hard but effectively. Don't just try to memorize, but try to solve problems and exercises in both math and physics. Don't read solutions, create them. But you also need feedback on what you do. A good course with a reasonable number of students and a skilled staff should provide that feedback. If they don't then you need to seek it out. Office hours. Be a pest if you need to.
You don't have an inability to understand deep topics. You have a need to develop skills. You may have some setbacks, but even those with great scores on IQ tests will also. Learn to push through those setbacks, with hard work and determination.
I don't know of any university that asks for IQ test results as part of admissions at any level.
The IQ number is just a number it isn't a locked gate.
For background see [this at Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Validity_as_a_measure_of_intelligence)
---
Let me note a moderately common phenomenon. Some people, perhaps those with high IQ, seem to find early schooling easy and don't have to work very hard to succeed. It just comes naturally. But eventually most everyone will reach a point when it ain't so easy anymore and, if they haven't learned how to learn, might fail at that point having no concept of the work it takes to succeed. I was "lucky" to reach my natural limit early enough that I knew I had to work hard. My sister, who had an easier time in school and far surpassed me in grades, didn't go so far. The "natural limit" of ability (whatever that is) hit her harder.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Basically like anyone else, some references I tend to refer to (and used myself to improve how I learn) are:
* Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning - <https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18770267-make-it-stick>
* Learning How To Learn (Online Course) - <https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn>
The online course is offered for free and based on the material of the book, though I as a warning, it that it is designed for schoolkids as well and so the lectures may come across as childish. However the material they cover is still useful for improving the speed and depth with which you can obtain knowledge.
A couple of other points:
* Regarding IQs, I remember coming across a study (can't remember where) which states that IQ is only correlated with job performance upto around 120 (a couple of jobs, such as theoretical physics and some mathematics see a correlation going upto 140, though note this was only **theoretical** physics). Beyond that other skills tended to dominate, e.g. emotional intelligence, networking, drive to perform.
* Keep in mind IQ only refers to how quickly a person can in theory learn something, it doesn't say how much they will know. If you are an expert in something and we are talking about your area of expertise, you will be the expert regardless of how high my IQ is. All a high IQ means is that if we were both starting from the same background knowledge I would be able to reach your level of expertise quicker than you would. But I would still need to decide that I need to become an expert rather than simply deferring to you (there is such a thing as opportunity cost).
* To back up username_1's statement about coasting on natural ability, having a high IQ myself there was a lot of effort put into making sure I didn't think I'd just be able to rely on my natural ability but should have to learn how to study. There is such a thing as a **growth mindset** and average IQ plus growth mindset will probably be able to do more than a high IQ and fixed ability mindset, even if it might take longer to reach that point. I still need to remind myself every now (particularly if life is happening) and then to engage in focused learning rather then just falling back on my abilities and what I already know.
* As suggested by the previous point on IQ only being useful upto a point, having a drive to contribute or interest in nature is something I'd say professors keep an eye out for, not just raw intelligence.
* If you are still worried "My lack of intelligence means I don't have the mental resources to understand this topic", think of it another way. Those people with high IQ can just throw mental resources at a problem until they understand it, if you have to come up with a smarter way to think about something so that you "fit it into your mental capacity" then you have a drive to come up with simpler ways to understand a topic which the high IQ people do not. This can be an incredibly valuable contribution, and is something the high IQ people may also find quite useful themselves.
PS: Rote memorisation should never be your go to, its only useful when trying to deeply understand a more advanced topic than what you're memorising, but you should understand the less advanced topic first.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/02
| 1,611
| 6,640
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate working on my thesis. It is a difficult situation because my thesis advisor took a new job and has left the university, and I also work part-time. My advisor goes months without responding to my e-mails, and there is no other way for me to contact him.
I am curious on who to contact when a professor is treating you unfairly. I have contacted the dean once, and because of this my professor did not grade my project for two whole months, and my complaint honestly resulted in him being way more distant. By being treated bad I specifically mean him not replying to my emails, forgetting to grade/give feedback to my drafts, and being very vague and cold when he replies to me once in a while. Many of my emails are still probably in his inbox waiting to be replied to. However, what made me really write this is him forgetting to give me feedback for my draft. Everyone has gotten their feedback, and there is very short time until our defense date. I just feel crappy, and so let down. What do I do and who do I contact?<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to be interpreting the IQ test as an absolute unbreakable block to your understanding. It is no such thing. Don't try to excuse yourself from the need for hard work to understand deep things.
I was once told, based on a test, that I had the "ability" to do well in a junior college but would probably be frustrated if I tried to go farther than that. I later earned a PhD in mathematics.
No, rote memorization isn't going to take you terrifically far, though some of that may be needed. For the very young it probably is (6\*7=42), but not later once the brain develops along with the ability to do abstract thought.
The key to success for most is to work hard but effectively. Don't just try to memorize, but try to solve problems and exercises in both math and physics. Don't read solutions, create them. But you also need feedback on what you do. A good course with a reasonable number of students and a skilled staff should provide that feedback. If they don't then you need to seek it out. Office hours. Be a pest if you need to.
You don't have an inability to understand deep topics. You have a need to develop skills. You may have some setbacks, but even those with great scores on IQ tests will also. Learn to push through those setbacks, with hard work and determination.
I don't know of any university that asks for IQ test results as part of admissions at any level.
The IQ number is just a number it isn't a locked gate.
For background see [this at Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Validity_as_a_measure_of_intelligence)
---
Let me note a moderately common phenomenon. Some people, perhaps those with high IQ, seem to find early schooling easy and don't have to work very hard to succeed. It just comes naturally. But eventually most everyone will reach a point when it ain't so easy anymore and, if they haven't learned how to learn, might fail at that point having no concept of the work it takes to succeed. I was "lucky" to reach my natural limit early enough that I knew I had to work hard. My sister, who had an easier time in school and far surpassed me in grades, didn't go so far. The "natural limit" of ability (whatever that is) hit her harder.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Basically like anyone else, some references I tend to refer to (and used myself to improve how I learn) are:
* Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning - <https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18770267-make-it-stick>
* Learning How To Learn (Online Course) - <https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn>
The online course is offered for free and based on the material of the book, though I as a warning, it that it is designed for schoolkids as well and so the lectures may come across as childish. However the material they cover is still useful for improving the speed and depth with which you can obtain knowledge.
