date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2015/04/18
| 2,154
| 9,019
|
<issue_start>username_0: I read this question [Does rigor/thoroughness of undergraduate program matter (for graduate/PhD applications)?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19248/does-rigor-thoroughness-of-undergraduate-program-matter-for-graduate-phd-applic?rq=1) and became very worried when I saw everyone blasting the OP for contemplating graduating in three years. The general consensus was that there was no reason at all to graduate early and that the lack of additional experience would hurt your chances at graduate school. I am concerned because I am graduating with only 2.5 years because I can only barely afford this by maxing out all loans. I would love to be able to develop greater depth in my field. Instead it has been a constant sprint to finish before I run out of money completely. I was rejected from every top ten university, and the one token safety school I got into jacked up the price as soon as they found I had nowhere to go.
Are the criticisms that finishing too fast valid in the context of extreme debt? I am saving over $100,000 by finishing early, will this reason be accepted by graduate schools? I see that graduate students do not have to pay tuition and get a small stipend, this sounds like a wonderful way to pursue an education and is very attractive to me right now. I feel that my education is rushed and I have not had the time to contemplate open research questions which are very important for graduate admissions. Graduate school is also the path to a job in research labs or academia.
**edit:**
I have done well enough (6th in graduating class unless I mess up). They offer to tack on a year for a masters **at your current rate**, which is touted as a way extend finiancial aid. This is untenable for me.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Are the criticisms that finishing too fast valid in the context of extreme debt?
>
>
>
Yes, the criticisms are still valid: the world, unfortunately, does not care about any particular person's debt problem.
The answers/comments given at the linked question in the OP are spot on; thus I would encourage you to try to find other sources of aid to fund your full-length undergraduate studies, if you haven't already done so (scholarships, etc.).
Having said that, some schools have a [diversity statement](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32484/what-do-admission-committees-look-for-in-a-diversity-essay) that you are to submit along with your application. In this statement, you can provide some background on the adversities that you have faced and how you overcame them. If you have significant financial hardships that you are battling through, for example, then a diversity statement would probably be the place to talk about that and hope that someone would care enough to have it positively impact your admission decision.
Whether the "diversity statement approach" will work or not depends on (among other things) your particular situation (e.g., how inadequate is your preparation for grad school due to graduating early relative to others in similar situations?) and the number of available slots the school has for cases such as yours. I still think this approach is too risky to count on, and I would, again, encourage you to look for other ways to stay in your undergraduate program for the "normal" amount of time so that you may reap the many benefits of doing so.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Karl, if you have figured out a way to get through your undergraduate institution's hoops in 2 1/2 years, that says something about you!
There is a wide variety in level of preparation (along with many other variables) of incoming grad students.
Don't reject your candidacy before giving some grad schools the opportunity to accept you and fund you.
But do prepare a Plan B for the possible case that you do not get accepted.
In Plan B, you would not be paying an arm and a leg for tuition, but you *would* be working in someone's lab, getting your feet wet with research. Perhaps you would be an intern (paid or unpaid). Perhaps you would sign up for one credit of research (somewhere cheaper than where you are now), and take the initiative to do more than what is normally done for one credit.
Perhaps you'll land a job where you can support yourself *and* do something interesting based on what you studied -- as a CV builder.
Or you could be a Vista volunteer, and make your CV more well rounded. Community service is a big selling point.
Edited here
I just thought of a Plan C. After your year of not being enrolled anywhere (during which you can be plenty productive with academics and research, you just can't be enrolled), and of being financially independent, perhaps you could apply for financial aid as an undergrad. You could state your intention to get a second Bachelor's degree. After one or two semesters of research projects, you'd then be ready to do your grad school applications.
I wouldn't embark on Plan C, though, without having an in-depth conversation with a financial aid officer. I recommend making an appointment with one that works in a community college. They'll have a helpful world view.
The thing I'm unsure about here is whether financial aid is given for a second Bachelor's.
By the way, another online forum that might be helpful for you is College Confidential. Addition: the culture there is to advise but be gentle with college students.
Another addition:
>
> I have not had the time to contemplate open research questions which are very important for graduate admissions.
>
>
>
Don't worry about that. You will get where you want to be, step by step.
General comment: just to put some of what you're feeling in perspective -- it is quite common for college students to hit a certain point in their studies where their self-confidence gets quite shaky. I have heard it said that the freshman knows nothing, the sophomore thinks he knows a lot, the junior is realizing he doesn't know anything, and the senior does know a lot. Hang in there. If you have a strong foundation in your area, and enjoy doing science, it will work out. I appreciate that you may not feel that way right now. All I can say is that these feelings are not unusual at your stage of academic development, and it should start to get better in the medium term, if not sooner.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: When students coming out of the universities with early finishes usually are not up to the level students who have completed the whole degree within 4 years or more. There is a clear difference between them when it comes to analytic and problem solving skills. Many reputed companies always look for the well educated people than people just having qualifications.(early finished student, but still having the qualification)
Same thing happens for when you go for further higher studies, as reputed colleges always wants to produce top class; well educated students, they'll most of the time rejects applicants who have early finishes. They'll consider that those people doesn't have proper foundation.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Here's one way to think about the issues. Imagine comparing yourself to someone comparably talented and hard working but with an extra year and a half of education. That candidate would be better prepared to excel in graduate school (they could hit the ground running, rather than having to catch up), and they would have had more time to build a track record that could impress the admissions committee. All other things being equal, they're going to be admitted rather than you. Basically, it's difficult to compete with a better educated version of yourself.
Of course you could just catch a lucky break, but your chances are best if the admissions committee can't fill the entering class with competitors like this. If you are exceptionally talented, that could well happen at any university. (For example, <NAME> was admitted to math grad school in Princeton at an unusually young age. If he had spent longer getting to that point, he would have built up an even stronger track record. However, he didn't need that to get admitted, since he didn't have to worry about competing against hordes of equally talented applicants.) It could also happen if you aim for a somewhat lower-ranked grad school than you might have been admitted to otherwise. However, you'll run into trouble if you apply to schools that have their pick of a lot of applicants like you.
How this will play out depends on your personal circumstances. Most grad school applicants can get admitted somewhere, if they really aren't picky about where, and few will be admitted to the very top graduate programs. All the factors applicants worry about are basically pushing them a little bit up or down the hierarchy of prestige or desirability in graduate programs. If you see the slope as being steep, then this matters a lot; if you see it as being shallow, then where you end up matters less.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/18
| 1,234
| 5,108
|
<issue_start>username_0: A book I have been reading1, has two (complimentary) recommendations for PhD students:
* Add everything you read/encounter to your reference management system
* Keep a annoteded bibliography of everything you read.
They argue that (as I read it):
* If you looked at a resource and found it was bad, then having a note about how useless (and why) it was will save you looking at it again, if you encount it later.
* If you look at something and find it is good, then you will want it later, and want to know why it is good.
* If you look at something and find it off-topic, then later you might realise a highly novel crossover between the topics.
* The pain/effort of ever trying to find something you've lost because you though you didn't note its full reference down apparently haunts the authors to this day. Indeed the authors describe a article they've been looking for for decades and suggest that if a reader finds it, they would appreciate the contact.
---
Right now my Annotaed bibliography contrained 16 references (I've been keeping it for a week.)
* 13 to various papers in my topic area, or for the foundations that lead to it
* 1 PhD thesis in my topic area, which as well as being good work is also a example of a thesis, that i could use for considering structure
* 1 Article from another area that is explaining the need for manythings, including my topic, for their area
* 1 blog post that while I might never cite, explains a concept from my area that I was having difficulties with better than anything else I have read.
My Anotations vary from:
* 1 sentence summary of the papers topic
* 1 sentence comparason to another paper
* several paragraphs explaining the content
* notes saying that I don't quiet get what the paper is saying.
* note saying that "This paper looks like it would explain paper X's technique but does not. Don't look here for answers on X."
* A see also note
* Or a combination of the above.
**Is this how Annotated Bibliography's work?**
It seems for several papers putting more detail would be a waste of time (Particularly the ones I am annotating with "Don't read this for X"
---
1 <NAME>., & <NAME>. (2010). *The unwritten rules of PhD research.* McGraw-Hill International.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is somewhat misrepresenting the concept to call it an "annotated bibliography". That term suggests something formal, organized according to a specific, prescribed structure, but really all you're doing is organizing the resources you've encountered along with any thoughts you may have on them. The resulting compilation of information is for your use only, and so you should organize it in whatever way you find most effective. I do suggest using a reference manager, since it takes a lot of the tedious work out of organizing your information, but if you honestly find a Bibtex file or note cards or stacks of paper on your desk to be better for you, by all means, go for it.
Whatever organization you use, it should have a few key features:
* Starting from your notes on a paper (or other source), you should be able to easily retrieve the information needed to cite that paper.
* And the other way around: starting from a paper's citation, you should be able to easily retrieve any notes you may have for that paper.
* Notes should be searchable, meaning that if you remember making a note about some topic or idea, but you don't remember which reference it was attached to, you should be able to find it (the reference) without too much trouble. This probably limits you to some sort of digital database, unless you have a pretty good memory.
* You should be able to access the full text of a paper that you've read, given the citation information. If your citation information is complete, this is satisfied by the ability to go on the internet and download the paper.
A bonus feature, not really essential, is the ability to *share* your notes on a paper with others. Some social reference managers enable doing this over the internet, or try to (assuming your collaborators also use the service), but it's more frequently accomplished by conversations in the hallway.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is unclear whether you have [satisfied requirements](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/43968/22768) of an *Annotated Bibliography* just yet. Combining LaTeX with BibTeX should suffice to deliver upon anything that's missing. E.g., you can use command `\bibentry` of package `bibentry` to produce a citation, after which you can include your annotation. More concretely:
```
\section{\bibentry{paper}}
A & B ...
\section{\bibentry{paperTwo}}
C ...
```
As it grows you might like to start categorising, e.g., pushing the above sections to subsections and wrapping inside `\section{Cat A}`. To make this more efficient from the offset, you could use macros.
Including the raw BibTeX entry is perhaps useful, which can probably be achieved with package `listings`.
You may end up with a rather valuable document, so design it to be public, even you may never make it so.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/18
| 551
| 2,400
|
<issue_start>username_0: What is a professional student, in the context of a "Graduate and Professional Student Organization" in the United States (cf. [this one](http://www.indiana.edu/~gpso/archive/www/index.php))? How are they different than or similar to post-docs?<issue_comment>username_1: My experience with the term is frequently derogatory. It is usually applied to a person who either doesn't know what they want to study, switches their major every year or two, refuses to graduate, and spends many more years than the average in school before graduating. Or, slightly less bad, is someone who likes school so much that they keep finding ways to get degree after degree after degree, never getting a job related to one of their majors, and typically working menial jobs to keep funding their education habit.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While username_1's description of "professional student" as someone whose sheltering in academia and trying not to graduate is one I have heard, there's also a more formal designation for the term.
Mainly, post-graduate students who are in professional degree programs. For example, medical and dental students, law students, many students pursuing Masters of Public Health degrees, or MBAs, etc. are all pursuing degrees that are intended to be applied to a profession, rather than going further into academia. They often have somewhat different concerns than graduate students, hence the different term.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Without knowing the exact details (e.g. country, university, link to that organization's website), I would wager the following presumption:
This is an organization of those students who are more experienced, mature or advanced relative to the regular/typical undergraduate students. One category of these are graduate students, another is students who are established professionals outside academia - either due to work experience or a non-academic qualification - and are engaged in some kind of supplementary or advanced study programs.
Examples of potential such "professional students":
* Electricians
* Woodworkers
* Mechanics
* Performance artists
* School teachers
* Accountants
* Nurses
in some countries these might fall under the "graduate student" category, but in others the qualifications for these professions are not undergraduate academic degrees.
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/04/18
| 484
| 2,075
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is a debatable issue given for me to make inquires on: some people said that coursework should be introduced at the doctoral level while others insist that it should not be introduced, as a PhD student is already a Master in the area of study.
What are the arguments for and against introducing coursework for PhD students?<issue_comment>username_1: I think that which way one goes on the question has a lot to do with whether you are dealing with a US-style model (long program bundling Masters and Ph.D.) or a European-style model (short program assuming Masters already completed).
To my mind, the main pro of doctoral coursework is that it ensures graduates have a solid general grounding in the field at some depth, and cannot only hyper-specialize. Complementarily, the main con is that coursework interferes with research by taking time that would otherwise be devoted to it, thereby stretching out the time expected in a program.
In a US-style program, a large amount of coursework is pretty much always included and the program is expected to take longer accordingly. In a European-style program, I think one can make a reasonable argument that there should be no coursework, as that should have been completed during one's Masters.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It very much depends on the program. For example, this assertion:
>
> a PhD student is already a Master in the area of study
>
>
>
Is not necessarily true for all fields. For example, my own field, Epidemiology, doesn't have a large number of undergraduate or Masters-only level programs in the U.S. That means that many students that enter Epidemiology PhD programs have at best a number of bad habits to undo, and more likely are entirely clean slates. As such, most of the top programs in my field involve at least two years worth of coursework.
This does definitely slow down the time until degree completion, which is the usual argument against coursework, but in this case really is the only way to ensure students are properly prepared.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/18
| 1,045
| 4,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: Every month, I receive several emails from India or similar countries for a postdoc position in my group.
I am an assistant professor in a small university. I wonder how many applications/emails receive famous professors at top universities?
When a PI has funding for a postdoc position, he post the position, and will receive tens (if not hundreds) of applications.
***Receiving these emails made me wonder, maybe this method is working that many people are regularly using it.***
Does a PI offer a postdoc position by such emails? Normally these candidates are not very strong, as they have already applied for posted positions.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that what has happened is that there are stories floating around, rumors with some kernel of truth, that this approach works. Sometimes I get emails from folks who are highly qualified in their area, but have no relation to our work. I think the model of what has "worked" is probably misunderstood.
I think the only thing that has ever really worked is for the "applicant" to send out mass emails to everyone they can find that's even remotely related until they hit on a few people who do have a position open and who direct them as to how to apply through proper channels. Occasionally these folks do actually have good qualifications and do get a position. The story of this process gets mangled, and people begin to think that mass emailing really works rather than realizing that it's targeted applications through the appropriate channels that worked but were found by luck.
I mostly don't respond to these kinds of emails unless the candidate is actually highly qualified, related, and I just don't have anything for them. I got one from someone in the UK this week who is working in my field, looking for a PhD position, and already has 3 (!!) master's degrees. Unfortunately, we run an HPC center and don't have faculty positions or advising rights, so I wrote the guy back and let him know that. Rarely do these emails deserve such a response since the candidates are applying randomly to every name they can find, i.e. wet lab biologists applying to an HPC center.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In some fields, this is the standard method of obtaining a postdoc. My own field (particle physics) is not one of them, but I have friends in computational neuroscience (this is in the US) who say this is how it works for them: when they are ready to look for a postdoc position, they identify professors or researchers who they would like to work with and send them an email asking if they have positions available. Now, what my friends are talking about is specific, targeted emailing, not mass emailing, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if some people get the idea that the more emails they send out, the better their chances. After all, this is nearly the same thinking as saying the more applications you send out, the better your chances, which is frequently-repeated advice.
Even in fields where this is not standard, it *can* happen. I actually almost got a position myself this way, despite it being very much not the norm in my field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, postdocs can get funded by direct contact with a professor. I'm a computational epidemiologist in the U.S., and of the two postdoc offers I got, both of them were based on personal contact (with people one of my mentors knew, rather than simply blind contact).