A couple of other points:
* Regarding IQs, I remember coming across a study (can't remember where) which states that IQ is only correlated with job performance upto around 120 (a couple of jobs, such as theoretical physics and some mathematics see a correlation going upto 140, though note this was only **theoretical** physics). Beyond that other skills tended to dominate, e.g. emotional intelligence, networking, drive to perform.
* Keep in mind IQ only refers to how quickly a person can in theory learn something, it doesn't say how much they will know. If you are an expert in something and we are talking about your area of expertise, you will be the expert regardless of how high my IQ is. All a high IQ means is that if we were both starting from the same background knowledge I would be able to reach your level of expertise quicker than you would. But I would still need to decide that I need to become an expert rather than simply deferring to you (there is such a thing as opportunity cost).
* To back up username_1's statement about coasting on natural ability, having a high IQ myself there was a lot of effort put into making sure I didn't think I'd just be able to rely on my natural ability but should have to learn how to study. There is such a thing as a **growth mindset** and average IQ plus growth mindset will probably be able to do more than a high IQ and fixed ability mindset, even if it might take longer to reach that point. I still need to remind myself every now (particularly if life is happening) and then to engage in focused learning rather then just falling back on my abilities and what I already know.
* As suggested by the previous point on IQ only being useful upto a point, having a drive to contribute or interest in nature is something I'd say professors keep an eye out for, not just raw intelligence.
* If you are still worried "My lack of intelligence means I don't have the mental resources to understand this topic", think of it another way. Those people with high IQ can just throw mental resources at a problem until they understand it, if you have to come up with a smarter way to think about something so that you "fit it into your mental capacity" then you have a drive to come up with simpler ways to understand a topic which the high IQ people do not. This can be an incredibly valuable contribution, and is something the high IQ people may also find quite useful themselves.
PS: Rote memorisation should never be your go to, its only useful when trying to deeply understand a more advanced topic than what you're memorising, but you should understand the less advanced topic first.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/02
| 2,065
| 9,173
|
<issue_start>username_0: How would you handle a colleague offering your PhD student a postdoc position?
I had applied and received fund for him to continue with me as a postdoc immediately he graduates. We had this discussion before the application. Now I'm informed that a colleague offered him a longer postdoc contract (+2 year) and he's accepted to work with him. I spent years training this student in this field and we work very well. So I believe the extra two years is what was used to attract him.
I need opinions to make sure I don't appear confrontational or bring my ability to finalize this student's PhD supervision without bias to question.
**Some points:**
* Politically, I think I am disadvantaged to have direct confrontation with this colleague. My position is under contract. And my work visa is dependent on keeping my job.
* The student in question is on a student visa and I believe he wanted to stay longer hence going for his offer.<issue_comment>username_1: Why do you want to "handle" your colleague? It is nice for the student to receive multiple offers and choose what's best for them. It is also nice for the student to be exposed to different research groups, mentors and supervisors before they become an established researcher and form their own group.
You may be able to keep the funds and use them to invite another postdoc, which means you would not lose the funding. It all seems rather a win-win situation and I am not sure why you consider confronting your colleague on it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You don't own your students; your role is to educate them and teach them about their field - in terms of content, in terms of conduct of research, and in terms of navigating the professional environment.
One of the first marks of your success in this process is the successful graduation of your student.
A further mark of success will be if your student is able to find a next position that suits them and furthers their career goals.
It seems that most academics agree that for a student who wants an academic career (which usually means eventual hiring as a professor, though there may be other long-term options in some fields) it's important that they demonstrate some independence in their post doctoral years, meaning that they do work separate from their PhD advisor. Ideally, this would be at a different institution, but another advisor at the same institution is better than the same advisor.
You can congratulate your student on their new position, wish them well, offer them support and a place to turn to advice in their future, etc.
For their remaining time as your student, there's no good reason for you to have nor to demonstrate any ill-will towards them for taking a job that's best for them. If you're feeling upset or like you can't advise them in their best interests because of some perceived snub, that sounds to me like a personal problem for you to resolve that shouldn't involve either your colleague or the student directly.
---
A commenter pointed out that you may be specifically bothered because you've obtained funding for this student to continue with you as a post doc. Given that information, I think the courtesy owed depends a lot on additional information not provided here, but it wouldn't change my overall answer too much. You say that *you* applied for funds, and that you had a discussion before the application.
It's not really fair to expect a student to be ready to commit at that point - yes, if they don't have any other options at that point, they certainly are going to want you to produce an opportunity for them. On the other hand, they can't stop all other plans just because your application for funding *might* be successful.
It is possible that you both reached a mutual agreement that the student would continue in your lab as a post doc, and that now they've accepted a *different* position without letting you know. I still think it's important to recognize that the student has to keep their own best interests in mind, and that staying in the same lab that they did their PhD work is probably not in their best interest, especially if they have another offer for a longer duration.
However, it's also possible that you've done these things more unilaterally, and I don't think it's fair to consider obtaining funds for a student or offering them a job because *you* want them to work with you to be any constraint on them should they choose to go elsewhere, nor should colleagues see it as a limit on whether they can make their own offers to the student; there's no "calling dibs". Hopefully you can use the funds to hire a different post doc, and if not, then you should have had a more concrete agreement ahead of time.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: You have to think long-term. You may feel disappointed now but your working relationship with students does not end when they graduate or they move on to a new position. For example, I have had a student who graduated more than ten years ago started working with me again. Just wish them success, be helpful whenever you can, and continue to maintain a good working relationship with them. You will never know what happens in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Your colleague did nothing wrong here (most likely).
The only questionable behavior comes from your student - IF you have clearly communicated the intended postdoc and IF the student clearly affirmed they are on board with it. If that is the case, you have every right to sit down with them and discuss why are they breaking the promises they gave so explicitly, and it triggers some kind of a crisis resolution sequence which all three of you will have to navigate.
However, if that is not as unambiguous, I would consider actively clawing them back abusive, as you are clearly currently in a position of power with respect to the student, and they may feel threatened by the confrontation. Students are a bit like children - like others have said, you have to do what is best for them, not make them instruments of your personal ambition. And being able to independently (!) find a new job with better prospects than you could offer (!) is a great career step.
On the flip side, you could be on the other end of this arrangement and become the one poaching others' students. To avoid situations like yours, I would advise asking students about the possible conflict of interest they may already be in and helping them to solve this issue ethically by raising their awareness of the other perspectives.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: You can't prevent the PhD doing his fellowship elsewhere, in spite of his apparent ["breach of promise"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breach_of_promise).
You will appreciate that having a good communicative connection between student and adviser is in most cases a large part of any success they may enjoy together. But you say your relations with the student are good so this suggests that he is not leaving you because he finds your colleague more congenial; rather more because he was offered a 2 year program and took this as he wants to stay in the country.
Naturally you feel aggrieved that your efforts in training this person on techniques vital to the field you work in have effectively been stolen by your colleague. And thinking that this situation could be repeated again must be dispiriting for you.
I think that a lot depends on your present Head of Department and his sensibility to his staff's situations. If (and only if) you adjudge your HoD to be appreciative to your situation, you might try talking to him on the matter. Terdon commented that where a PhD student agreed prior to application to be your nominee for a fellowship bid, then your colleague's "poaching" of him showed scant courtesy to your time investment in him let alone good collegial relations. Your HoD of course may agree or not.
But whatever happens, you have learned that when you intend making a big time commitment in training a PhD with a view to retaining him for later work, you have to evaluate *character* at least as much as intelligence or energy. A student who is voicing anxieties about his visa security or his girlfriend in another part of the country may really be creating for himself a plausible exit route from future commitment to your research group. We all have to learn to "read the signs" in others' behavior in order to avoid disappointment.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: If I were you I would think about it on the bright side. You have trained your student so successfully that another professor is happy to offer them a long-term postdoc position. This is nothing bad for all three parties: You get a testimonial for your education, your student gets a bright future, and your colleague gets a helping hand at their lab. I see no reason to confront anyone.
If you're worried about your postdoc funding, you can seek another candidate to support your projects. A postdoc candidate is nothing unreplaceable. It's completely reasonable to expect your "replacement" workforce to catch up with your project in a month or two.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/03
| 672
| 2,197
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently reading The Limits of Realism by <NAME>. I'm having trouble understanding the convention of reference that he is using. [On page 7](https://i.stack.imgur.com/3nNKM.jpg), he writes the following:
>
> That picture is of reasoning from a 'God's Eye point of
> view'.1
>
>
>
Then at the bottom of the page, the following is written:
>
> 1Putnam (1980a: 100; 1981c: 49; see also 1982a: 38; 1983a:
> x, xviii).
>
>
>
What do these years mean? I've looked at the bibliography, but I can't find sources corresponding to these years and the author. Here's the [first](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UGqsk.jpg) [two](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Qr1tl.jpg) pages of the bibliography.<issue_comment>username_1: Most likely, Putnam has written multiple works which are all being cited. There are four of them, written in different years (1980, 1981, 1982, and 1983), and the citation gives more details on where to find the relevant information in all four of those sources.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This answer merely adds detail to the answer given by @username_1.
In his book, Button uses a referencing system that seems to be somewhat non-standard. He combines a footnote style of referencing (with footnote numbers in each chapter being separately numbered from '1') with an author-date system. The superscript after the word *view* in the text indicates, as you have correctly shown, that there is a similarly numbered footnote at the bottom of the page.
The referencing system at the bottom of the page is an [author-date](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenthetical_referencing) system exactly as @username_1 has indicated. In the 2013 edition (i.e., 1st edition) of Button's book (ISBN 978–0–19–967217–2) the sentence you have quoted appears on page 7. The bibliography for the book commences on page 245 and commencing on page 253 is a list of works by <NAME>. If you look through that list, you will find two works with a 1980 publication date, one listed as 1980a, the other as 1980b; the work listed as 1980a is entitled *How to be an Internal Realist and a Transcendental Realist* (at the same time).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2022/12/03
| 1,984
| 8,248
|
<issue_start>username_0: About a month ago, I read a new article published by my previous advisor and three other researchers in a top journal. I noticed that part of it uses part of my master's thesis, only written as if they are the ones who did it.
It is the second time he is doing that, only that last time I didn't know my rights.
I wrote them, asking them to add a citation to my thesis. My advisor refused. He was claiming to "forget" citing me and that it was too late to make any changes. When I reminded him of the first time he "forgot" to mention me, he said that he paid me a scholarship, so my work is his (meaning he will do it again and again).
Of course, I was not very happy with this disrespectful answer. I was also very unhappy to understand that he didn't let me finish my masters (he kept me for 4 years!) because he knew that my work will become "his" one day.
Just a little background - I come from a small country, and my field is very specific. One bad word from this professor can ruin any chance to build a career at a local university.
My current head of the group (I am doing a postdoc in another country) told me to write to the journal editor, but she also said she doesn't think I will get any reply.
I wrote to the editor, along with a link to my masters' thesis and the parts that he copied. I didn't expect any answer. However, he replied very quickly and told me he and the other editors see it as a very serious case – They want to contact my advisor and change the article. I got panicked and asked him not to do that, explaining that it can ruin my possible future career. He proposed a Zoom meeting. Then, he proposed that I speak with other past-students of his, and that we write a letter together, so it will not be personal, only from me. He emphasized that he can't leave the article like that because it is a significant plagiarism (3 paragraphs + graph). I agreed.
The problem is that most of his students did not finish (they either changed an advisor or left before finishing). The one who did finish managed to do it because another professor pressured this advisor, so there was nothing serious he could use.
I am currently in an advanced stage of getting a research position in another local university. I try to postpone the action from this journal as long as possible, hopefully, to be after somebody from the other university will surely ask him about me. But:
1. It is not serious not answering for such a long time
2. I don't know if I can postpone their letter to this past advisor long enough
I know I should not have written this message in the first place. However, I did, and now it is too late. So the question is – what can I do?<issue_comment>username_1: First, I think you have done the right thing in bringing this to the editor. A serial plagiarizer and abuser of students should be stopped.
Second, you can't control the situation anymore. The editor might not be convincible to delay an update and the article needs to be corrected.
Third, the only people that can protect you from this professor either have the same power over them that the professor has over you: a department head or dean, perhaps. But you would need to bring the case to them forcefully.
Fourth, while the power of that professor might be enough and the system corrupt enough to deny you a career at that "local" place (which is what I think you are concerned about), I'm guessing that a career there would be one of your worst options. If they have power to stop your entry, they still would have power afterwards. The best case is that you are mistaken about that, but no one here can say.
Finally, your best option might be to explore options elsewhere using resources such as the PI you mention in a comment. If an institution is made aware of the entire situation from people (the PI, the editor...) that can be trusted, then the professor's attempts would probably fail and they would face disgrace. Their actions can only succeed in darkness.