There *are* definitely also just listed positions, but I have definitely seen *qualified* direct contacts result in at least some interest.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In the US, in NIH funded fields top post docs are generally funded by NIH-NRSA fellowships. Potential post docs approach a supervisor with a project that is mutually interesting and will provide the post doc with a new skill. If the potential post doc is on top of things, the NRSA application decision can be known before the start of the post doc. In other cases the PI might need to fund the position for 6-12 months, followed by a 36 month fellowship. In other words, when approached by someone who wants to get an NRSA, and is qualified, you take them. This means that getting a post doc through "direct contact" is quite common. Depending on the field you may never have met or only have an introduction via you supervisor.
That said, the Indian spam emails, although I have never seen post doc ones, do not fit this model and are generally unsuccessful since the NRSA is limited to US citizens.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/18
| 679
| 2,894
|
<issue_start>username_0: For background, I am a mathematics graduate student.
Now, it happens once in a while that I find an interesting conference/workshop which I would be happy to attend, but which I'm not sure about (for reasons which might appear later on, such as not enough funding, finding a better conference etc.).
Suppose that in case of acceptance, the organizers offer some travel/accommodation funding, and that enrollment closes a relatively long while before the conference takes place. Also, suppose that I am not offering to give a talk.
Is it inappropriate to enroll with the knowledge that there is a relatively big chance I won't be able to participate, and retract my enrollment after being accepted if I realize that I indeed can't go?
Does the answer change if I enroll at several conferences "just in case" and then go to one of them if I'm offered enough funding to cover my expenses?
Is there a point after which cancelling my participation is considered rude? What is the polite way to do it? Is it common, in your experience, that (student) participants cancel their participation after having been accepted?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: If you submit a paper, it gets accepted for presentation, and then you decide not to go, that is a negative sign about you. The organizers will have to change the program. This is regardless of funding.
If you are just going to listen to talks, then without funding, it may be a small negative signal or neutral. Depends on how the number of participants affects the organizing decisions. For a big conference, one person more or less does not matter. For a small workshop, the room size, catering etc may be affected.
With funding, the organizers have to reallocate funding if you decide not to go. Again a negative signal.
General point: how much extra hassle are you causing others = size of negative signal about you.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The negative effect is that it may be difficult for the organizers to re-allocate the partial funding they'd allocated to you, so someone else missed the chance for funding to attend.
On the other hand, "the system" is not really actively worrying about your larger welfare, nor about the welfare of whoever missed funding due to your change-of-heart, and "the system" will not be "harmed" by your withdrawal. The organizers will scarcely notice whether you were there or not, funded or not. It's small potatoes.
Between those two extremes, granting that you yourself do have to reasonably play the odds for funded attendance at conferences, you should aim to be "a good sport", not inducing commitment of far more resources than you'd possibly use, thus, freezing them and denying use to others. But don't be exaggeratedly altruistic toward "the system", since the relationship is very unsymmetrical, not in your favor.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/18
| 2,153
| 9,245
|
<issue_start>username_0: It seems to me that academic settings have a very high degree of social hierarchy and I find it very hard to deal with it while being at the bottom of the ladder. Any tips on how to deal with it?
I attend research meetings where I am the newest student in the subject while the other grad students are all very senior students with years of background. This makes it very hard for me to get my ideas or opinions be heard given implicitly how the time is proportioned between everyone. Like if one of these senior students has something to say which could be very silly or trivial or even wrong. he would get more social space to say it than anything I would want to say. Its very uncomfortable as to how much anything they have to say gets so much attention.
I constantly have to find ways to try to severely compress anything I would want to say so that in a few seconds of window of opportunity I might get, I can get across my point. Its like a constant battle for every sliver of time and space.
How do I get myself heard!?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Like if one of these senior students has something to say which could
> be very silly or trivial or even wrong. he would get more social space
> to say it than anything I would want to say.
>
>
>
Have you ever thought thought that this is a group that has met for a while so they like to have a little levity to the meetings? It is likely that most people on the team understand that the person saying the silly or trivial thing is just trying to have a little fun at the mundane meeting.
>
> Its very uncomfortable as to how much anything they have to say gets
> so much attention.
>
>
>
You need to have a better attitude about your group. You just joined and you are already making judgments about how others should act. It is likely that this group has a dynamic that they like to have a little fun. Even if you are 100% correct and the group just has dumb ideas... Well first maybe the group appreciates hearing ideas without being shot down. And then secondly maybe they aren't that dumb and the ideas come with a bit of history of the project/research. There are a lot of things I could say in a bubble that I wouldn't agree with myself but might be perfectly fine given X, Y, and Z.
>
> I have to like constantly find ways to try to severely compress
> anything I would want to say so that in a few seconds of window of
> opportunity I might get, I can get across my point. Its like a
> constant battle for every sliver of time and space.
>
>
>
If you are handling it this way, chances are you are just making it worse. If you are just providing slivers of ideas then there is a chance that the group thinks that you are scatter-brained or can't form an idea. This could actually make others want to cut you off even more.
How do you overcome all of this?
* make sure you don't have body language that senior members ideas or conversation is "dumb". If they feel this they will want to tune you out.
* when you do talk have well formed ideas and continue talking until they are understood.
* have more communication with the team outside of these meetings. To gain acceptance faster you need to share your ideas/wants outside of the meetings. If there are a few people you are closer with, talk with them first and run things by them. If you bring something up via email that is a good idea there is a good chance someone will give you a good amount of time to explain it further. Note that this might not be the amount of time you wanted, but will be more. There is also a good chance that a senior team member will take over your idea, but this is how groups work.
Your status with this group needs to be earned, that is apparent. Incrementally showing your worth and also showing appreciation of others is key.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I partially agree with username_1's answer that you must improve your attitude towards the group and the ideas expressed there. It is very important to stop seeing people within your group as competitors and instead accept them as colleagues and partially mentors (at least initially). So, ask for advice when needed (outside those meetings) and listen carefully (by temporarily shutting down your ego) to listen to their suggestions and ideas, even if you think their ideas are silly. Being a researcher is about being open minded to different ideas and alternatives and you must only disregard those ideas when you have 100% solid proof that they cannot work. Otherwise, your opinion about how silly they sound has absolutely no weight.
On the other hand, you should not be intimidated by the same group either. Although you will always learn more from listening than talking, do not be afraid to say your opinion when you have valid reasons to believe your idea will work. Even if you are shot down in flames, you will have learnt why your idea was not good and that could save you months of work. In this context, the bruising of your ego will be helpful towards your research. Moreover, in academia you must learn to grow a thick skin for rejection, otherwise you will not make it. One harsh comment on a lab meeting is nothing compared to the rejection of your first paper in which you have invested many months of work.
You must also should not care about these imaginary social hierarchies. Those senior graduate students are also in the same bottom as you in your fictitious hierarchy structure. Many of them may probably have many years doing a PHD without their PHD being any closer. At least you are at the beginning and that means that the sky is still your limit. For many of them, even if they are getting close to their PHD, their limits have been already set for them.
Also understand that in Academia having a big ego is part of the game. We all partially believe (one way or another) that our contribution will advance the human state-of-the-art and promote the boundaries of human knowledge. You must really believe in yourself to actually embrace such a concept and insisting on doing research despite of the inevitable rejections. In this sense, in Academia you will meet many people who are full of themselves. This is partially normal and expected. You do not have to be like them. But you must also not allow yourself to be intimidated by them either. After all, we are all judged by the magnitude of our research and not by our magnitude of our egos.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the previous answers make some assumptions that I am uncomfortable with: they describe how academia *should* work, but not always how it *does* work, especially for people who are from disadvantaged groups.
For a basically healthy academic community, I think the advice in the other answers is pretty good about essentially how not to block oneself.
A lot of academic communities are so not healthy, however, and often in ways that are not readily visible to their privileged members. For example, I have female colleagues who have frequently had the experience of having their ideas denigrated and dismissed for apparently rational reasons, then hearing the exact same idea readily accepted when spoken by a man. Or there may be a power-clique and anybody who isn't "blessed" by the clique may have a much harder time being heard.
Some academic communities are also simply downright toxic and not good for anybody. I have seen groups where any sign of weakness meant students and postdocs would start verbally attacking one another, trying to gain favor in the eyes of their professor.
I think the first thing to do, then, is to try to get some perspective on what type of academic situation this really is. Find some more experienced friends or a faculty mentor outside of the group that you can trust and who is generally "good at people", and talk to them about your experiences---not your feelings, but the actual words that people are using. That person can then help you figure out whether the problem is in the group or in yourself, and what the best path to take is, whether it is changing your attitude, improving your standing, or simply finding a different group.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Here are some ideas:
1. Bring along an ally who has some interest in the material.
2. I was going to say, follow up after a group meeting, with an email to all the members of the group, but I just discovered you tried that but they ignored the email.
3. Ideally the group should function with a talking stick.
4. Visit some other groups to see if it's just your group, or if it's the general climate at the institution.
5. When you get a turn to talk, if possible give them a little outline of what you're going to talk about. For example: "I have two comments. First, ... (develop this one as extensively as you like)... My second comment is (this one should be the shorter one -- in fact it can be extremely short -- it was simply designed to buy yourself some uninterrupted time)." If you get interrupted anyway, do assert yourself.
6. Jot down key words and phrases of the things you'd like to talk about, 5 minutes ahead of time. It can be nerve-racking to try to speak when you keep getting interrupted.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/18
| 560
| 2,154
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm elaborating a small scorecard for a comparison between two technologies, I was wondering if it would be formally acceptable to use "and/or" in my bullet points, e.g., "Not automated and/or involves excessive configuration."<issue_comment>username_1: The construction "and/or" generally betrays a weak sentence construction. It's almost always possible to replace the use of "and/or" with a more satisfactory construction (such as "either . . . or" or "at least one of").
So while you are allowed to use it (unless your style manual tells you otherwise!), I think it's always better to avoid it in such writing. (One sign that it has not really gained widespread acceptance is the fact that most style manuals still tell you to eliminate "and/or" constructions entirely.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that "or" means "and/or", but I might use the latter in rare cases where emphasis of the "and" possibility was called for.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Even if your advisers allow "and/or", it is best to write in good style.
In general, any phrasing that cannot be read aloud is bad style, because it will make the reader stumble.
*Try "berries or apples or both" instead of "berries and/or apples".* It is more legible.
This is also what [Strunk and White](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Style) recommend.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: From a purely linguistic perspective, there is nothing wrong with *and/or*. Some languages do have dedicated conjunctions with this meaning ---e.g, German *beziehungsweise*, normally abbreviated to *bzw* in writing (and before you ask: yes, *bzw* appears in technical/formal writing too). Whether using *and/or* in a dissertation is ok from a stylistic perspect is a different matter. Strunk and White say it's not ok, but frankly, a substantial part of what Strunk and White say has little to no basis in reality.
Semi-ultimately, it is up to whether your advisor is ok with it, and really ultimately, it is up to how much you care about whether future readers of your dissertation will be ok with it.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/18
| 1,045
| 4,577
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will be entering my first year of college next Fall. Even if most of my AP classes don't count for credit, I will *probably* be eligible to graduate after six 15–16 credit semesters. Though my desires might change throughout the next few years, I intend to pursue a PhD in Computer Science, Neuroscience, or something else that I'm interested in.
So, if I am eligible to graduate after three years, and I apply to and am denied from desired PhD programs, can I complete a fourth year of my undergrad and reapply to the same places?
I understand that each year of undergrad adds an additional valuable summer of potential REUs, internships, and other experiences. What are other reasons (besides the aforementioned and taking more credits per semester) people advise against completing undergraduate studies in three years?<issue_comment>username_1: You are absolutely allowed to reapply to schools in successive years. However, unless you have had a substantial updated in your profile, such as through improved grades, or additional work or research experience, I would not necessarily expect a better result.
However, it is definitely possible, and if there has been a substantial improvement, the results can be very different. (I've seen firsthand examples of this in students for whom I've written letters of recommendation!)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: On rather general grounds, I would recommend against viewing college as a race to be completed as quickly as possible. In all likelihood you really will not have another time in your life where you are expected and encouraged to explore the intellectual landscape in a really broad way (of course you're encouraged to explore it [much more narrowly](http://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/) as a Ph. D. student), and if you rush through it you may look back on this with regret later on. That said, since I assume from the reference to AP tests you are in the US, given the cost of college these days I can understand viewing the expense of an extra year as an unaffordable luxury.
More practically, as you already seem to recognize to some extent, finishing quickly will significantly reduce your chances of getting into a strong graduate program. I am a faculty member involved in graduate admissions at a decidedly non-elite mathematics department, and even here we expect our applicants to have done appreciably more than the minimal amount necessary to get a degree--e.g. they should have taken multiple graduate courses (if available at their institution) and/or have done some substantive research or seriously advanced independent study. Especially since you haven't even figured out what specifically you want to do yet, I'm pretty skeptical that you will be able to build the kind of record that's going to impress graduate admissions committees if you spend a less-than-normal amount of time as an undergrad.
Of course I have no way of knowing your talent level, but whatever it may be, it seems almost tautologically true that the people who will be competing with you for admission to the kind of graduate program that you should be going to will be about as good as you, but with at least 3.5 years of undergrad experience under their belt when they apply (in the fall before they graduate). If you only have 2.5 years' experience when you apply then you have to expect that you'll lose out to those people, and end up somewhere not as good as where you should.
This suggests a sort of compromise, which happens to be what I did as an undergraduate: plan to finish after 3.5 years. Since one applies to grad school in the fall anyway, the missing senior spring semester doesn't affect the strength of your graduate applications, but you do save a semester's worth of money. (As alluded to earlier, if money is no object then your goal should be to be an undergraduate for as long as you can.) I got into an excellent graduate program doing this, and while it would have been possible for me to graduate in 3 years instead I'm sure that this would have led to me going to a much weaker graduate program, which in turn would have done permanent harm to my career.
But to answer the question in the title, unsuccessfully applying one year would not prejudice your application in future years, if your record improves in the interim. I would however recommend waiting to apply until your record is where you want it to be instead of applying early and going to a suboptimal (for you) graduate program, which would be the likely outcome.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/19
| 717
| 2,712
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working for some time on a paper that I hope to submit to a mathematics journal. Buried deep in the guts of the paper is a technical lemma that I struggled with for some time before finally posting the question to MSE, where it [promptly received an answer](https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/1238197/prove-a-relationship-involving-floor-functions/1242017#1242017). What is the proper way to acknowledge this assistance in the submitted manuscript?<issue_comment>username_1: In your case, the user who helped you participates under his real name (he's from my hometown :)). I would include his proof, with a footnote at the page bottom "This proof is due to ...", and additionally thank him where you usually thank people (I've most typically seen this as footnotes on the page of the abstract, but whatever is normal for you). To cover all bases, I'd finally contact Hagen by simply leaving a comment under his answer with @(name) either linking to this question, or outlining what you intend to do, and getting his sign-off to do so. I think in any case where you can identify a user by name, mention of MSE is optional.
The same generalizes for those participating not under their real names. You should then just discuss in your @(name) message under which name (if any) user would like to be quoted. If user agrees to using their proof but prefers to not be mentioned by name, then thank an anonymous user of MSE.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The proper way to acknowledge *any* source other than your own brain is to formally cite that source in your bibliography; whether that source is a textbook, journal paper, proceedings paper, preprint, StackExchange questions, blog post, newspaper article, movie, cereal box, bathroom wall, or your mom is utterly immaterial. If your source is a StackExchange site, then you must cite the StackExchange site.