Good luck with this. You are, at the moment, a bit stuck. Use what options are open to you and don't depend on things that you don't have control over.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: (As usual for me I've written this off-line, so not taken into account your later comments. I hope it's still useful food for thought!)
I believe you have done the right thing in the bigger picture, by trying to expose your *former* advisor as a plagiarist and exploiter. Unfortunately, as you are finding out, the system treats juniors that raise such questions as disposable footsoldiers giving them no protection and minimal support. Thus these situations can turn into a nasty mess...
I'm afraid I can't add much to the other answer, beyond a few things to think about:
1. You say it is a Master's thesis, and that you are now on a postdoc;
what is the state of your PhD? Until that is completed (submitted,
graduated, certificate in your hand) then protecting that should be
your **first priority**.\*
2. Consider carefully and calmly what power this guy *actually* has over you - bullies will bluster and exaggerate. His position is probably much weaker than you think. I agree your PI is
probably the best person to turn to - as sympathetic and available -
but you will need to share clearly the whole situation with her. I
assume she is your first reference for the position you are chasing; maybe she can mention that your former advisor cannot be relied on to provide a fair reference for you? (That's a whole Academia.SE question right there!)
3. I've no idea what the journal is playing at: they have his manuscript, and the thesis is online, hopefully with the proper timestamp, so they have all they need to demonstrate plagiarism. Similarly, other students (published) theses are presumably also accessible on-line, so it should be easy for *anyone*, including the journal, to check for any plagiarism from those. The editor of any "top journal" has no excuse for being unaware of the way things are ([What researchers think about the culture they work in](https://wellcome.org/reports/what-researchers-think-about-research-culture), 15 January 2020), so I'm gobsmacked that he's apparently trying to expose you as the complainant, opening to victimisation (retribution).
I doubt that's malice, more likely a badly thought-out procedure by the publishers, but the upshot seems to be that not only are you at risk of retaliation yourself but are also being used to entrap other former students. I'm not sure I'd trust the guy.
\* Because even if this whole business makes you go off and do something completely different, you still don't want a multi-year gap (or worse, multi-year failure) on your CV. You don't want it and you don't deserve it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Sometimes the right thing to do is hard, but it must still be done.
The right thing to do is report this, which you have already done, and allow the editor of the journal handle it from there. You may well end up being victimised for that at your current institution, which is a terrible situation I have been in in the past for bringing malfeasance to light. Unfortunately, you should still aspire to do what's right, and you will come out the other side all the stronger for it.
However, this says far more about the institution you work at and those other local universities who you believe would deny you work based on this. Any respectable institution would see a young researcher taking such a difficult action in the the defence of academic integrity a huge, green tick at interview stage - as long as they handled it properly.
Given that, I don't think aiming for a position at these local institutions serves your long term career well at all. If they tolerate this sort of behaviour, and even try and suppress reports of it, then they likely have, or will develop, a terrible reputation internationally. At which point your reputation will suffer by osmosis.
Get out at the earliest opportunity and try and get a job with a respectable institution. I know for some people this may not be easy, but in the long term I think anyone would be better leaving acadaemia than working at institutions like this.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/03
| 548
| 2,192
|
<issue_start>username_0: In one of the papers, I have mistakenly written a wrong/irrelevant word which makes the sentence vague. The sentence contains review of somebody else's work. The referee is confused and has asked for an explanation about that sentence. Shall I directly express that I have made a mistake and include the correct sentence ?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is proper to admit to a minor error and make the correction. I'm assuming that it makes the work clearer to others as well.
Everyone makes such mistakes. There isn't any issue about it, nor about saying thanks for the "good catch".
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with the excellent answer by [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/). Your own post describes it as a mistake, so take the opportunity to correct this mistake, and thank the referee for spotting it. This is a routine part of peer review so there is no need to agonise over it. In terms of your response-to-referees you would typically write something like this:
>
> **Referee:** There appears to be a grammatical error/irrelevant word in the sentence on Line 6, p. 12, such that I cannot understand its meaning.
>
>
> **Agree - revised:** Thanks for catching this error. I have revised this sentence to make it clearer.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The reviewer was confused by the sentence, so other people will be confused as well. So it should be changed. The improvement is only small, but the change is also very small. Change the sentence to be not confusing, and notify the referee.
If you don't agree with the referee: The referee was confused, so he or she is by definition right.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, you must state your error clearly and add the appropriate words. It is crucial to be open and truthful about any errors in your writing. You can apologise for the error and describe how the proper sentence should be understood in your answer to the referee. This will clear up any doubt for the referee and help them grasp the article more thoroughly. To avoid such errors, it's also crucial to properly proofread your work before submission.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/04
| 558
| 2,257
|
<issue_start>username_0: My field is life science/biology.
I am wondering if there is any difference between last author and corresponding author. For example, if one is the second last author and corresponding author, and another one is the last author but not corresponding author, who is actually leading the work?
And also would be viewed differently among university? Particularly for tenure applications?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is proper to admit to a minor error and make the correction. I'm assuming that it makes the work clearer to others as well.
Everyone makes such mistakes. There isn't any issue about it, nor about saying thanks for the "good catch".
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I agree with the excellent answer by [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/75368/). Your own post describes it as a mistake, so take the opportunity to correct this mistake, and thank the referee for spotting it. This is a routine part of peer review so there is no need to agonise over it. In terms of your response-to-referees you would typically write something like this:
>
> **Referee:** There appears to be a grammatical error/irrelevant word in the sentence on Line 6, p. 12, such that I cannot understand its meaning.
>
>
> **Agree - revised:** Thanks for catching this error. I have revised this sentence to make it clearer.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The reviewer was confused by the sentence, so other people will be confused as well. So it should be changed. The improvement is only small, but the change is also very small. Change the sentence to be not confusing, and notify the referee.
If you don't agree with the referee: The referee was confused, so he or she is by definition right.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, you must state your error clearly and add the appropriate words. It is crucial to be open and truthful about any errors in your writing. You can apologise for the error and describe how the proper sentence should be understood in your answer to the referee. This will clear up any doubt for the referee and help them grasp the article more thoroughly. To avoid such errors, it's also crucial to properly proofread your work before submission.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/04
| 433
| 1,867
|
<issue_start>username_0: Assume that it is appropriate to send an email to potential supervisors to inquire about a research program.