See [meta.math.SE](http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/4259/do-i-cite-mathstackexchange-in-my-paper), [meta.cstheory.SE](https://cstheory.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/352/how-will-you-cite-a-discussion-on-this-site-in-your-paper), and [meta.SE](http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/8212/citing-stackexchange-postings) for a discussion of when, whether, and how to cite StackExchange questions and answers.
(Full disclosure: I have cited blogs, StackExchange questions, Usenet posts, newspaper articles, movies, and video games in my refereed journal papers, and at least [one of my StackExchange questions](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/34/how-hard-is-unshuffling-a-string) has more citations than at least one of my research papers.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/20
| 2,678
| 11,200
|
<issue_start>username_0: Short version: Graduate prelims include lots of topics which are only distantly related to your particular research area. How does one motivate oneself to learn and do this stuff?
Long version with personal background: I'm a 3rd year undergrad who's planning on applying to graduate schools in the US next year (in mathematics). I'm taking a graduate course (Galois theory) which, in the graduate programs I'm looking at, typically amounts to less than 1/3 of the material on the algebra prelim, which is one of the usually 3 topical prelims. For me, the concrete consequences for failing this class are academic probation with possible loss of funding/scholarships; if I were in the graduate school here, this would be possibly ejection from the program.
Unfortunately, I find this topic to be horribly uninteresting. I did very well in the first half of the class because it was essentially a very fast-paced redux of group and field theory, but I can't find a single drop of inspiration or interest in my mind for these classic Galois theory results that we're developing. I've done some undergraduate research in algebra (factorization theory) and, if I were to go into that as a professional, I feel confident that I will never touch Galois theory ever again. So for me, Galois theory being mandated to be learned by me for only this one purpose, a prelim exam. Therefore, I'm having trouble finding motivation to learn it.
The lectures are in the usual "lemma: proof, theorem: proof, corollary: proof" style (occasionally throwing in a sentence or two of motivation, why we study this topic), with weekly homeworks which heavily supplement the lectures (only a small percentage of grade), and 2 tests (midterm and fnial). These homeworks are pretty in-depth and are expected to take upwards of 5 hours to properly complete. (Usually 1-2 pages of proofs for each problem, and 3-5 problems per week.) Nobody is holding my hand any more and walking me through the class like in undergrad classes. (E.g., the homework problems aren't even close to self-explanatory and often cover topics not even mentioned in lecture.) Even though I'm showing up to lecture and taking detailed notes, I haven't even started the last 3 homeworks. The final is still 3 weeks away so it's not impossible for me to catch up, but it's going to take a *lot* of hours to get this material learned so that I don't fail the class.
As far as I can tell, this class structure is more or less standard in graduate mathematics, so if I'm serious about wanting to continue in academia I'm going to need to find out how to manage this problem (lack of interest). How do others handle this? Where does the motivation come from? (other than Adderall.)<issue_comment>username_1: In this case, the best way to motivate yourself to study this uninteresting material is to try to become interested in it. It's important not to specialize too early, and as a third-year undergrad, you should only now be in the process of deciding a broad subfield of mathematics to specialize in (usually Algebra, Analysis, Geometry/Topology, Applied Math, or some combination of the above). Given that you're interested in becoming an algebraist, it's simply too early in the game to be crossing specific sub-fields of algebra off your list. Especially not Galois Theory, the basics of which you will very likely be expected to know if you take graduate courses in algebraic geometry, number theory, or the like. And even if you don't directly use this material in the future, it's a chance to develop mathematical maturity and intuition. (I'm glad to have been exposed to Galois Theory as an undergraduate, and I'm an analyst!)
As for this particular class, it sounds like it's simply going too fast for you. Which there's no shame in; I certainly had the same experience when taking graduate classes as an undergrad. If you revisit this material in a few years, you may be surprised to find yourself enjoying it. In which case you'll be thankful for anything you learned the first time around, even if it didn't fully sink in.
Basically, you should motivate yourself by keeping in mind that the effort you put into this class will benefit you in ways that aren't apparent right now.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Good scientists need to have a fairly broad background in their area, the requirements of a department generally reflect what that department has decided needs to be part of that background in order for its graduates to be considered well educated in their area.
Learning a broader base of material is important for a couple of reasons. First of all, it gives you more intellectual "tools" for approaching problems in your area. Even if a particular subject (e.g., Galois theory) turns out not to be very useful for the problems you are working on right this very moment, it is likely to be useful and important for a lot of things in the discipline, and if you have some understanding of it, you will be able to recognize when you are dealing with an unexpected case where it is the right tool for the job. Much time and energy is wasted when people who are missing a piece of background try to re-invent the wheel. Likewise, you should understand it well enough to recognize when it is the *wrong* tool for the job.
Second, in most graduate classes there are two simultaneous lessons being taught: the material itself, and the structure of the science supporting the material. Galois theory is partly so hard because it is an example of a mathematically deep concept, and understanding how Galois theory works may also better enable you to recognize and develop another new deep concept.
Finally, science will always be throwing new ideas and concepts at you, and is also increasingly interconnected and interdisciplinary. You need to develop the skills to be able to learn and cope with new material, even if it is not a type that you prefer, or else you will quickly become locked into an ever-shrinking subfield and likely obsolete.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Where does the motivation come from?
>
>
>
Ideally, the professor teaching the class should do a good job of motivating the material, but it sounds like they somehow aren't connecting with you. For a topic like Galois theory, which is a standard part of the core mathematics curriculum throughout the world, you can be sure many mathematicians find it fascinating and important. If your class isn't successfully conveying the fascination and importance, look elsewhere for it (this class shouldn't define or limit your explorations). Talk about Galois theory with your friends and classmates. If it's clicking for them, they can help you appreciate it; if it isn't, you can investigate further together. Ask the professor questions. Talk with other mentors. Look for other books that you might find more engaging. Search and ask questions online. All this is much more work than just going to lectures and working on problem sets, but it's the only way to get a deeper understanding. (And five hours of homework a week is not much for a graduate course. This leaves you some time to study the material on your own.)
>
> I've done some undergraduate research in algebra (factorization theory) and, if I were to go into that as a professional, I feel confident that I will never touch Galois theory ever again.
>
>
>
You may be right that you won't ever need it in your research. However, if you become an algebraist, there's a good chance you'll have to teach Galois theory someday. More generally, as a professional mathematician you'll be responsible for having a much broader knowledge of mathematics than just your own research interests.
>
> Even though I'm showing up to lecture and taking detailed notes, I haven't even started the last 3 homeworks.
>
>
>
It sounds like a vicious cycle: your dislike of the material keeps you from working on it, but that limits your understanding and makes you dislike it all the more. The good news is that I'd bet you don't have an intrinsic dislike of Galois theory, but the bad news is that you'll have to break the cycle somehow. This is largely a matter of psychology. When I've been in situations like this, I've gotten out through indignation, along the lines of "I'm not going to let some crummy lecturer keep me from understanding and appreciating one of the highlights of mathematics." But what works best for you will depend on your personality.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Lots of good advice here. But I'm going to take a different approach.
You are not really interested in this material at this stage of your life. You might be later, but for now, you really aren't. It is unfortunate that your program doesn't allow you more freedom of choice.
So now it's time for Operation Get By. There are several things that can help you accomplish this:
* Find a human being to help you. It might be the professor, it might be the TA, it might be a professional tutor, it might be a friend, it might be a really nice grad student.
* Find a study group (it might be a bit too late in the semester for this -- but there's no harm in trying).
* Try some internet research, to see if there are some solved problems out there that are close enough to your homework problems, that you can use them as starting points.
I was forced to take Assembly Language once, and I HATED it. I have never used what I "learned" in that class. I cussed and whined my way through all the projects. I hated the teacher. *You don't have to love everything in math, or have a good fit with every teacher.* But you do have to pass your required courses. Sigh.
What I am proposing you do is akin to faking it in music. Once I had to learn Tchaikovsky's Fourth in one week. There were masses of fast passages with lots of accidentals. The first couple of days, I did my best to plow through as much of the material as I could each day, trying to find sensible fingerings, practicing in a thorough way, to get the hand shapes comfortable. But by the middle of the week it had become clear that the conductor was NOT going to help. He was going to take the fast passages so fast they were UNPLAYABLE. He was not going to rehearse the most difficult fast passages carefully, to give us a chance to work up gradually to a fast tempo. So I gave up. I resigned myself to faking huge swaths of black notes. I have never done this before or since. But really, there was no other way out. I could have given myself lots of soreness in various body parts, practicing those passages like crazy, but the end result would have been no different -- so I cut my losses.
>
> if I'm serious about wanting to continue in academia I'm going to need to find out how to manage this problem (lack of interest). How do others handle this?
>
>
>
Don't worry about this. In graduate school, you get to follow your own interests more. You'll have a wonderful advisor, who will make sure your own interests are not leading you down a blind alley.
Also, you will be a little older, more knowledgeable and more mature than you are now. Just take things one step at a time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/20
| 667
| 2,845
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a US graduate student, and recently I have had the great honor of being awarded a large fellowship that provides a sizable monthly stipend for tuition, living expenses, and conference travel.
I plan to travel to a couple of conferences in Europe this summer where I have accepted/pending submissions. However, there also happens to be a pair of nearby conferences a few days prior. These conferences are not as essential to my interests as my planned travel, but still extremely relevant, and if given the opportunity I would like to attend them despite the fact that I will not be presenting a paper.
But conferences are *expensive*. It is a huge stretch to afford all of these conferences, even with my stipend (which will begin in June, so I won't have had the time to save up). I would like to apply for the student volunteer positions at these conferences, which would reduce registration fees partially or completely if I were selected.
However, I feel anxious that I may be taking away the opportunity from a student who *really* cannot afford to go. Especially since, as I mentioned, I can stretch myself super thin to make it without the volunteer waiver(s).
On the other hand, though, I suppose it could be argued that I "earned" this financial freedom by earning the fellowship.
**Is it ethical to volunteer at a conference where the registration fee would be waived, if I have a fellowship and wish to attend the conference despite the lack of any obligation to do so?**<issue_comment>username_1: The only problem would be if you were to misrepresent your financial position to secure the registration fee waiver. If the volunteer positions are truly meant to be for students of limited financial means, then it would be tough to justify. However, in many cases, it's based on a competitive application where ability to afford the conference is not taken into account. If that's indeed the case, then you can go ahead and apply with a clear conscience.
(Also keep in mind that all or at least part of the travel costs for many graduate students would be covered by their universities, so they may not be paying as much out-of-pocket as you think!)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Volunteering is often a lot of work, so it is generally quite reasonable to see the coverage of costs to be not a scholarship, but as compensation for the many hours of labor that you will be putting in as a volunteer. It is for this reason that many conferences waive the registration fee for their organizers as well. As such, I think there is no ethical concern about getting a waived registration in return for volunteering. I would, however, find it ethically problematic to apply for a *scholarship* (which some conferences offer) when you could be covered by your fellowship.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/20
| 984
| 4,051
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am from a small country where we do not have many eminent professors, but I did work hard and published over 30 papers which were cited more than 400 times. I am applying for research jobs internationally, and a key factor is references.
It does matter who has written the recommendation letter. In addition to my unknown colleagues, I tried to find some eminent professors as professional references. I contacted several ones who have even cited my papers, but they simply replied "they cannot be my reference as they do not know me", meaning that why they bother to recommend someone they do not know.
This gave me a bad impression that no matter how hard or good you work, career success depends where you are and how many people know/care about you.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I contacted several ones who have even cited my papers, but they simply replied "they cannot be my reference as they do not know me", meaning that why they bother to recommend someone they do not know.
>
>
>
This is to be expected. The purpose of letters of reference is to provide a personal perspective on a candidate from an eminent figure who knows the candidate well and is able to compare her/him with peers. The simple fact that they cited you means close to nothing. I have probably cited hundreds of researchers, maybe thousands, some of which I don't even remember the name. There is also the question what these references are actually supposed to write in their letters if they don't know you personally - *"Mia wrote this pretty good paper in 2012, but I have never met her or talked to her outside of when she asked me for this reference."* isn't a great letter of reference.
>
> This gave me a bad impression that no matter how hard or good you work, career success depends where you are and how many people know/care about you.
>
>
>
It is a bit of a depressing way of putting it, but at the end you are not incorrect. "Knowing people", or more correctly, "making people know you" is indeed very important for a researcher who wants to progress her/his career.
>
> How to find professional references?
>
>
>
This depends a lot on your level. As a student, you typically want your professors to act as references. As a more advanced researcher, which you seem to be, it is very important that you:
* Find and occupy a niche (that is, if people think about subsubfield A in area B, yours should be the first or one of the first names that pop into people's mind). This works only if you *repeatedly* annoy people about a subject in papers, keynotes, lectures, and tutorials.
* Go to conferences, write joint papers, and work on joint proposals related to said niche
* Visit other universities, or invite researchers from other universities working in your or a related niche
* In this way build a substantial network of collaborators and co-authors
* Follow-up on on your network, make sure that people that you once knew are still aware of your recent work
* Maintain reasonable standing with the important players in your larger area
If you end up with a reasonable network, which clearly takes time and dedication, you typically want to select the most eminent members of it suitable for a given application to act as references.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: [This should be a comment but too lengthy to put in the comment box...]
>
> I am from a small country where we do not have many eminent
> professors, but I did work hard and published over 30 papers which
> were cited more than 400 times.
>
>
>
Write this in your cover letter, explain why you cannot find a famous reference. It is really an achievement that you published over 30 papers which got cited more than 400 times if you have not worked with famous professors. Make sure the reference you got from the "not so famous" people are good.
Good reference is important, but that's not the only factor people consider when they read application. Try apply first before giving up and feel frustrated. Good luck.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/20
| 352
| 1,581
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is accepting or rejecting a paper the reviewers’ responsibility? Or is it left to the editor to decide based on all the reviewers’ comments?<issue_comment>username_1: Accepting or rejecting a paper is always left to the editor. The reviewers, however, are typically expected to summarize their review by providing a recommendation to the editor for the paper's fate. This is generally not just accept or reject, but may also have higher granularity such as "major revision," "weak accept," "reject but encourage resubmission," or "borderline."
As an editor or program chair, I appreciate this feedback (even if I may sometimes ignore it) because sometimes it is sometimes difficult to judge a referee's judgement from the tone of their review. For example, a very long and harsh-sounding review may actually say something like: "I am being very strict in my review of this paper because I think it is good work that can be a great paper on revision." I might overlook it amidst the harshness... or the reviewer might not be so clear.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Reviewers can only *recommend* acceptance or rejection (or a major or minor revision). It's the editor's responsibility to weigh the reviews, along with the manuscript, and decide.
After all, you will often have multiple reviewers. And they will usually not even know who else is reviewing a given manuscript. So how else could you decide what to do with a manuscript where two reviewers recommend a major revision, while the third recommends rejection?
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/20
| 888
| 3,788
|
<issue_start>username_0: My abstract/paper has been selected at 2nd International MISG-2015 conference held at Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. I would like to know if it's valuable for an Undergraduate student to present paper at this conference and will it have a high impact when I apply for an university for Masters?<issue_comment>username_1: As mentioned in the comments, you can see discussion about this conference [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43231/will-my-paper-be-published) that suggests the conference does not have enough staff to excel in its claimed fields of expertise or review the submitted papers properly. A publication will, at first glance, look good on an application, but any investigation by the admissions board will highlight the fact that this conference is not prestigious and probably a scam. I believe that it would be possible for this to have a negative impact on your applications. The only potential redeeming factor would be if the process of its submission to this conference provides an opportunity to publish elsewhere. This seems unlikely given the conference but a real publication elsewhere would have a much greater positive impact on your research career.