Is it a good idea to attach recommendation letters in the cold email? Or instead, should I write in the email that recommendation letters from my academic referees can be provided if it is requested?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Assume that it is appropriate to send an email to potential supervisors to inquire about a research program.
>
>
>
That's fine but...
>
> Is it a good idea to attach recommendation letters in the cold email?
>
>
>
If I were the supervisor in question, I wouldn't be interested in these letters. Everybody can come up with nice recommendation letters and they don't normally mean much if anything. Actually I'd prefer to not get them as any uninteresting line I don't have to read is a good thing.
>
> Or instead, should I write in the email that recommendation letters from my academic referees can be provided if it is requested?
>
>
>
Another completely uninteresting line, don't do that. Every university has a formal admission procedure and normally you will have to submit recommendation letters there. That you can provide them if needed goes without saying.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: My experience is quite different and might not be relevant, since it is not common in the US to apply through a professor. I'm assuming here that your situation is the opposite.
But, rather than sending the letters, especially in an initial contact, you could send the names and affiliations of your recommenders, saying that they will supply letters if asked.
My opinion on such things is that shorter emails are easier to deal with and respond to if there is any interest. You won't be accepted into a program based on an initial letter in any case.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/05
| 604
| 2,699
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am involved in standardization in my field and have thus insight and information about the contents of upcoming standards that are not yet published. I am co-chair of one standardization group that is working on a particular standard that is projected to be published sometime (rather towards the end of) next year. A lot of the content exists already.
There are not a lot of standards in my field as it is quite a new subfield and the contents of the standard are thus quite novel. I am currently writing a paper and would like to cite the standard even though it is not published yet (and very likely will not be by the time the paper will be published). But as a paper will "last/be relevant" for many years, for most of the papers' lifetime the standard will be published. And I think the reference to the standard enhances the quality of the paper.
I wonder if this is an acceptable practice (citing unpublished standards that kind of constitute not yet publicly available "insider knowledge") and if so, how to cite it.<issue_comment>username_1: I have been involved in a number of standardization processes, and in every case there have been identifiable documents that can be cited long before the final official ratification and adoption.
The specific details depend on the standards process, but examples that I have seen include:
* Numbered working documents, drafts, and ballots
* Published RFCs
* Public repositories containing a working draft
* Documents on preprint servers
* Journal articles (including perspectives, proposals, progress reports, etc.)
Not all of these will come with a DOI or will be public. This is especially likely to be the case for industrial standards (e.g., ISO, ANSI) that are paywalled even after they are published.
All, however, are perfectly citable: remember that a citation doesn't promise that a reader can actually *obtain* the source in question, it only clearly identifies what that source is.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I am not familiar with the practice of standardization, so the following may be off the mark, but a lot may depend on whether you have any non-disclosure obligations with respect to the existing "lot of the content".
Anyway, I don't quite understand the purpose of citing the unpublished standard. Unpublished standard is not a standard, so I don't see how citing it adds value to your article. Your article will have a date of submission and the date of publication, so it will always be tied to some point in time.
The situation may be different if you use some ideas from the standard, then you may have to cite it, maybe with a note (unpublished).
Upvotes: -1
|
2022/12/05
| 1,375
| 5,875
|
<issue_start>username_0: I got a rejection after minor revisions although I handled all requirements.
I got comments from two reviewers:
>
> Reviewer #1: Good work. Like the paper.
>
>
> Reviewer #2: I like these kinds of quantitative comparison papers and
> think they are good for science in general.
>
>
>
I didn't get any notice about the grammars or the error typos except one and already corrected it, Now the comments after reviewing say
>
> I was hoping that the authors could provide new contributions that
> would be useful to other researchers. This was not in the paper
>
>
>
Also, one of the Reviewer ask for correcting an abbreviation I wrote which is right, and I mentioned the reference for this abbreviation with the replies to the comments.
What should I do ? Is there any chance to get the editor to look again at the paper?
**If the paper doesn't have new contributions, why then it enters to minor revisions with some normal comments?**<issue_comment>username_1: It is unlikely that you will get any better result from this journal.
You weren't rejected for minor things like correcting abbreviations. The third review is saying that there isn't sufficient innovation in the paper (nothing new) to warrant publication. The editor seems to agree.
You might get a different else from another journal, but probably not from this one. If the third review says more, consider what they say carefully.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Submit to a lower-ranking journal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Your paper is not being rejected because it is wrong. It is being rejected because it doesn't contain anything new. It's like, if I were to write a paper that proves that 2 + 2 = 4 (because 2 = 1 + 1 and 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 = 4), then that proof is not wrong, but it will also never be published.
This particular reject reason:
>
> I was hoping that the authors could provide new contributions that would be useful to other researchers. This was not in the paper
>
>
>
Is very damning. As long as this this reason is true, most reputable journals will likely reject your paper.
You address this comment by adding more results. Superficial changes won't do it. You need either more analysis, more experiments, etc., or you need an argument as to why your paper does provide something new. The latter probably means a significantly rewritten introduction.
As it is, an appeal to this journal is likely to fail. You could try to submit to another journal, but it'll be important to fix the above objection first.
**Edit**:
>
> If the paper doesn't have new contributions, why then it enters to minor revisions with some normal comments?
>
>
>
It's hard to say without knowing the first decision letter or the contents of the paper. However, it's rather common for editors/reviewers to give the author a chance to address the raised issues. If for the first decision the reviewer had already expressed doubts about the novelty of the paper, then they might be expecting you to explain what exactly your contribution is in the revision. They might expect you to spell out exactly what you've done that's new. This is arguably a minor revision, because it's something you ought to know well already and so should be able to address quickly.
A minor revision decision is *not* a sign that your paper is going to be accepted. For example, I've given minor revision decisions before the formal review process even started, because the paper was written in incomprehensible English and the recommendation was for the authors to get it proofread by a native English speaker.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> If the paper doesn't have new contributions, why then it enters to minor revisions with some normal comments?
>
>
>
What could have happened here is that at first glance, the editor did not desk reject the paper and sent it out for review. The two reviewers in the first round did not think your paper was bad and suggested only minor revisions were necessary. In the second round, the first two reviewers were not available anymore (which is not an unlikely scenario) and another reviewer was brought in who had less of a good opinion of your paper and suggested to reject, which led to the editor rejecting it in the end. Or one of the first round reviewers did a more thorough review in the second round and found shortcomings initially missed.
In the end, although in an ideal world it should be, peer review is not an unbiased system and the quality of reviews is not always stellar and not all reviewers will be a good match for the articles they review. From my own experience both as an reviewer and a reviewee, it is not unlikely that one person really only has minor comments and thinks a paper is worth publishing with some minor changes, while the next has three pages of remarks and feels that only major revisions will make the very same article publication ready, if ever.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The pragmatic answer is to earnestly address the reviewer comments and then submit to a lower ranking journal. Realistically, this may be the best chance for the paper.
Also, make a note to modify your paper writing process going forward so that this is less likely to happen .
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: The reviewer who stated
>
> "I was hoping that the authors could provide new contributions that
> would be useful to other researchers. This was not in the paper."
>
>
>
May very well be wrong. If you believe that your paper does in fact make new contributions, you may do well to point them out in a new version of the paper. I see that done in papers all the time.
If you do not believe that your paper makes new contributions, then I guess there is your answer. You may be able to expand on the paper so that it does make new contributions.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/06
| 3,826
| 16,424
|
<issue_start>username_0: Something I hear from students about certain instructors is a complaint that the instructor "makes the course harder than it has to be" or some variation. I'm a postdoc and my students generally really like me. I hear them say this about other instructors and I'm just curious, what is going on? I read it on ratemyprofessor or reviews of other instructors, or overhead students saying this.
The easy explanation is "the student is lazy" but I don't buy this. I generally agree with the students that the instructors they dislike aren't great instructors.
It seems to be closer to saying "the instructor is unclear". What is an example of an instructor "making something harder than it needs to be"?<issue_comment>username_1: The fundamental reason is that the student is unhappy. But *why* they are unhappy could be one or more of the following, at least.
1. Instructor doesn't explain things clearly.
2. Instructor gives more detail than necessary.
3. Too much homework.
4. Homework not very useful.
5. Instructor won't take questions.
6. Instructor takes too much time with questions.
7. Instructor follows the book too closely.
8. Instructor doesn't seem to use the book.
9. Exams are too hard.
10. Exams are just wasting my time.
11. I hate group projects.
12. I hate solo projects.
You get the idea, I hope. Everyone that says this probably has a different reason. You can add your own. Stop when you get to 100, if you like.
Note that the statement about "harder than it needs to be" gives no information about why. That requires further exploration in the individual case or evidence from other student comments. If student comments have some consistency then they may have some validity.
Moreover, students aren't always the best judge of this in any case and their real meaning may just be "harder than I'd like it to be". Some things are hard. And in some fields (math, say) insight may only come through hard work.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Presumably what they mean is that the explanations of the course material are able to be understood, but they are harder to understand than alternative explanations or modes of teaching which would impart the same material in an easier way. Asserting that a course is harder "than it needs to be" generally means that you think the same learning could be accomplished with less effort and difficulty if it were presented in a better way.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What is an example of an instructor "making something harder than it needs to be"?
>
>
>
I'll quote this example from personal experience, which is unfortunately not very understandable unless you are in physics.
Basically, when we study physics at high school level, we have parameters that we evolve forwards in time using known equations. For example, we could be asked to calculate a [force] that acts on [body] for [time] producing [acceleration].
Comparatively, in quantum mechanics, there are two basic approaches. The first is called the [Schrödinger picture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger_picture). You are given a physical state, which you evolve forwards using the Schrödinger equation. This is relatively similar to high school physics, since the operators never change, but the physical state does.
The other picture (and historically the one first discovered) is called the [Heisenberg picture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisenberg_picture). In this picture, the physical state remains constant while the operators (corresponding to the things you want to measure, like position or momentum) change. There is still an analog of the Schrödinger equation, but it is for operators, not physical states.
Needless to say, for students brought up on high school physics, the Heisenberg formulation is significantly harder to grasp. It doesn't matter that the two formulations can be shown to be equivalent - the Schrödinger formulation is simply easier to understand on an intuitive level. A student who sees Heisenberg's equation of motion for the first time could legitimately go "what on Earth am I looking at? How can this possibly be a physics equation?".
When I first studied quantum mechanics, I had the misfortune of my professor using a Heisenberg picture textbook. I had all the prerequisites - linear algebra, matrix manipulations, strong elementary physics grades - and near the end of the course, I (like most other students) still had no idea what was going on. I had no physical intuition, no sense of what the math I was doing is supposed to represent. I still got an "A" for the course, but about the only thing I learned was that the professor's math is flawless.
If you teach quantum mechanics using the Heisenberg picture, I'd say you are making the course harder than it needs to be.
**Edit**: to add another example, consider [this answer](https://boardgames.stackexchange.com/a/57359/) to a bridge question on Boardgames.SE (if you're not aware, bridge is a card game).
You don't need to be an expert on bridge to see why the author's teachers said not to let the author near novices. When the novice asks "what do I do with this hand?", the author is liable to respond with "well it depends on X, Y, Z, and more besides". Meanwhile the novice is looking for "the answer". With so many more things thrown on top, it rapidly becomes confusing for the novice, making the answer harder than it needs to be.
An analog in academia could be the student asking if X is true, and the teacher says "well it depends if Y, Y', Y'', Y''' are true, if none of them are true (and usually none of them are) then X is true".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Sometimes this happens when a student has prior experience, and success, in a subject from a high school course. In the US, Advanced Placement courses are marketed as equivalent to introductory college courses, but college instructors covering the same syllabus will take quite a different approach than high school teachers.
As an example: in single-variable calculus we teach the concept of the derivative as a limit of difference quotients, use the limit to prove theorems about the derivative, and ask students exam questions requiring this conceptual understanding. In a high school class, there may be more class time spent on the literal "calculus" of derivatives with the power rule, product rule, quotient rule, etc.
A student may have succeeded in this high school class, thanks to the extra time spent with in class with the instructor, and the focus on mechanics over concepts. They may find that the college version, comparatively, spends "too much" time on ideas that they feel aren't relevant since they weren't relevant in the high school version. From their point of view, the college instructor transformed a subject they found easy in high school into one which they currently find hard. Hence, "harder than it needs to be."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: It could be because of the mismatch between reality and expectation, from my experience.
When I took Linear Algebra years ago, my classmates complained that they did not understand anything. However, it was not the fault of the instructor.