I recommend talking to academics at your university about this conference and if they have any knowledge of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've got a fairly pessimistic view of the value of publishing in obscure, questionable places. As an admissions committee member, I periodically see applicants with papers in journals or conferences I've never heard of. Without more information, publishing in an unknown venue is completely meaningless, since the world is full of junk venues that will publish literally anything. Many of them claim to do peer review and enforce scholarly standards, but they will actually [accept nonsense text](http://pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen/). Unfortunately, there are no magic words (like "peer review" or "international") that will certify a publishing venue, because some venues simply lie, while others are honest but incompetent.
When I run across a completely unfamiliar venue listed in a graduate school application, I do some quick web searches to try to find out more about it. Sometime I discover that I should have known about it, or that it's a perfectly reasonable and respectable venue that just doesn't have much of an international reputation, but often it looks pretty suspicious to me. In those cases, I have one of two reactions, depending on how the application comes across. Either I think "Oh no, this applicant was tricked into publishing a possibly worthwhile paper in a worthless journal", or I think "Hey, this applicant is publishing in a worthless journal to try to manipulate the system". The former is more likely, with the latter being mainly when the application contains unseemly self-promotion or exaggerations. Being tricked is mildly negative, since it suggests the applicant was naive and insufficiently careful, but it's not such a terrible thing. (The main outcome would be that the paper counts for little or nothing.) Being manipulative is very bad.
If you can't evaluate a conference yourself, it's important to seek advice from people who can, since sending good work to a bad venue is not a winning strategy. As for MISG-2015, I can't speak from any direct knowledge, but the [list of topics](http://www.globalilluminators.org/misg-2015-kualalumpur-malaysia/conference-scope-sub-themes/) strikes me as absurdly broad, and I find it difficult to believe any [scientific committee](http://www.globalilluminators.org/misg-2015-kualalumpur-malaysia/scientific-review-committee/) of twelve people could possibly do a responsible job of handling submissions from such diverse areas.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/20
| 581
| 2,093
|
<issue_start>username_0: This is actually just a revision of [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42918/does-one-need-a-masters-in-math-before-taking-a-phd-in-math) in relation to [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/42923/22511).
I ask "Does one need a master's in math before taking a PhD in pure math?" (And then applied to the US for this question)
Chris C's answer suggests that in the US, I may just go straight from a bachelor's in mathematics to a PhD in mathematics, but I don't quite have a bachelor's in mathematics. My bachelor's is in mathematical finance.
Edit: Sorry. I forgot to emphasize something. My bachelor's didn't have a thesis. I had a thesis in master's, but it was in mathematical finance. Will this be a problem? I was thinking math PhD programs in the US think students have [some background in mathematical research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42304/with-a-background-in-mathematical-finance-and-desire-to-apply-for-a-mathematics#comment95102_42304).
>
> A variety of areas throughout mathematics. And that answer of mine that you link was written for an audience completely unfamiliar with mathematical research - someone ready to pursue a PhD should already know what it says. – <NAME> Apr 2 at 13:33
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I am a mathematician. One of my academic siblings has an undergrad degree in mathematical finance. As <NAME> comments, grad school admissions committees are most concerned with sufficient background, as opposed to the particular credential.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's very important to have a bachelor's degree, as typically there are bureaucratic rules that make it very hard to admit a student without one. The words it says after "Bachelor of" don't matter very much, as long you have some strong evidence that you can be successful in grad school, from your grades, test scores letters, etc. With mathematical finance vs. math, there's a decent chance the committee wouldn't even notice the distinction.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/20
| 2,086
| 8,991
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question is a bit different from this question: [What to do if asked to write a letter of recommendation for a weak candidate?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2717/what-to-do-if-asked-to-write-a-letter-of-recommendation-for-a-weak-candidate)
Instead of not knowing the student well enough, I know the student too well that I think he is not a suitable candidate. I have a good relationship with the student, it is just that I know I cannot comment highly on this application as he lack one skill that is particularly important for that post... I have suggested to him to try something else but he seems to be very keen in applying for the post. I cannot turn down his request because he said he could not find anyone else (He need 3 references) I never read a poor reference before; how honest usually are people in writing them?
(He is not a bad student, and I have written him a good reference on another application before, so I do not want to write him a poor reference...)<issue_comment>username_1: If you do not feel that you can avoid writing him a letter, then tell him precisely what you wrote here: That the letter will not recommend he gets the position, for the reasons you wrote (which will pretty much guarantee that he does not get the position). Chances are that he will then no longer want you to write the letter.
You may also want to contact the people you send the letter to and tell them that you did warn him that the letter would be bad, or they might get the idea that you betrayed the student by writing such a bad letter.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Here's how it typically works (at least in the U.S.). First, you should warn him that you don't feel you can write a strong enough recommendation for him to get this job, and that you're convinced he'd be better off with another recommender. You should try to explain why, so he can learn why you think this position is not a good fit for him.
If he insists that he wants to apply and has no other options for a recommendation, then you should try to write a supportive but honest letter, typically by taking your previous letter and strategically modifying it to fit this particular job. By "supportive but honest", I mean making the best case you reasonably can under the circumstances, but being honest about any weaknesses and not endorsing him in any way you'd regret. Often, instead of saying "I don't recommend hiring him" you can instead say something with enough qualifications that anyone can read between the lines.
For example, suppose an excellent teacher is applying for a job he simply doesn't have the research accomplishments for. You can send a letter that comments in detail about his teaching and concludes by saying "Although Bob does not yet have any peer-reviewed publications, I'm confident that his work in progress will lead to a publishable paper. When combined with his excellent and enthusiastic teaching, this makes him a good candidate for a faculty position that prioritizes teaching over research." If you send this to a faculty search at a research university, they will read it as an automatic rejection, without your having to say so explicitly. (Note that if Bob actually applies to an appropriate teaching position, then you should not send this text, but rather a more enthusiastic version with fewer qualifications.)
Of course you may not want to set up an automatic rejection, but rather just to make sure the hiring committee is aware of your concerns. Another possibility is to conclude by saying "Bob is in many ways a strong candidate for this position. My one reservation is..." If the hiring committee agrees with you that this is a concern, then they will reject him, but at least you gave him a chance to find out whether this issue worries the committee.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: **Don't write a negative reference letter.** Don't beat around the bush with fogging like "the position is not suitable for you". **Set up a conversation where you tell him clearly and assertively what his negative trait is (you said impatience), and be constructive about how he can improve, and how to manage his career in the meantime (avoid or handle such situations).** Do this very urgently, don't delay - it's already hurting his career. Do it verbally, behind a closed-door. Keep it constructive. Make it a two-way conversation, not a firing squad. Suggest or agree actions or metrics for the future.
One important duty of a supervisor is **giving negative feedback**. That means you. If you don't do that you're a bad supervisor and you're not serving him well. If you're consistently uncomfortable doing that with people, the issue is primarily with you, not him.
Do you mean:
1. that this particular position requires an abnormal level of patience ('patience of Job'), or
2. simply that he is in general abnormally or pathologically impatient?
Those are two utterly different scenarios warranting two different courses of action. You're not being clear. Or assertive. Impatience is potentially a very good trait for some positions (and bad for others), so do you really mean he lacks the social skills or communication style to mask his impatience? Really focus on being clear and specific. Was it foreseeable that 1a) he should have been able to figure out said position requires an abnormal level of patience (in which case, help him figure that out), or 1b) is it that you somehow know this via the grapevine and are trying to secretly "help him" without telling him why? (in which case, teach him how to do his own background check on a position)
>
> I cannot turn down his request because he said he could not find anyone else. (He needs 3 references)
>
>
>
EDIT: based on discussion with @Corvus, here is a major cultural difference between academia and industry:
[In academia] References have a standard set of things, and it's considered ok to write a reference which intentionally omits some of those.
[In industry] Absolutely you can! In fact, arguably **you're obligated to, ethically**. Arguably, the moment you detected a sufficiently seriously negative personality trait that would harm his career under your supervision, you were obligated to tell him promptly - not delay until the last minute when it damages his career or livelihood - as it is now. There's a pair of you in this situation, as they say.
>
> <NAME>.: *"You may also want to contact the people you send the letter to and tell them that you did warn him that the letter would be bad"*
>
>
>
This is all too weird and avoidant for words. If you're that unassertive and uncomfortable being a supervisor and giving essential feedback, you should step down immediately from being a supervisor, or at very minimum warn anyone when they start under you that you're incapable of giving negative feedback, and that their career will suffer for it. If people saw such a weird cover-your-ass but-I-told-him-so follow-up letter, they might conclude that the referee has basic issues supervising and communicating with people, and that the department is aware of this and doesn't care. Don't create that situation. Set up the conversation with him immediately. Don't be afraid of that conversation. Handled right, it may be the most important and constructive of his career. It may also equally be an important learning experience for you.
You may want to try the book/audiobook/course: *"Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High, Second Edition"*
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Others have already stated ways to write what you want to say, in terms that are typically found in recommendation letters. Another piece to it is that lukewarm letters are often short: they describe the candidate in positive but general terms, but they do not go into the details you find in good letters. (Such as: "Specifically, among his publications, the one on homeomorphic indeterminate tangential operators stands out in its creativity: it introduces a new class of operators that ... ... ... . This paper, despite having been published only two years ago, already has 170 citations." This would obviously be for a more senior researcher, but you can find similar detail in good letters for students.) In contrast, letter writers who don't feel like saying very much because there is not much positive to say, often keep the letter to the most basic content -- not negative, but not detailed and positive either. A reader of the letter will clearly read between the lines why you are omitting the details.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It is as much about what you don’t say as what you do say.
So write a reference that lists all his skills in the same order as the job spec, maybe even use the same headings as the jobs spec. But leave out the section he is week on.
Writing a bad reference or refusing to write an reference could lead to legal problems…
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/20
| 1,514
| 5,870
|
<issue_start>username_0: The research (Delphi study) started with NN study participants in Round 1 (gathering demographics). Ten percent of the participants dropped out and did not complete Round 2 or (of course) Round 3.
I'm unsure how to report this.
Do I report the demographic results and then add a note to the Round 2 and Round 3 results ("Note: Of the NN people who completed Round 1, only Nn completed Rounds 2 and 3.")
Or do I remove from the Round 1 results the data gathered from the drop-outs?
Or ... ?<issue_comment>username_1: It is a very bad thing to remove people who dropped out from your data set. The problem is that you do not know whether dropping out is correlated with the effect that you are studying.
For an extreme example, consider a study on the effect of being shot at on soccer ability. In round 1, people play soccer, then they get shot at randomly with a gun that might or might not hit them, then they play round 2 of soccer, then they get shot at again, and then they play round 3 of soccer. Of course, anybody who actually gets hit when they are shot will probably drop out. If you eliminate those people, you will vastly underestimate how badly soccer players are affected by people shooting at them.
This may seem like a rather extreme example, but things very much like it happen frequently in biomedical or psychological studies, just with less obvious causal connections.
Report exactly what happened, and take the missing people into account when you are computing your effect size. If you need help on the technical aspects of that, you should ask on [Cross-Validated.SE](https://stats.stackexchange.com/).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You should present demographics for every round available for accuracy, completeness, and your own personal sanity. Drop-outs and people lost to follow-ups, are still data points, especially in medical/psychological/sociological studies. They may not have any associated data, but they were recruited and participated at least during the initial phase of data collection (demographics), and not counting them can imply other things.
Anyways, I like using an example to show why it helps present a clearer image.
Let's say 100 animals sign up for a study at Round 1. The demographics are as follows: 50 dogs, 50 cats.
However, when Round 2 rolls around, 20 cats are nowhere to be found. The results are collected from the remaining subjects; 25 dogs are peanut butter lovers, and 15 cats are peanut butter lovers.
If you only say that 20 animals dropped out, the information presented here doesn't mean very much, since you don't know what animals dropped out. In actuality, both dogs and cats had a 50% split based on the population of data collected, but presenting information only partway can be misconstrued as perhaps it was 25/40 dogs and 15/40 cats, because you haven't provided any. In addition, neglecting to mention that you originally had 50 dogs and 50 cats and only presenting that you had 50 dogs and 30 cats in the final results could indicate selection bias or a lack of interest, as opposed to losing cats to follow-up exams.
So you would present in a nice table or summary:
>
> During Round 1, 50 dogs and 50 cats were recruited for the peanut butter study. However, 20 of the original 50 cats (40.0%) dropped out before Round 2 testing and could not be replaced. During Round 2 testing, it was found that 25 of 50 dogs (50.0%) and 15 of 30 cats (50.0%) preferred peanut butter.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I fully agree with the other answers that you should do statistical analyses on your dropouts, and report and think about the results. Did people who dropped out differ significantly from participants that stayed on? For instance, more women may have dropped out, or more men, or the less successful in initial rounds. If so, you may have confounding effects like selection bias, which you should discuss. (Or you may already have your next research idea right there ;-)
As others write, *don't* just drop data. Data is precious. Use all you have.
The [CONSORT group](http://www.consort-statement.org/) (which stands for "Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials") has some materials. It also publishes a [flowchart template (MS Word doc)](http://www.consort-statement.org/download/Media/Default/Downloads/CONSORT%202010%20Flow%20Diagram.doc) that seems to be becoming the norm for reporting dropouts in the course of trials. I know of a few journals that require exactly this kind of flowchart for submission, which will usually end up in the online supplement of the article. I find such a structure enormously helpful, certainly more so than a free text description that one needs to wade through. I'd strongly recommend you include this kind of flowchart.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Some time ago, we developed a work titled as *[Adaptive Q-Sort Matrix Generation: A Simplified Approach](http://www.inesc-id.pt/ficheiros/publicacoes/11389.pdf)* [1] to support our research. This work aims to implement a system related to the [DELPHI method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_method). In particular, the goal was to develop the [Q-Sort method](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_methodology) for information retrieval of an experts' panel. The reason why we did it was to provide a new and simple algorithm to generate the [Q-Sort matrices](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_methodology) that adjust to the size of a given survey. Therefore, we can have more questions whose weight is null for the outcome of the round. On the same hand, giving experts the need to prioritize some questions, above others, in order to reach a consensus in a more direct way.
[1] <NAME>., <NAME>., <NAME>. and <NAME>., Adaptive Q-Sort Matrix Generation: A Simplified Approach.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/20
| 1,693
| 7,176
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a new graduate student and my adviser asked me to set up a meeting with some out-of-state colleagues (whom I haven't met yet) to start working on a collaboration that I'll be playing a major role in. One of these colleagues suggested a "webinar" or video conference for the meeting. I was wondering what kinds of video conference software are appropriate for this kind of situation - I asked my adviser but he's a little older and not technologically savvy. Is Skype too informal for a video conference like this? Is there another software that is more accepted among academics? These collaborators are at various institutions across the US (where I am), and are all either academics or government employees.<issue_comment>username_1: I use Skype and Google Hangouts all the time. No stigma attached. Go for whatever is convenient for everyone.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Your university may pay for a license for one of the major web conference software packages like WebEx, GotoMeeting, Adobe Connect, or ZoomMeeting. You should check. These may have better screen-sharing features for slides, shared whiteboards, and the like. They all pretty much have free clients as long as some party to the call has paid for the service.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I have direct experience with Skype and WebEx. Of these two, I have found Skype less reliable. I like the WebEx technical support.
I find that if I use the computer for the audio, there is a bit of a delay, just enough to be annoying. So I use the telephone for the audio. WebEx allows you to choose how you will do your audio.
You should buy a microphone headset for whatever you decide to use (computer or phone). Unfortunately the ones for the phone don't work with the computer, and vice versa.
Find some live webinars and the like to participate in so you can see a good moderator in action. Then practice using the software, with a friend, colleague or relative.