The instructor chose the axiomatic method of teaching Linear Algebra instead of the "cookbook" style. As for me, the course was indeed abstract and interesting, but not difficult. However, my friends did not think about it that way, blaming the instructor instead. They had friends from other universities, for example, who told them that Linear Algebra was easy like high school mathematics. Some of them had prior learning experience with "cookbook" linear algebra. That's why many of them expected that the course would be that easy.
*All of our mathematics courses were taught in axiomatic style. Not just Linear Algebra. It is just an example.*
Moreover, some people are not ready to embrace the axiomatization of mathematics. Some people don't even know about the existence of axiomatic systems. Some even refuse it think about it.
Also, the seemingly, deceivingly simple nature of the real world makes some people believe that we are trying to overcomplicate things. That is not true.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: "Making the course harder than it has to be" relates mostly to how the content is taught in class.
This can be due to a number of things on a course-wide scale or simply down to how individual lectures or topics are lain out.
Overall this may be due to poor perspective on the part of the professor. He/she never really overviewed the course content **from the viewpoint of an incoming student who has all prerequisite courses successfully completed** and then structured the lectures accordingly.
On a single lecture basis, it usually means a professor not arranging their lecture in a pedagogically appropriate way, i.e. building on the concepts already known to students and guiding them rationally and sensibly towards their next concept plateau.
But occasionally it also means the **professor's delivery of the lecture** leaves the students with misunderstandings on the concepts, their relative importance or offers ideas that run counter to the student's intuition or common sense. Here there are different causes, including:
1. The professor may have a natural insight into this concept and assume everyone else also has - though of course they don't.
2. The professor himself/herself has a poor grasp of the concept and is just trying to bang home some (often poor) textbook version of it with a hammer and tongs.
3. The professor's pacing, tone and volume is not proportionate to the importance or complexity of the current content.
4. The professor has very poor vocal projection.
5. The professor chooses an unorthodox (e.g. interactive) approach to a topic that doesn't lend itself to such teaching.
I would say that every professor has one or two of these shortcomings when they start out in their career. To my knowledge, no university **insists** on professors having to take a teaching course prior to starting lecturing themselves. Yet most learn from their mistakes and the advice of senior colleagues. Many take student observations seriously (after an initial sulk) and adapt their approaches accordingly. But some will maddeningly carry on regardless and neither colleagues nor university management will intervene.
Just one final point on "making courses harder".
The best way to teach something is the clearest way from the point of view of someone not yet familiar with it. Sometimes students (and adults no less) in the euphoria of achievement can forget just how lost they were before they "got" the concept. They then have the confidence to look at the concept in another way and find they can arrive at an understanding - actually quicker, providing you already know of course - by looking at it like that. Then they try explaining it another student in "their own" way - only to thoroughly confuse that student.
Sometimes it's well to remember that the first working out of something is necessarily elaborate rather than elegant. Lessons learned with a bit of work and worry are seldom forgotten - unlike the tricks of elegance.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: I've had something like this where the instructor was teaching a course in his field of expertise to a group of students completely new to the subject. But due to his extensive expertise and knowledge of the area he didn't cover the fundamentals well and just glossed over them, because for him it was so obvious it didn't really need explaining. He also used a lot of jargon he was familiar with but we were unaware of, as a result a lot of students got lost at the very start as he jumped into the more difficult stuff too early. He made the course more difficult than it needed to be by not taking the time to understand the level of the students he was teaching and jumping into material that was more advanced too early, using unfamiliar jargon and not taking the time to cover the fundamentals properly.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: This can also relate to the scope of the course. During my bachelors, my school offered two versions of introductory statistics: one for math/applied math majors or anyone looking to take further statistics classes, and one intended as a capstone intro for majors who need to know practical statistics. However, for a period of about two years, the capstone course was taught by a professor who disagreed with this philosophy, and taught the capstone intro like it was the advanced intro. This introduced a lot of complex proofs and caused him to run out of time to cover all the practical statistical tests that were supposed to be covered.
This prompted widespread student complaints that he made the course "harder than it needed to be," because in this case the "need" was defined by the fact that this course was developed for a specific audience/scope which he ignored.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: Because teaching is hard, and people who are experts in a topic often aren't actually very good at passing that knowledge on.
In my experience, the biggest failing is usually due to not getting the level of detail right for the audience, and that comes down to two factors.
1. If you don't focus enough on the things which are the building blocks for everything else they need to learn, they'll struggle to learn. An expert instructor will often gloss over important information, because to them, it's so basic that they forget it needs to be said.
2. If you focus too much on the things which *aren't* fundamentals, they'll be confused and overloaded. An expert instructor will often elaborate on more advanced aspects of the field because they find it interesting, forgetting that their audience don't yet have the grounding to keep up.
Getting that balance right is one of the most critical skills for anyone doing teaching / training work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: When I was an undergrad, professors that I thought "make the course harder than it needs to be" were brilliant people who weren't good at teaching. They didn't use appropriate textbooks, or they skipped their own office hours, or they provided no feedback on assignments, etc.
As an example, I had a math professor who spent every class period delivering his lecture while faced away from the class, writing on the chalkboard. He didn't assign a textbook. He never made his lecture notes available online. He would not let students take photos of the chalkboard. We spent our classes frantically transcribing his notes, scribbling down anything seemingly-important from his lecture, and occasionally asking for notation clarification—Excuse me, professor, is that a 1 or an i? We students coped by comparing our notes and swapping textbook and youtube channel recommendations and, on the whole, we learned the material. But it was so much harder than it needed to be.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I guess a concrete example is fine:
The definition and *theory* behind the derivative is considered tricky, and complicated, by students. The list of rules on how to *compute* the derivative is considered easy.
Students tend to prefer *this is how you calculate, and solve problems on the final* over *this is the theoretical reason why we actually care*.
Students are much happier with learning to be meat computers, rather than having an actual understanding of the theory.
I think this can explain the comments on the evaluation. So, one easy way out is to always follow up theory with a concrete example where this is used, and make sure this example is from some older final. Real-world examples are much more abstract than 'the final which is gonna be in 2 weeks from now'.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: In a comment, @Garandy replied:
There's an art to teaching well that a lot of professors don't bother to learn or put into practice - making an effort to write clearly during presentations, having prepared slides when possible, utilizing real-world examples to illustrate theory, etc. Beyond that, though, there are professors that pride themselves on their class being "hard" and do nothing to make the content more accessible to students - often times because it was "hard" when they took it, and they can't fathom why their students couldn't all learn it as well as they did.