You can feel good about reducing your carbon footprint!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As somebody who does a *lot* of remote collaboration, I find that there is a distinct tradeoff between link quality and software.
* Google Hangouts is the worst for audio and video quality, but is more resilient to bad connections. It will usually get *something* through.
* Skype is great when there's a decent connection, but degrades badly when there is not.
* Most paid software (e.g., WebEx, GoToMeeting) has less choppy video than Skype, but the audio is unreliable: some days it's great, some days it's crap. The audio problems seem to have to do with the phone part of the connection, not the network.
* Given good bandwidth, BlueJeans gives the best video and audio of any I've encountered, but will shamelessly dominate your machine's network connection and processors.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Personal anecdote: I am not allowed to install Skype on my corporate machine, for security reasons. (I'm unclear whether the issues our IT people fear are that people might listen in on our *secretsecretsecret* Skype calls, or whether they fear Skype might be a vector for malicious software.) So don't be surprised if someone cannot do Skype.
My company has a (likely expensive) [PGI](http://www.pgi.com/) subscription. This runs in browsers, so we have less security concerns. It allows the host a lot of options and will work for larger videoconferences (multiple hundreds of participants).
I realize that this is not academic use *per se*, so feel free to flame me ;-)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: I think the culture will vary pretty dramatically based on the university you're at. Oregon State University's email accounts are through Google Apps for Education. Because of this, Hangouts is the primary chat/video conferencing application on campus.
My recommendation would be to simply ask the people you're trying to conference with. List a couple services and ask what they're most comfortable with, if the choice isn't obvious.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: Based on over a decade experience of online collaboration for business and personal uses:
* Google Hangout was the first major name to introduce group video chat [max 10 participants]. The main advantages of it is its smart codecs, which scale Up or Down the video quality dynamically based on the internet connection performance. By this way your connection remains connected and not goes on hold like Skype.
There are some options to record the chat without third party softwares ([Hangout OnAir](https://plus.google.com/hangouts/onair))
Along with this, it has got some 1 click enhancement options (e.g. brightness adjustment, auto enhance etc.)
* Skype has also got the group video chat option now. It is recommended in case of strong and reliable connection ONLY.
* GoTo meeting and GoTo Webinar are getting more popular for larger participants. Webinar is used for a larger audience, you can provide them the option to speak to all or write to you (organizer only).
GoTo meeting is more suitable when all the participants are expected to have active participation.
GoTo solutions provide the telephonic participation for audio also. I have shared a sample registration confirmation email on [PasteBin](http://pastebin.com/mpNyQXag). (The actual email is well formatted not just text based)
There is another aspect of this question. Nowadays institutes are having complete solution package from different providers i.e.
Google Apps for Education or Office 365
are the top most these days.
ALSO,
if the sensitivity of the meeting contents is high, at-least skype should not be your selection.
Zoho, WebEx, Voxeet are some other names to mention.
TeamViewer is a decent and very old screen sharing solution, it supports multiple users and the video result is very stable. It is free for non-commercial use. You can compliment it with some other audio option for best results.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: The German research network DFN is running three Adobe Connect Servers for web conferencing (see <https://www.vc.dfn.de/en/web-conferencing.html>). Every member of a German research organization that is part of DFN should be able to use this service without further cost. In my case, I can simply log in with my University computer account and create sessions. I can also invite external attendees as guests.
Regarding features, I particularly like the different whiteboard options in Adobe Connect for discussing academic content. Also, as this runs over servers of the research network, there's not the issue with data security that some may have when using Skype or Google hangouts.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: Our research collaboration uses Clickmeeting <http://www.clickmeeting.co.uk/> . It is an online meeting tool which does not require installation of any software and runs entirely in the browser. We've used it successfully for meetings of around 30 participants. It supports voice, camera, chat and screen sharing. We don't tend to have any connection problems, but if we do it is quick to rejoin the session.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/21
| 850
| 3,690
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a phd student is completely funded by an outside institution and don't cost the school or the university anything, what impact would that have on the student relationship with his advisor? Especially on things like interest on the student progress.<issue_comment>username_1: The main effect of external support on a student/advisor relationship is that there is less external pressure for production of short-term results. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing depends strongly on the individual student and advisor.
* With less pressure on the student, there is more freedom to develop a unique research agenda but also more opportunity to get "lost" in the possibilities and waste time.
* With less pressure on the advisor, there are fewer boss/employee dynamics in the relationship and generally less strain, but also more opportunity for the advisor to be distracted by other short-term concerns.
A secondary effect is that the student may have less opportunities to be apprenticed in grant-writing, since their support is already assured.
In sum: with a good advisor and a student with a mature outlook, the freedom of external support is a blessing. If either of those two ingredients is lacking, it can be a problem to lack the forcing functions of external support.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Although each case is unique, my general sense is that advisors tend to care the most about (invest more time/effort into) students who are "their" students, in the sense that they are brought into the program to work with (be funded by) them, to conduct research within their general research field/agenda, and to adhere to their recommendations, including the approximate study plan and time to degree.
With this in mind, the more you can emulate this dynamic (align yourself with advisor in ways that minimize differences caused by independent support), the less awkward the relationship will be.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: I am tempted to say that if the student is good, then the professor will push him/her to do more, and vice versa.
A professor's success depends **a lot** on the group's PhD students. Once a hiring decision is made, the professor doesn't really get reminded of who's footing the bill every day. Therefore the level of supervision would stay uniform across the board.
It is very much a semiotic relation, not a parasitic one.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: First off, having a PhD paid for by an outside institution is a big advantage for any PhD student. This generally makes it much easier to gain admittance to a PhD program as you are essentially free labor. **Be sure your advisor can take advantage of this in a way that benefits you.**
I've seen this situation most often when a company foots the bill for an employee. If this is the case, be sure your advisor's work lines up well with what the company is doing. You're generally expected to work for the company after graduation, so keep this in mind.
If you are lucky enough to get a full scholarship for the entirety of your PhD, skip to the next paragraph. If not, keep reading. Most PhD student "pay" for their education via GRA/GTA positions at the university, and by bringing in outside research grant money. Many of these grants are called scholarships, and will only last 1 year.
If you are entirely funded from the outside, reach out to people you know who went to the school, and find a prof who has worked with people who are "self-funded". Some profs are very happy to work within constraints that may be set by your scholarship, while other would prefer you be funded under their projects.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/21
| 908
| 3,397
|
<issue_start>username_0: Assume you are writing a manuscript and you have uploaded your raw data to a relevant hosting site (e.g., The Dataverse Network, FigShare, etc.). Where in the manuscript should you indicate a link to this?
This question was posted on [twitter](https://twitter.com/nicebread303/status/590395191359582209) and one suggestion was to include a link in the author notes and the results.<issue_comment>username_1: I am sure there are many ways to do this, but I have recently started to end the paper with a specific (unnumbered) section **Further Material** (or something like this). For an example, you can check [this preprint](http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.2429) of mine.
Before, I primarily gave a link to the online material as a footnote somewhere in the Experiments section, or wherever else it made sense from the text flow. However, it happened to me more than once that a careless reviewer overlooked these footnotes, and complained that the data has not been made public.
Some journals will also allow you to upload accompanying material to their website. However, at least in my field this is so unusual that I would be afraid that potential readers will not even look for the material on the publisher's website.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Some journals ask for a standardised data section - see, for example, the start of [this recent PLOS paper](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0122588). Some (eg [JGR](http://publications.agu.org/author-resource-center/author-guide/text-requirements/#ack)) recommend putting it in with acknowledgements. Many more (eg [Marine Biology](http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/227_Instructions+for+Authors+-+specific+requirements-Jan+2015.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1404302-p1031155)) are somewhat vague but suggest in-text citation of the dataset. It'd be worth checking what's standard for the journal(s) you're planning to submit to.
If there's no guidance at all, then putting in a short section at the end on accessing data is perfectly reasonable - it stands out, as username_1 says, and it is easy enough to move it around elsewhere if requested. And if you have a DOI for the data citation, use it - it'll help credit the data if reused in future.
**Edit**: [here's an excellent and detailed example](http://www2.ametsoc.org/ams/index.cfm/publications/authors/journal-and-bams-authors/journal-and-bams-authors-guide/data-archiving-and-citation/) of how to do in-text citation of data, from the American Meteorological Society. They explicitly deprecate the acknowledgements approach (though suggest both can be used in parallel if desired).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In epidemiology and other medical research it is extremely common to both describe the data set in question, and to discuss what software package was used to do the analysis, both of them in the *Methods* section of a paper.
As such, the most logical place is to link to open data is at the end of this description.
For example:
>
> These data sets do not include patient-level information, but rather laboratory confirmed, suspected or probable cases of the disease, which is thought to represent the best available estimate of the current state of the epidemic. A curated version of this data is available at <https://github.com/username/horribledisease>.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/21
| 537
| 2,212
|
<issue_start>username_0: In chemistry and physics, there are now a number of scientists who appear as authors on over 1,000 papers. Famous professors can have good funding and then a large research group where their research fellows work in parallel while they apply for more funds.
However, when it comes to 1,000 papers, to me it no longer seems possible for a person to make a legitimate contribution to each paper. In other words, it seems the famous professor's contribution must be trivial to many of these papers. I even wonder if there is time to read all of their papers carefully.
Do these authors simply get authorship in return for getting funding and running a group, or is it possible for them to be a full author in the normal sense of the word for most or all of their papers?<issue_comment>username_1: It seems like a single person could make a meaningful contribution to 1000 papers. Assuming 40 years of high publishing productivity (35-75 years old), 1000 papers requires 2 a month. With an 80 percent time commitment on a 50 hour work week, that is 80 hours of contribution per paper. I think 80 hours is enough time to make a contribution to a paper worthy of authorship. Simply discounting papers because someone has published a lot seems unfair.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the title question: Yes, it is possible, as shown by the following convincing example.
Logician <NAME> has written [over a thousand papers](http://shelah.logic.at/) (in addition to a number of books). The inner workings of collaborations are never public, but the norms of the field and the fact that the papers have very few coauthors strongly suggests that he did indeed make substantial contribution to all of them.
[ Whether most scientists with over a thousand papers to their name "earned" them is a different question. ]
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: While it is possible (as other answers show), there are also professors whose name could be considered as the collective pseudonym of their PhD students: The students publish papers with the author "<NAME>" (and their own name), so that they can write grant proposals for "<NAME>", citing all his papers.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/21
| 1,402
| 5,776
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a PhD student in a biomedical related field.
I came a long way. I first did my undergraduate and worked for a few years, though not research related. Later, I identified my research interest before embarking in the PhD with the hope of fulfilling my career dreams. I used to love and enjoy science, but that was long ago. I was happy when I got into the PhD program. Now I'm nearly 2 years into my study, mostly 'wet' lab and basic sciences research.
Unfortunately, my experiments - most of them - fail. Initially, that was due to lack of skills and experience - with time things have improved but I am still lacking good results that can give clear direction in my work.
My project has been modified a few times because initially there were problems with the biological samples so I had no choice. Then, I tried to 'reproduce' a piece of result done by a colleague few years ago but the results were always 'off' no matter how many times I did it. Even someone else with better experience in the lab tried but could not replicate the same result. The conclusion was perhaps, change in phenotype of biological samples over time.
Then my project changed again, and the technique is now becoming more complicated and 'taxing'. Partly, because my supervisor is not very happy and feels that it is time I should be producing good data and should aim for higher impact. With more complicated experiments, I also need to beef up my basic sciences knowledge but as someone coming from a different background it is taking me extra time to grasp. With my confidence going in a downward spiral.
I am finding more and more difficult to articulate my thoughts clearly to my peers and I feel constant 'rejection' and 'guilt'. Most of my colleagues are actually good people, but harsh words, although not ill-meaning, are slowly eroding my confidence. When I ask questions because there is something that I don't fully understand (without prior knowledge and not something I can read up on), people appear impatient and ask back (e.g. "why are you asking?", "what do you think?", or just "I can't give an answer to you on this"). It feels more and more difficult for me to ask questions or speak up for myself.
One day, I was blamed for something (from someone outside the lab) that I didn't even do. The accusation was pretty unreasonable - others who witnessed the event felt the same - but to me I felt I was just a bully target. I just broke down and cried because I realized I couldn't take the stress and frustration of rejections and failure.
My friend in the same lab gave me some counseling but also at the same time asked me whether working in this lab is truly what I want to do. I don't want to quit my PhD, but then again I don't know how I can get out of this situation.
* Should I change project?
But my PhD qualifying exam is coming up and I am having a massive problem with writing up a good proposal because of all the frustrations happening.
* Should I change to dry lab?
I am afraid of talking to my mentor because I don't know whether at my current mental state I'll just suddenly break down again.
In summary, my resentment and contradictory statements that I receive:
1. Ideology: To do a PhD, perseverance is more important than being smart.
Reality: You need to be smart. REALLY SMART.
2. Ideology: There's not such thing as a stupid question. Ask if you don't understand.
Reality: Huh? Why do you even ask?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> * Should I change project?
> * Should I change to dry lab?
>
>
>
A PhD can be extremely frustrating and discouraging. Whatever you do, don't make a major decision while you are stressed and upset. Take a deep breath (and maybe a day off) and decide what you need to focus on.
Since you will be qualing soon, you likely need to spend a significant amount of time studying for that. Passing your quals are important, and will likely give you a confidence boost.
Secondly, consider finding a social outlet. Many grad departments have a weekly social meet-up at a bar. Apart from meeting people that work in different labs, it is also quite likely you will meet other people who have gone through this issue, and will help you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: It's good that you are reaching out for help. To address all the issues and problems you face will be a long process. Start by focusing in just the first steps.
First, I suggest you recruit a "coach" -- a respected peer, a recent graduate, a researcher from another department, or a PhD who works in industry. This "coach" should *not* be your supervisor or anyone in your lab. You need someone with whom you can be totally open and honest, and even be "messy". This "coach" won't give you much advice and certainly won't solve any of your problems. They just need to be understanding, supportive, and consistent in their connection with you.
Talk with your coach *every day* for at least 15 minutes. Set short-term goals -- just for the next day -- and hold yourself accountable in front of your coach. Set a few number of *small* goals, e.g. "Tomorrow, I want to rewrite four pages in my lab notes".
Second suggestion -- start a journal (NOT on a computer or on the Internet) where you record ONE positive experience or accomplishment *every day*, no matter how small. Maybe it is just something you noticed or someone you appreciated. Maybe it is something that made you laugh. The point of this is to make a habit of paying attention to -- and *soak in* -- positive and expansive experiences.
Again, these two suggestions are just the first steps, aimed at giving you a more solid footing emotionally so you can deal with the bigger long term challenges you face.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/21
| 448
| 1,753
|
<issue_start>username_0: I want to know if it is ethical to present the same paper in two different conferences, where the conference that is to be held earlier does not publish in it any journal/conference proceedings, while other conference will publish it in a conference proceedings.
The field is mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: The issue is highly field-dependent. In computer science, it's probably still considered highly unethical, but in my field—chemical engineering, where papers are not normally "published"—presenting the same talk in multiple venues is not normally considered a problem. Other fields lie somewhere in between.
I think that, regardless of the ethical dilemma, the issue is that the more likely you are to have overlap between the two audiences who will hear your talk, the less you want to give the same talk—even if it's ethical to do so. At the very least, you should have enough new material in the later talk that it's worth the audience's time to hear the second version if they've already heard it at the first conference.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree that's not unethical to present the same study for different audiences. But no to publish or try to publish the same paper in several publications. Editors does not allow and I agree.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: "The ethical issue in CS is double publication, not double presentation" ... I think the same is true in mathematics.
Way back, a year or so after my Ph.D., I proved a [certain result.](http://www.ams.org/journals/proc/1975-049-02/S0002-9939-1975-0372586-2/home.html) I submitted it to a journal. Then I was invited to 2 or 3 conferences, where I was expected to talk about that result.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/21
| 1,115
| 4,755
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a full professor of chemistry from Iran. I want to move to the United States. I have a good record of publications, teaching, executive positions, conference participation, etc.
However, as I applied for full professor position, I was not successful. Apparently, my credentials are equal to successful candidates or even better (I checked with the names announced), but their works were in the same country.
I do not care to apply for an assistant/associate professor position, but the requirements are different. They expect young people to start.
What can be a promising pathway for me to enter the US higher education?
Is it actually possible? Can a professor from a developing country find a place in the US higher education?<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer: Yes, a professor from a developing country can find employment.
Longer answer: It's hard for anyone to get a position as a full professor. It's likely to be harder if you are from another country.
"I applied for full professor position, I was not successful." Many, many people apply for full professorship positions. Most of them are not successful. There are many reasons you didn't get offered the position.
One of the reasons may have been that there would be more hassle to do the necessary paperwork for immigration purposes. Not all universities will do this.
The main reason was that there was someone that the appointing committee liked more.
You might ask for feedback about why you weren't offered the position, but the university might not be forthcoming.
The big hurdle that I think you are going to have is fear from the university. If they appoint someone and they turn out to be unsuccessful, they have a problem on their hands. Removing a full professor is difficult. Someone they know (or know of, through contacts) is always going to be a safer bet than someone who they don't know. (I read somewhere recently, and I can't think where that assistant professors are appointed because of hope - the hope that they will do well. Full professors are appointed through fear - the fear that they won't turn out to be a disaster for the university).
I would have two pieces of advice: (1) Keep applying, and seek feedback about your application. (2) Don't be too fussy about the position; if you are in the country and have a job, it will (I think) be easier to get a different job.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: My spontaneous thought when seeing your question was whether you had considered a visiting position as well. The barriers for a non-permanent position are naturally lower. I've seen cases where this happened in a different field in Zurich, where a Russian Academy of Science member was a semi-permanent guest (this was a long while back after the borders had just opened, and so it somewhat compares). It comes with risks and possible frustration: the person I have in mind - a distinguished academic in his home country, advanced in age (mid 50s), and highly intelligent - relied on continued good will; the resulting feeling sometimes showed. While there is never a guarantee that this translates - somewhere in your target country - to a permanent position, at least you'd have your foot in the door.
I also remembered a quote from my old Latin teacher: connections only hurt those that don't have them. Iranians have a sizable presence in the US - both from before and after the revolution. Many are highly successful and accomplished, and to further their goals, associations exist. By its name, the association of [Iranian-American Academics and Professionals](http://www.iaapdc.org/about/) sounds like a fit (and if not, there are others). I'd consider reaching out to them for advice too. Maybe they can set you up with someone who has the same story, and is willing to mentor you.
Given the current political situation, I don't know if any of the above raises additional issues for you. You'll only know after you tried.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> *What can be a promising pathway for me to enter the US higher education?*
>
>
>
You mentioned "a good record of publications, teaching, executive positions, conference participation" but didn't offer any details.
One possible approach likely to help is **to co-research and co-publish with US academia members**, ideally from schools you are interested in.
If they come out of the collaboration impressed with you, they can serve as **local advocates with their institution** for you. A publication might carry less weight than a personal recommendation from a colleague they personally know who can describe the work you did for that publication, in most situations - and would to the hiring committee as well.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/04/21
| 734
| 2,743
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently published a paper in a journal which does not offer a notification system to send email alerts when a paper is cited. The journal is a well known and has a high-impact factor in my field. Are there free services which can automatically send me an email alert when my paper is cited in another publication?<issue_comment>username_1: You can set up an [alert on Google scholar](http://scholar.google.com/scholar_alerts?view_op=list_alerts&hl=en) that will do exactly what you want. From Google's [help page](http://scholar.google.com/intl/en-US/scholar/help.html#alerts):
>
> **How do I get notified when a particular paper is cited?**
>
>
> Search for the title of your paper, e.g., "Anti de Sitter space and
> holography"; click on the "Cited by" link at the bottom of the search
> result; and then click on the envelope icon in the left sidebar of the
> search results page.
>
>
>
An even more effective way can be to set up a google scholar [citation profile](http://scholar.google.com/intl/en-US/scholar/citations.html) and select "Follow new citations" from the appropriate checkbox in the "Follow"/"Following" menu of your own profile.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Another option would be [ResearchGate](https://www.researchgate.net/) . It a bit like facebook for academia (e.g., you can additionally follow people and get alerts when they publish new research). It's free, so you can give it a try.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The top answer mentions setting up a "google scholar citation profile" to get notified automatically when any of your articles are cited. Those instructions may be out of date, so here's how to do it **as of June 2018:**
1. Go to your own google scholar profile (you probably have to set one up first)
2. Click the blue "Follow" button
3. Select one or more of the three checkboxes: "New articles in my profile", "New citations to my articles", "Recommended articles".
If you like, you can also subscribe to these categories for other researchers' pages (probably "new articles" is the most useful in that case).
All of these email notifications can be listed and managed, along with your keyword alerts, in your Scholar Alerts page, which can be found at <https://scholar.google.com/scholar_alerts?view_op=list_alerts&hl=en>.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If you work in a fields whose main journals are indexed by the ["Astrophysics Data System"](https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/) (e.g., astronomy, astrophysics, or space science), you can use the [ADS Citation Bot.](https://github.com/hippke/adsbot) This bot will send you either an email or a tweet when a new citation to one of your papers has appeared.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/22
| 315
| 1,276
|
<issue_start>username_0: In computer science, I often see companies sponsoring academic conferences. What do companies hope to gain from doing so, and is there any evidence that these hopes are fulfilled?<issue_comment>username_1: Advertisement.
>
> is there any evidence that these hopes are fulfilled
>
>
>
Yes: if it didn't work, companies would slowly stop sponsoring.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Three reasons immediately come to mind:
1. Advertising. I have a *staggering* amount of marketing material from tech companies, and I don't even go to that many C.S.-type conferences. I've got things covered in stickers, a t-shirt or two, etc. And there is something to be fair for your firm being on people's minds associated with the conference.
2. Recruiting. It's very common for there to be recruiting events, tables, or the occasional pitch during a conference. It's an easy way to reach an audience of people who have a particular skill set you know you're looking for.
3. Supporting the community. Many commercial businesses are built on software and systems built and maintained by the community, their employees use that software, etc. If a conference sponsorship keeps that going, it's probably worth it as essentially an R&D expense.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/22
| 1,082
| 4,697
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'll be attending a accredited/well-recognized university for my undergrad this coming fall, and I'm just curious about research correlating with publications. I have a particular yearning passion in enhancing the field of pediatric robotic surgery, a new field of medicine that just opened up very recently, and I am firmly intrigued in doing undergrad research along with a publication from that department. Now I know for a fact publications take up an exceeding amount of time.
My main question is :
**How long does it take a student to conduct undergrad research and then release a publication based off of that research?**<issue_comment>username_1: I think your question is perhaps ambiguous (does "typical length of time" mean hours you put in, or days/months from the start of the project?), and not really answerable regardless of the interpretation. There are different kinds of undergraduate research. Here are a couple of the usual ways undergrad research is done:
1. A somewhat intensive short period of time (6-8 weeks, say) where a student works on a topic chosen by an advisor ahead of time. Presumably these topics are carefully chosen so that the student is able to make real progress in such a short period of time. These projects are often in the form of an REU (Research Experience for Undergraduates). If you do some googling, you will likely find REU's in your field of study, and some advisors/organizers nicely list all of the publications that come out of the REU's. You will see that not all REU projects result in publications.
2. Working over a longer period of time with a specific professor in your department. This can be an actual job, where you are paid to work in a research lab, or it can be an "independent study" course, where you actually get a couple of credits to work with a professor on a research project. If you are being paid to do research as a student job, your hours may be (at least technically) limited by university policy. This type of research *can* be very substantial. For example, I knew a person who worked in a professor's fluid mechanics lab for all 4 years of his undergraduate education, and I think they produced and published some nice results.
So, for shorter more packaged projects, I think a "typical" time would be 6-8 weeks. For longer, more open-ended projects, you could potentially work with a professor for years (depending on lab space, grant money, etc.). All of this is highly field-dependent I'm sure.
Now, all of this being said, I think the most important point to make is that *publications should not be your ultimate goal*. Work hard, be passionate about your field of study, learn as much as you can, and keep up on the other things you have to do as an undergrad. If you do this, then you will impress your advisors and have great letters of recommendation, which will help you get into a great graduate school, and then you can spend the rest of your career worrying about publications :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer depends on many many factors
* How intelligent you are
* How concentrated your work is
* How hard what you're doing is
* How much support you get from the rest of the group
* How much previous experience you have
* Whether the project actually ends up producing publishable work
* What the rest of the group is doing, where they are at with publications
* Whether you're first author/who actually writes the paper.
I go to a famous university in the UK and even though I've spent two of my summers doing research projects that were 8 weeks long, I've only been listed as an author in one conference abstract & talk so far.
For example my first project would have been publishable if it had worked but the problem was far too complex and it didn't work out.
I'm now in my masters year and much more likely to get a publication from the work I've been doing in the past few months (2-3). There are up to 3 papers my supervisor is talking about my work being included in and .
I put this better outcome down to better vision from the supervisor, harder work and better work from myself due to experience and the fact the group are looking to publish soon.
It's very complex balance of things, if your main goal of a project is to publish which is fair enough because this is how we concretely measure progress in academia, I'd suggest a minimum of 8 weeks work would be required. You also want to keep an eye out on how frequently groups are publishing and ask the research scientists you look to work with about publishing prospects when deciding.
If you were writing the paper yourself then you need extra time for that too.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/22
| 766
| 3,217
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was assigned a research topic for one of my psych classes this term. I designed the study, collected and analyzed data and then wrote a paper. After I presented my paper to my professor, she was very excited and said this paper was publishable. She would definitely run follow-up studies on this topic. I then offered to join her team to run this study and she agreed.
Now I am not sure if I am only participating as a volunteer research assistant or as a co-researcher for this project, considering the research topic is not my original idea. I just designed the study, ran it and received significant results.
Should I ask for clarification on my role at the upcoming meeting with my prof ? If so, how should I approach? I don't want to appear too aggressive.<issue_comment>username_1: If you have conducted the pilot study and are also part of the follow-up team expanding it into a full publishable study, then you should definitely be invited to help write and be an author of the paper.
This should also be an easy and uncontroversial decision for your professor. It's also fine and in fact good to get that clarification explicitly now. You can just ask something like:
>
> I'm excited about helping turn this project into a paper. Am I right in thinking this means I will be an author of the paper as well?
>
>
>
This is not a hard question, so if your professor says anything other than "yes," (possibly with appropriate caveats about you actually sticking with the project) then you should be concerned.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Before talk with your professor, take a look at other papers published by him/her; you will get a sense if he/she usually includes all involved students as co-authors or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: All of the other answers give good advice.
It should never be considered aggressive to ask. You certainly shouldn't assume your name will go on the paper. It may be too early to tell if you'll be first author, so I'd use "co-author" instead of "author" when asking.
*I don't know what the psych field is like. I've had experience in microbiology (where the average number of authors is ~5) and physics (where the average number of authors in some fields is ~2).*
If asking about authorship makes you uncomfortable, another (lesser) way to do it is to offer to write up a more polished version of the paper. This will get you to the point where the professor is editing the paper and byline will be filled in. Or the professor may bring up the topic for you.
Assuming your account of how the research progressed is correct, if your professor says "no", it's time to find another lab.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: If you can prove that you were a major contributor to the paper as it seems from the fact that you "designed the study, collected and analyzed data and then wrote a paper." then you should definately be one of the authors on the paper as a major contributor.
The role of the main author differs by university/country, but if you already have written the paper and it just needs edits from more experienced academia writers, then you should be in my opinion the main author.
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/04/22
| 742
| 2,976
|
<issue_start>username_0: There is a degree called “Masters by research” in Australia, in which a researcher basically researches for two years(full time) on the topic or research problem(differs from Phd on many aspects especially minimum requirements).
What is its equivalent degree in USA?
Is it MPhil? Are they both same or are they different? (may be based on entry requirements, task done and degree completion requirements).
As far as I know, both require dissertation but there are not many taught courses in Masters by research and you are expected to make some unique contribution to knowledge body.
Is MPhil restricted to certain faculty such as arts or it can be in any fields (For e.g., computer science)?
I am bit confused as some Australian universities also offer MPhil in addition to master by research degree and I could not find degree called "Masters by research" in US universities.
Can anyone please clarify?<issue_comment>username_1: In my experience, there isn't a separate degree in the US for achieving your Masters degree through research. In fact, in many places, that's the only way to do so. At the university where I received my Masters degree, you had three options, all of which granted the same degree:
1. **Coursework** - Take something like 30 course hours.
2. **Coursework + Project** - Take fewer hours (around 20 - 24) and do a larger project than a normal project course.
3. **Coursework + Thesis** - Take fewer hours (around 20 - 24) and do a smaller thesis than a PhD.
Many universities don't have of the options and just have #3.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not familiar with the Australian higher education model, but there are no standardized degree requirements across the United States. Most program requirements are similar, but specific program requirements vary both within and among universities (e.g., most PhD programs require coursework in the US, but not all).
To answer your question *What is its equivalent degree in USA?*, I'll build upon username_1's answer. I've personally observed that some programs in the US give Masters of Science (MS) degrees for thesis based graduates (Wesley's option 2) and Masters of Arts (MA) for non-thesis based graduates (Wesley's option 1). Wesley's option 3 could be either an MS or MA degree. **But**, this trend is not consistent across school or even programs. Additionally, I've seen some programs give MAs to MS students who fail their thesis defense (rather than an MS degree if they re-defend their work or no degree at all).
Last, there is a current trend for schools to offer "professional" Masters level degrees in the US because these programs generate income for the university (see this [article](http://www.chronicle.com/article/Those-Master-s-Degree/146105?cid=rclink) for a discussion on the topic. Some of these are MS degrees, some are MA degrees. Others are program specific degrees (e.g., Masters of International Affairs).
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/22
| 808
| 3,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working on a research project and have submitted the paper to two different venues(not simultaneously), and both times I have gotten reviews which criticize the paper for a lack of novelty. What exactly makes an algorithm or system design novel? How can I judge the novelty of my solution?<issue_comment>username_1: Try to answer these questions and write your answers down in the "Related Work" section:
* What are the related algorithms?
* Is there any problem that they have not solve but your algorithm has?
* If yes, it's easy for you.
* If no, why is your algorithm different?
* Is it more efficient in terms of time or space?
If you have answered these questions, I think you are off to a good start to judge the novelty of you algorithm.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you should know the answer more than the rest of us. It is novel if no one else has thought of it or implemented it. You must show this sufficiently in your literature survey (background section) to satisfy your reviewers.
As long as you can differentiate your work from others in the same field, then it is novel. I would think it is easy to show that an algorithm is novel, can't you test your algorithm against others that attempt to do the same thing, and test it using the same benchmark? Focus on computation expense and storage?
Feel free to send a rebuttal asking which paper(s) they think talk about the same thing, thereby making your paper not novel. Chances are, they have something to substantiate their claims.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The novelty of a scientific result is defined in terms of its relationship to previously published results. In order to perform such a comparison you need:
1. to have a good idea of what related works have been published by the community, typically obtained by some combination of reading papers and attending conferences, and
2. to compare your your system against the most similar prior systems and demonstrate its quantitative or qualitative superiority (e.g. "my system is three times faster" or "my system can process widgets AND frobs, and all previous systems could only do one or the other").