Upvotes: 1
|
2022/12/06
| 1,476
| 6,454
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm about to finish an undergraduate degree in mathematics, and I want to do research in mathematics, so naturally I'm looking into postgraduate study options. I'm quite stressed about this, and I was thinking about what I want in an institution to continue my studies, and I came to the conclusion that all I want is a sufficient stipend and freedom from major hurdles. The issue is, I look around me and see people having collaborations and talking to each other, and none of that is happening to me. My experience with talking to people about math is full of experiences like:
* Professor presents a concept in class. I ask a question about it, and he says he doesn't know and will look it up and tell me. This never happens. I eventually research the topic and manage to figure out on my own, and it's not hard. This one has happened 3 or 4 times.
* I'm taking a graduate level class and the evaluation is an open ended assignment, and after completing it the professor tells me mine was the best in class, and tells me she wants to talk to me about it later. This never happens.
* I think of an elementary problem, and an idea to solve it. I think the idea looks promising, and mention it to a professor who does research in the area. He tells me it's interesting and encourages me to look into open problems, but doesn't give me any sources to read or mention it ever again.
* I have an undergraduate project to study a topic under the supervision of a professor. I'm supposed to present what I've studied to the supervisor once a week, and by the time I've covered the basics and advanced on to things that he doesn't know, the advisor looks clearly disinterested and doesn't notice when I make errors.
* I have another project like above with another supervisor. He is more interested than the previous one, but often insults me saying things like "I'm happy you're finally going to learn some mathematics" and telling me his other students are better than me.
* A classmate and I decide to study together, usually before a test. We ask each other to solve some exercises we weren't able to do by ourselves, and I'm able to solve some of theirs, but they aren't able to solve any of mine. They aren't ever interested in discussing math in other contexts.
* I ask a question in class, usually about the intuition behind a certain object. The professor gives a curt and unhelpful response. I eventually manage to figure it out reading a book or watching a lecture on youtube. I notice that the professor obviously knew how to give a good answer but chose not to for some reason.
* I attend a conference in a prestigious university far away with lots of famous mathematicians. I can't understand any of the talks, and while I manage to have good conversations with some of the people there, none of them are actually about math.
To me, mathematics has always been a thing that has happened between me and a book or a computer. I have an article published with a novel proof of a classical result, and when that happened I was incredibly happy, and I want to feel that more times. I really do love math, but to me academia is little more than an someone who is willing to pay me to do research. This makes me concerned. I feel like other people are getting opportunities to collaborate with each other that I'm not getting for some reason that I can't understand. It isn't any of the obvious reasons you might imagine, my grades are "excellent" according to everyone who has opined, I got grants that only a small minority of students get, and my professors and classmates often praise me. Even that professor who said I didn't know any mathematics said in a recommendation letter (which I had to see for bureaucratic reasons) that I was "the best student [he] met in [his] carreer".
The immediate decision I have to take is whether I want to go to the university that will give me a PhD for the least amount of effort, or if I want to take more conventional considerations into account. For example, I'm considering choosing a PhD advisor who I know will be absent all of the time. But deeper than that, I feel like I need to understand what is going wrong, and whether I can (or want to) fix it.<issue_comment>username_1: It's hard to respond to your experiences point by point without much more information than you can provide, so I will offer an answer in general terms.
You seem to be a good mathematics student, capable of independent work. You should do that work as part of the mathematics community, not with an advisor who will leave you alone, not at an institution where you can get your degree with the least amount of effort.
I would probably recommend that you apply at a good school (look for guidance from professors you know). In your first year or two you will mostly take courses. Pay attention to which professors work in areas that interest you, and talk to more senior graduate students about how they work with their advisors.
PS As for not understanding talks at a conference at a prestigious place - join the club. It's quite common. The talks are often highly technical, designed to communicate with active researchers in the field.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First thing to keep in mind is that it is very rare for an undergraduate student to have the inclination and aptitude to engage in mathematical research. As such, it is unsurprising that you were unsuccessful in finding people to talk math research with amongst your peers. This will also colour the expectations of faculty members you are engaging with.
As <NAME> already pointed out in the comments, your first three examples should be read as invitations to you to arrange further contact and talk more. Following up is on you. This is particularly true for the second example.
A PhD advisor is committing to much more than an undergraduate project advisor, and typically has much more freedom in this choice. I would expect the typical PhD advisor to be far more interested in their students projects than the typical undergraduate advisor.
In my personal experience, most mathematicians are very kind people. I advise staying away from toxic personalities, better mentors are out there. (Details of "How to find a good mentor/PhD supervisor" are another question that depends on the system and has been asked before).
It takes quite a while to get to the point where you understand conference talks.
Upvotes: 2
|
2022/12/07
| 214
| 883
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a letter of recommendation from my internship coordinator and the year the letter is dated to says 2021 instead of 2022. It clearly seems like a mistake but I’m worried that it will render the letter invalid since it looks like it was from over a year ago when it was written a just a few days ago.
Since my internship coordinator was the one who submitted it, does it really matter if the date is wrong?<issue_comment>username_1: Nobody is going to notice, and whoever does will not care. It's not a question for you to spend emotional energy on: mistakes happen, move on.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Just send them an e-mail back letting them know about the issue. Probably they have sent out multiple letters whilst forgetting to update the date, so they might be happy to be notified so they can correct it for everyone.
Upvotes: 3
|
2022/12/07
| 330
| 1,433
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of writing a paper which proves some conjecture.
What I want to know is:
Is it standard practice to include general commentary on the conjecture and other research around it as references, even when I didn't need any of it to come up with the proof?
If it is standard, accepted practice, what would be the implications of not including it anyway and trying to publish?<issue_comment>username_1: If you cannot provide context to your problem, who will be interested? You also want to show how your proof differs from or builds on the work of others.
Both of these are reasons for *desk rejection*; in fact one question that is often asked of referees is if the manuscript refers to most recent work on the topic.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: An academic paper is not used as evidence that you can do something so you can be judged on it, like a paper for a course might be. It's meant to advance knowledge in some area. You don't get "points" only by making no mistakes in your proof.
If you haven't shown the current state of knowledge, you've failed to demonstrate how the paper advances knowledge. Your proof might be valid, but you haven't shown why anyone should care, and you haven't demonstrated that you have done something new that no one else did before you. References to other work positions your work relative to the field as a whole.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|