The "amount" of novelty is then how *much* better you are, relative to the interests of the community, and is very community dependent: a 2% improvement in the cost of manufacturing concrete is worth billions of dollars, while a 2% improvement in the speed of a personal computer program is generally unnoticeably tiny.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It is very difficult to commensurate novelty. To make sure you score well at this topic you have to provide a good and fair comparison with what has been already developed in the field. You have to be well aware of the state of the art.
Similar to a mathematical theorem, novelty is demonstrated, and not implied. Don't expect the reviewer to do your work and compare your methods with other methods.
Also, try to see if the conclusions of any paper, that also contains a set of challenging problems, not solved yet, can be be addressed by your work. Also, try to get some position papers where the problem you solve is being acknowledged.
There are different orthogonal aspects you have to care about, novelty is one. Importance of the work is another, third is how to disseminate it easily to the public. History of science is full of people who made breakthrough discoveries and remained anonymous, while the scientist doing the mass dissemination actually got the credit.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/22
| 846
| 3,765
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will have my master thesis defense in one week and today my advisor wrote me he is not sure about a method I used to obtain a result (this will not ruin the entire work, but still will make some results useless).
I explained him the theory behind the method (which I found in a highly reccomended book, and I decided to apply after having written to the book's author to ask clarifications), but still he keeps raising doubts about it.
The fact is that now it is too late to change things, because the thesis has already been registered and anyway I do not understand why the method should be wrong. Therefore I stick to what is written in the book and to the explanation the author gave me.
I thought that maybe he just want to make sure I will be prepared to defend my work that day, but he is actually having words on the method itself, which is not something I have invented: I am just applying it as it was explained.
This is making me really anxious, because I do not know how to deal with this if such a question should be asked during the defense. I mean, I will give the same explanation, but what if someone insist on it?<issue_comment>username_1: This is not something you should get to your defense with your advisor still doubting. You and he need to sit down ASAP, work through the material, and not stop until he is satisfied. I would would hope that he would be willing to take this very seriously. No advisor should let a thesis go to a public defense with this kind of question looming in their mind. No one should be forced to do a defense that their advisor thinks they're not ready for.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The part where you say that you do not understand why the is wrong and you are just stick to what is written in the book and the author's explanation is most likely to be the problem. The first step is to understand the advisor's objection to the method. Now that you know that there is a reason to doubt the method, you should concentrate critically on that method, and do your best to find the flaws in the method. Do not be distracted by the fact that it is too late to change anything, and focus on truth. It may well be that there is some minor change in the method that would solve the problem, which you need to discover. That is the purpose of graduate education.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Criticism about other scientists methodology is an essential part of any scientific discourse. You should not consider results bullet proof anyways, that have not been verified by other research units, possibly using a different methodology.
You are lucky as your advisor told you about his objections before the defense. Make sure that you understand the reason and the consequences of the criticism, so that you can prepare a response in beforehand.
Your response should make clear that you are aware of the issue and how it would influence (or even invalidate?) the results you've obtained (if it were true). Also think about whether you think the criticism is relevant, justified and what measures could be taken to avoid the issue (as part of future works on the topic).
You might also want to add a note on this to the discussion part of your thesis and a slide about it to your presentation that you may turn to when the question comes up.
If you find out that the approach you've taken is indeed flawed it shouldn't mean that your thesis failed altogether. But you should describe specifically why and how your approach did fail and how you think future works should approach the research question to be effective. Note that there's even a bunch of journals that also publish negative research outcomes to counteract publication bias.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/22
| 843
| 3,109
|
<issue_start>username_0: Apparently, Iowa's politicians intend to enrich the tenure experience by annual [gladiatorial games](http://academeblog.org/2015/04/21/culling-the-iowa-faculty/) at state schools, regardless of tenure:
1. those being evaluated below some threshold shall be terminated, and
2. after (1), the 5 remaining lowest scoring professors will be put to a public student vote, and the one with the least student support shall be terminated.
The source looks legit - blog of the AAUP. I'm not sure if this is enacted, or proposed (I think proposed). I'm also not entirely sure how to link this to an answerable question fit for Academia.SE, but maybe:
* Is this a joke I didn't get, or is it true?
* Is it part of a broader wave?
* Does this contradict any case law, or is being fought already somehow; or will professors just have to live with it?
If this is true, and stands in Iowa, to be worried for the US at large one just has to look at how quality of life legislation spread like a wild fire once enacted in one place.<issue_comment>username_1: Proposals to "reform" or end tenure are not new—they have been going around for several decades at least (as I remember such stories when I was an undergraduate in the 1990's).
This is not yet enacted legislation—it is merely a proposal that, as far as I can tell, probably has not even had any hearings yet. As such, I would suspect that such a bill would be shot down in committee, as the proposed methods would probably violate at least some sort of labor laws, as the faculty would in effect be judged by students with whom they have never interacted. Such "popularity contests" would pretty much dry up any opportunities for faculty recruitment. (Who would want to work at such a school?)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The [follow-up post](http://academeblog.org/2015/04/22/culling-the-faculty-part-ii/) to the aforelinked post mentioned above answers most of your questions. Specifically:
* The bill is not a joke, it was actually [submitted as proposed legislation](https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/Published/LGI/86/SF64.pdf?hc_location=ufi).
* The proposed bill, like many before it, is a very clearly a Bad Idea™. To quote from the blog:
>
> The absolute nuttiness of the bill is the best defense against its ever becoming law. Iowa, though, has other protections. <NAME>, President of the University of Iowa AAUP chapter, informs me that this dead-on-arrival bill was intercepted by the Iowa Senate Education Committee chair, a professor at Iowa State, who sent it to a subcommittee chaired by another ally of education. Tachau writes, “I’m inclined to think that this bill belongs to the large category of ill-informed bills on any number of subjects with no chance of passage with which the records of all legislatures are replete.” I agree.
>
>
>
It does not appear that this bill has any chance whatsoever of actually becoming legislation.
* Unfortunately, this bill is not alone; there are other examples of the teaching professions being attached through legislation.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/22
| 1,221
| 5,010
|
<issue_start>username_0: I will just project my mind here and see where it goes. A lot of this will seem childish/immature/ Due to various problems from a multitude of directions in my life; some serious, some idiotic (mid-life crisis at 18?! What the hell was I thinking); I decided to defer my enrollment to Imperial College London last year. I will now be joining the Theoretical Physics course this October. For some reason I felt I did not have enough life experience to go to university but I ended up getting a job in consultancy and have plans to travel for a while before going to uni in five months.
On paper it seems there is not much wrong but I am telling you it is not so. The pain of not learning anything new is a lesser one than others but still one I feel keenly. The knowledge of being behind on the treadmill of life compared to my friends is also worrisome. When I read about my lifelong idols (Feynman, Erdos, Einstein etc.), people I respect greatly, I feel for some reason I can never think on the same plane as them anymore due to missing out on a full year of education. I know how silly that sounds, but the feeling is there nontheless.
Either way, feelings aside, how will this year gap affect me career-wise? If there was an alternate-reality, naïve version of me who went to university straight away, what advantages would they have over me? What will professors think when when/if I apply for a PhD? What percentage of academics have also had a similar break, roughly?
Basically I just want to count my losses and ensure I extract as much juice out of the next 5 years as possible, so I look upon this period as just part of my life rather than an ugly blotch. Thanks for reading.<issue_comment>username_1: If I regarded life as a "treadmill" and if I expected to "think on the same plane as" Feynman, Erdös, and Einstein, I'd certainly get depressed, and the same goes for almost everyone in academia. You can have a perfectly good, rewarding, non-treadmill career on a lower plane than those superstars.
Furthermore, I would expect that one year's delay in entering the university will ultimately have practically no effect on your career. Certainly, when I'm involved in hiring new faculty, I don't ask at what age they entered the university or graduated or got their doctorate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A year more or less makes zero difference for anything that's more than a year removed from the reason to take the break.
You worry unnecessarily about the issue -- plain and simple as that.
(Now, on the question to comparing yourself with Feynman, Erdos, and Einstein: If you want to stay sane, you need to at one point come to the realization that these can be idols, but not a status you can aspire to ever achieve. They lived in different spheres, and the number of people at this level is minuscule. I think a lot of us who consider themselves reasonably successful in academic life had, at one point or another, a small crisis when we realized that our contributions will not amount to much 100 years from now -- and eventually came to the realization that that (i) doesn't mean that we can't have a satisfying life that includes other things we're proud of -- such as raising children, or just inspiring students, and (ii) that most of science is actually many relatively small steps, of which we can contribute many.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think taking some time "off" before entering university could be a good thing, rather than a bad thing.
It means you enter university not just because it's the next step on this path you're following (as was presumably the case through school), but because you made a conscious decision to go there. You're slightly more mature, you've probably learnt quite a bit from your job (and you will from your travels)... really not a bad decision at all.
Personally, having taught (TA'd, mostly) many early-year classes, I think many students have no clue why they're there. If you were not ready for university, whatever your reasons and the judgement you might put on them now, better you stayed away.
Are you worried that your ability to learn has suffered from being away from school? I took a six-month break after my third year, then worked for two years before my masters, travelled for a year between my masters and PhD, hardly felt that at all. You might lose some of the automatic behaviours of a student, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Compared to that other version of you who went straight to university, my guess is you're better off.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: There are countries, like mine, where several years of military service right after high school is mandatory.
There are many people who have to work for awhile before they can financially allow themselves to begin studying.
There are more people than you might think, that simply did not even made up their mind about which subject should they learn at 18.
A year is nothing.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/22
| 551
| 2,461
|
<issue_start>username_0: I currently work full-time for the Department of Defense. I usually get three-weeks worth of paid time off every year. This has been helpful because I like to go back home to visit family for about two weeks or take a long weekend and visit friends around the country.
I will be starting my master's degree program this coming fall and I have managed to obtain a part-time graduate research assistantship (GRA). In reading the student handbook, I noticed that GRAs are required to work year-round and only allowed to observe certain holidays. There is a provision that you can work more hours over several weeks in order to get some consecutive days off.
My question is, in the graduate student lifestyle, is my dream of maintaining 2-3 vacation weeks a year completely thrown out the window? Will I be expected to stay on campus and work every single possible day? Do GRAs grant vacation hours that you can accrue?
Thank you for your time.<issue_comment>username_1: Congrats! As far as I can remember as a Graduate Assistant we were not offered vacation time or personal time as part of the deal. You can speak to someone in Human Resources or at your Graduate Student Union to learn more about the policies at your particular institution. Keep in mind that many schools have fairly generous semester breaks so you might easily be able to squeeze 3 weeks in between December and January. However, the answer will be specific to your particular institutions policies.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer is: **it depends.**
The biggest factor is where you're a graduate student. For instance, graduate students in Germany receive up to six weeks of vacation per year, while graduate students in the US may only get two weeks' vacation per year, if even that much.
However, I think that in the US, where policies are a bit less generous, the real deciding factor is your graduate advisor. I think that reasonable graduate advisors will permit students to take off a few weeks per year (especially since most of them might do so themselves!), provided that you make sure it doesn't conflict with any major deadlines or events in your group. For instance, asking to take substantial vacation time just before your first big conference is probably inadvisable. But time during the holidays or during a relatively "quiet" time in your group (whenever that happens to be) would probably be OK.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/22
| 721
| 3,224
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose a work (a book with abstract math research) is presented as LaTeX source under a copyleft license available at a public Git hosting service.
Will scientists be reluctant to cite such a work, because it was not published "officially"?
Having asked this question, I mention that in my opinion that publishing under copyleft in a Git repository is a better means to hunt errors than traditional peer review, because everybody can track and patch errors in the book. But will this real security convert to enough sense of security of academic community?<issue_comment>username_1: Scientists typically only cite works that have been evaluated by experts, although reviews are not an error-free guarantee of truthiness. A good way to catch errors is to temporarily post a preliminary version, and then revise for reviewed-publication in light of comments that you get. Add the possibility that anyone could modify the work -- effectively making the book a Wiki-type publication -- then there would be even less trust in the work, if any random drive-by web-surfer is given permission to modify the book.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the old days, cranks would pay vanity presses to have their work published, then donate the books to university libraries, hoping they would end up on a few shelves. Nowadays, they just put their work on line. Simple.
One suspects that (in most cases) work is placed in non-traditional places because it is not good enough to be published in the traditional places. I guess there are a few non-cranks who do this, but they are vastly outnumbered by the cranks.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There are two separate questions tangled together here. The first is whether scientists will cite something that has not gone through a traditional peer review process, and the second is whether a copyleft / open source repository project is a good way to manage such a non-traditional publication.
To the first, the answer is most certainly yes. Many non-peer-reviewed publications are not just cited, but highly cited, particularly technical reports and standards. These do not undergo peer review, but if they are useful to people, they will cite them---sometimes thousands of times.
For the second, well, consider the fate of most free and open projects, whether on GitHub or elsewhere. Almost every project of this type dies quietly in the dark, because nobody notices or cares about it. Some, of course, succeed, and a few have massive impact. The question is: why should anybody care about your project? If they do, then copylefting in a git repository is no better or worse a way to manage the document than any other way that communities manage non-peer-reviewed documents (though make sure you do it with a [CC license](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/), not a code license). If they don't then the technological or ideological elegance of your approach will make no difference.
The bottom line is: you are focusing on the technology, rather than the community. You need to understand how your work will interact with your community, and then the technology is a secondary issue that will follow from that interaction.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/04/22
| 476
| 2,112
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have sent an article for a conference in Computer Science and in the Important Dates of the call for papers, it says the notification to the authors is April 20. Now we are at April 22 and the status of my paper still appears as Under Review. I was wondering how many days should I wait for sending a remainder email to see what has happened with my submission?<issue_comment>username_1: It's fairly frequent, particularly for smaller or less tightly run computer science conferences, for the response to authors to slip back by a few days. Often, this is because some reviewers may not have sent their reviews in on time, and if the program committee isn't proactive about scheduling for slippage and having backups available, it may take them a few extra days to get enough reviews to decide on those papers. This then is likely to delay responses for *all* of the papers, because both the organizers and the conference software wants to sent all of the notifications at once.
So, to your question of what to do:
1. If you know anybody else who sent in a paper, compare notes with them. If they haven't heard yet either, no worries. If they have heard, then you can email immediately.
2. If you don't know somebody else, give it a week, and then ask.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As an abstract management system, we work with a lot of academic conferences. Quite often, the organisers don't even communicate the deadline for author notification officially.
Just like a high number of conferences will extend the submission deadline because authors submit at the last minute, more often than not, the peer review process will last a bit longer than anticipated because reviewers haven't completed their reviews yet. Besides, picking which submission to accept and which to reject might also take more time and push back the final decision.
I agree that waiting for a week before contacting anybody is reasonable.
Then you can email the Chair or the programme chair to ask if they could give you an idea of when the results will be published.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/22
| 3,159
| 13,220
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, this is a question that I do not know much about. I might get called on not having done a ton of research on graduate school, but I am really curious about this. I am an undergraduate student of mathematics and I am certainly planning on pursuing a graduate degree. I have looked at the top schools of math and they are certainly what one would expect: MIT, Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc.
My issue is this: Academically, I was a late bloomer. I did not take high school seriously because it was annoying and elementary. Where I grew up, my school did not offer much in terms of AP classes or other opportunities. So, the only thing I excelled at naturally was math classes. Of course, they were extremely easy and required almost no effort on my part, which is what made me leery in terms of taking college level classes. I figured that I was good at high school classes because they are simple, but college level will be a different story.
I was wrong. In university, the gap was wider. Once I became adjusted, I actually enjoyed mathematics because it was so much more abstract and complex. This caused me to do rather large amounts of independent research in graduate level topics (topology, analytic number theory, analysis, etc). My only issue is that I am not in a competitive environment, really. The students are not top-notch, and don't share the same drive that I have. This is why I feel like being at the top of the class is not really an accomplishment, since I am not doing anything that any undergraduate at MIT, Harvard, Yale, etc, couldn't do.
My question that I pose here is this:
How good do I really need to be?
I have a passion for mathematics and for the most part, I seem to be talented at it. In terms of GPA, I have maintained a 4.0 with little effort just because I typically have already covered the material in the class on my own. However, there is a voice in the back of my head that keeps telling me that I only stand out because I am at a school that is not top tier, ivy league.
What does a graduate student at a top tier school look like? In my mind, I see someone that has been publishing papers since their teens, and was at the level I'm at now coming out of high school (I am a rising senior at the moment). Is this true? Am I being realistic? I am concerned because I would love to apply to some of these schools (and to get in is my dream!) but I honestly don't even know what level I am at in comparison to the rest of their applicants. I would hate to get shot down almost instantly because I am a joke in their eyes.
Sorry if this was a bit of a ramble. The question boils down to the title really, the rest is just elaboration for those that are interested. Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: From what you have said about yourself, I think you're very well prepared for graduate school at a very good institution. There are always a few incredibly bright, very young mathematicians that fit the image you have in your mind of students at top tier universities. I know of a few myself. However a very large number of math graduate students are much like you (and I).
I had a very strong affinity for math as a young child but grew up in one of the *worst* academic environments in the US. A highly nontrivial amount of students in my area didn't graduate high school, even fewer went to college and fewer then even went to universities that were not the crappy local universities. I lucked out because one of the best high schools in the nation was in my area yet I didn't feel very challenged and more or less coasted along and didn't try. Ended up with a GPA of about 3.0 at the time of graduation. I even spectacularly failed statistics with a 40 or so from lack of effort.
Undergrad rolled around. I flourished in the environment: took lots of math classes, took plenty of courses outside my degree to broaden my horizon, did lots of research, but like you I was a big fish in a small pond. I felt similar to you - that I only looked good in comparison to all of the others. I *almost* had a 4.0 in math and had a 3.8 overall with a couple of years of research under my belt. When it came time for grad school applications, I cast a bit of a wide net, but got rejected from a lot of universities. (This was largely my fault since I seemed to mess something up on *every* application. Having not really done undergraduate applications, I was a bit overwhelmed and scatterbrained.) I actually got into my top choice university which surprised me a lot.
When I started my master's, I did notice that there was a bit of a gulf between me and the other students once I got there. My undergraduate institution didn't have nearly the course selection or resources that the other students had. However in terms of math capability, I was at least middle of the pack; so while I had a bit of a learning curve and some growing pains, I think I ended up being one of the stronger master's students because I fully dedicated myself and didn't give up. I *did* spend a ridiculous amount of time in my office the first semester, though. I went to school around 9:30 in the morning and went home at midnight many days.
For all of it, I grew incredibly and am doing quite well in my PhD program. Coursework is a cinch now, research is going well and I'm writing up a couple of papers which I hope to submit in the not-too-distant future. With your background and love for mathematics, I think you'll be in a much better position than I was in terms of applications. Your GPA is better, you seem much more fluent in many areas of mathematics and are much more mathematically mature. The biggest factor in determining your success (outside of pure genius - which is incredibly uncommon, even amongst mathematicians!) is your unwillingness to give up. Even if you're slightly weaker than some of your future fellow graduate students right now, once you get there, all of those disparities will quickly melt away if you put in the time and effort. Where you came from *does not* have to dictate where you end up. You are more than your past if you allow yourself to be.
---
Here is some general off-topic advice regarding grad school since you seem to be lacking in advising: just because you want to go to a top tier university and get in to one *does not* mean you should necessarily go. For undergrad, this is not the case; if you get into MIT, Stanford, Harvard, etc. and have the financial means, you should definitely go as it is a great opportunity and can directly impact your future. At the graduate level, things are so much more nuanced. (For example, the reputation of the university doesn't directly dictate your future success provided that you put in 100%. In the internet age, it is much easier to do really meaningful research and network with top researchers at any respected university since you have access to all of the information you want.)
When you apply, you are not applying to the university more than you are applying to a professor (or professors) or at least this is the philosophy I think one should have. You should have an idea of what kind of things you want to pursue for research and you should look to those people who do research in that direction. I don't mean to say that you need to know exactly the project you want to do but have a rough idea of the field you are interested in, say commutative algebra or functional analysis or harmonic analysis. If you apply to a university in which no one really pursues what interests you, you're going to be without a future advisor or you'll have to settle for second best. Applying to a graduate program just because of prestige doesn't guarantee success or happiness. Granted, at the top universities, this tends not to be an issue as they have very broad reach but it is something to be wary about. Just because it is a great university or great department *does not* mean it is a great fit for you.
There are also other factors to consider when applying to schools: Could you deal with the super competitive atmosphere (or alternatively the extremely laid back atmosphere)? Could you stand to live there for four to six years, e.g. if you're from a very hot climate, could you survive the very harsh winters in upstate NY or if you're from upstate NY, could you handle a Texas summer? If you cannot see yourself being happy with (or tolerating) a lot of these extra-academic aspects of where you are, you might want to reconsider.
A PhD is very demanding and can be soul-crushing at times. You'll often run into really difficult road blocks in coursework or research and if everything else in your life makes you miserable as well, you're going to have a really bad time. Your mental health is very important. You will be pushed to the extreme at times and in many ways throughout your PhD and your environment shouldn't amplify this. If you're having a tough time in research, the weather is absolutely miserable and you cannot stand your fellow graduates for whatever reason, your mental wellness might take a turn for the worst. I have seen this happen first hand and it is really unfortunate. These are not things academic advisors often tell students who wish to do graduate school because they are easy to overlook, but it is something to keep in mind. Hopefully this has been helpful.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: well I'm an MIT pure math PhD. I published my first paper when I was 27 : a couple of years after getting the PhD! Very few people has published anything before their PhD and their first paper generally was from their thesis.
If you have actually done some original research, write it up and get some advice from a professor at your school regarding publishing it. Being published is a massive help in grad school applications.
My general rule is only do a maths phd if you have a calling for it. It sounds like you do. I treated most of Grad School like a job -- go in around 9, take a break for lunch, go home around 6pm. Work hard during those hours. Enjoy your evenings and weekends.
High quality institutions do help your career so apply and if you get in, go and visit. If you don't like the atmosphere, go elsewhere. Certainly when I was at MIT the atmosphere was collegial rather than competitive.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me offer some perspective from an admissions point of view. What's important, for graduate studies, is your preparation, talent, motivation and work ethic. How will a committee assess this? If you go through a bunch of advanced courses with all A's from a top school, unless something is really wrong with your application, you'll get into a top school because the admissions people know the quality of the program you went through.
The main problem with coming from a small/unknown school (and I also did myself, so I'm sympathetic) is that it is harder to evaluate your preparation and talent, so to get into top programs there needs to be something in your application to gauge you against other applicants. Being able to do this is also helpful for personally knowing how you stack up with students coming out of top schools. Here are some suggestions:
1. Even if you're not at a great school, you probably have some professors who got their PhDs from top schools. They will have a sense of how you compare to students from top schools. Consequently, they will be able to give you informed advice about what kind of schools you should apply to, and be able to write in their recommendation letters things like "Rellek is comparable to the better students I've known at at Ivy League Institute, Inc." Note: recommendation letters are particularly important when you come from an unknown school.
2. If you've done things like summer programs with students from all over, your experience there can help gauge you against other students. (So it's natural to ask someone from one of these programs for a letter.)
3. If you've written research papers or typed up notes on advanced topics, you can make them available (say on a personal webpage), so interested committee members have the option of taking a look.
4. Consider applying to some backup schools and/or master's programs as backups. After a master's at a good school, you will be easy to compare with top students around the country.
As a final comment, it's true that to get into Harvard or Princeton, you should to be exceptional (or really lucky), but you merely need to be good and show promise to get into a top 10 school. I remember I was surprised when I found out most grad students I met at top 10 schools weren't "superstars" (some are, of course, but that's not par for the course).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you state on your letter of purpose what you have stated here, it will be regarded highly, because the admissions officer will see the passion that you have, and that has more relevance than anything.
Opportunity doesn’t knock. If it knocks, it knocks on the inside.
You.... are opportunity… You create it
And...You are what you believe.
That is what sets you apart, and, that is what
you need to let these Ivy League admissions people know.
That is what I did...
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/04/23
| 2,306
| 9,302
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a computer science student from India. I noticed that most of the résumés and thesis papers etc. I see are written in LaTeX.
If I write my résumé in Word (say) rather than LaTeX, will it have a negative affect when I apply to graduate schools in the U.S.?
If not, then should I even learn LaTeX for my future academic prospects?<issue_comment>username_1: No. Almost no one cares. You should learn LaTeX if you intend to work mathematics and will need to write up your work. It's much simpler to typeset formulas in LaTeX than MS Word, and it's also free.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In a math-heavy area the ability to use LaTeX certainly matters, yet it's just another skill. In other words, if your resume says that you are familiar with LaTeX, then you don't need to prove it by typesetting your document in it.
However, for two candidates that are equivalent but for LaTeX familiarity, in a math-heavy area I would certainly pick the one with the skill. Working with the other on a paper will probably be a nuisance at first, wasting valuable time. Moreover, how in the world he/she survived with no familiarity of LaTeX until now? It's a bit like being a programmer and not using a version control.
**Edit:**
Just to make it clear (your friends do use LaTeX, so I'm assuming math-heavy field):
1. If it is a big burden, then don't sweat it, the possible advantage will be small, other factors will matter much more.
2. Nice resume from Word is better that an ugly resume from LaTeX (in particular if it screams "I can't use LaTeX").
3. Having a nice resume in LaTeX won't hurt, so if it is not a big issue, why not? You could ask your friends to help you (it shouldn't take more than ~2h).
I hope this helps :-)
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think it does not matter so much but the only thing is that it looks more classy than Word documents. Also, you avoid the possibility of file extension issues as your compiled file is already a PDF. If you use Word, possibly, you should convert your file to PDF.
Not really to answer to your question but you can use LyX or find an already made LaTeX template and do it easily.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I use LaTeX to typeset my resume *and* my business card. I have typeset it once, and I can go back and modify the content, and as long as I like the overall shape of the document, and I don't have any spelling errors, I know my document is completely free of formatting consistency problems.
Any small change will be immediately applied to all of the appropriate content.
It also allows me to comment out sections and make comments in the source of the document that I use to tell years-older me why I did what I did.
To me, as a LaTeX user, meeting another such user immediately puts them at a higher level than a non-user. To contrast with Barth's answer, with a flat-out, "No." I would say it's a positive signal consistent with the idea that you can make an investment in learning something, even if not directly related to your discipline, with clear long-run payoffs, and ceteris paribus, I'd rather work with you than someone else with otherwise identical attributes.
But *I* personally value diversity in learning, whereas PhD programs prefer focus.
Overall, it *would* be a **weak** signal and I would not do it simply because you think it makes you look good. Rather, do it because of all the payoffs I mentioned above.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: To play devils advocate, let me answer **yes**. Of course LaTeX knowledge doesn't imply any other kind of skill, but the two do seem to correlate in mathematical fields, because almost all serious research is typeset in LaTeX.
See Scott username_5son's 10 tips for detecting if a claimed mathematical breakthrough is wrong (in particular, see #1): <http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=304>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I'm an Electrical Engineer that left academia for industry, and typeset my resume in LaTeX. Other than the ease of getting the formatting exactly as you want, there is another benefit: version control. I keep it in Git. All changes are committed no matter how minor. Since .tex files are ASCII, I can diff any two versions I choose. I also have different branches, for example, a grad school application version, and an industry job search version.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Avoid transmitting either of the following messages;
* "This is my first LaTeX document ever"
* "This is my first Word document ever"
... or the morally equivalent "This isn't my first *(X)* document ever, but I have not improved (much) since then".
Other than that, a matter of taste.
This may seem like a bit tongue-in-cheek, but the other answers here fail to address the very real possibility that if you suddenly switch to LaTeX, the outcome will be catastrophic not because of LaTeX, but because you need to learn it before you try to use it. The same holds for Word, and some people seem never to learn. Once you're past the "I almost managed to hurt myself with my typesetting software" stage, whatever you use is probably good enough. (There's "probably" because we cannot predict what sort of nut will be on the reading end. There will be people who care more than they should.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I think you should learn latex, regardless of how you intend to write your résumé. As mentioned in other answers, it makes writing math a lot easier, and a lot faster than anything else I've worked with. For academia, it also facilitates writing indexes, sources and basically everything that gravitates around your main narrative.
I would certainly recommend it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: username_1 says that *no one cares*. And this is true – it doesn't matter what program you use. But I should elaborate that presentation does still matter – you should take care in preparing the document.
Simply using the default layout of *any* typesetting program is generally a bad idea. The formatting is probably not ideal for the purpose, and I have no great love for Calibri and Computer Modern. Sloppy, default formatting may give a bad impression.
Just take the time to carefully design your document layout, and if you want to look a little more distinctive, pick a sensible font such as Palatino or Latin Modern Sans.
If you put a little care into presenting your CV, it should be virtually impossible (without looking at the PDF metadata) to tell which program you used for typesetting. The unique features of LaTeX like `microtype` are not something that people will notice or care about when reading a CV. The `moderncv` package for LaTeX provides some good CV templates, and I suspect there are plenty available for Word as well that look just as good.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: In average, it does not matter if the content is well-formed and understandable. The latter, by far, is more important.
In opposition to the majority of the answers, **I** find resumes written in LaTeX to be bland. The applicant took a template, wrote the content and printed it out. Please note that I emphasized the "I".
It is strictly a matter of taste of the one who will be at the receiving end. Some people like the standardized, repetitive style (it is often simpler when you go though 1000 resumes) - others are attracted by the slightly more elaborate one which stands out in the heap.
How you present the resume does matter. Since you are just starting I would go for something close to a standard in your field and add some sight deviation so that it catches the eye of the reviewer.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: What's important for your CV is that it has an informative layout and that it's easy to read. On top of that, it certainly helps if it looks "nice", whatever that means.
What software you used to create a good-looking CV is entirely irrelevant. I've seen bad-looking CVs and documents written in LaTeX, and I've seen beautiful CVs and documents written in Word. Don't think for a second that an ugly or bland CV in LaTeX will help you in any way.
Focus on creating a good layout for your CV, and use whatever software you think is best suited for you to reach that goal.
As an example from real life, I don't think many people would be able to tell from a print-out of [my CV](http://folk.uio.no/sverrej/cv/stausland.johnsen_cv.pdf) that it was written in LaTeX and not in Word, and I don't think anyone cares either way.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_12: If you're worried simply spend an hour or two playing with [Lyx](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LyX), or one of the other [TeX](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_TeX_editors) editors. It won't take long to pick up the basics / create a TeX variant of the document.
I suggest starting with a GUI based editor, as I personally found it far easier to play in WYSIWYG mode, and then peek at the resulting markup than: RTFM, play in vi, compile and eventually use a Dvi Viewer of your choice to verify the results.
It's a shame [TechWriter](http://www.mw-software.com/icon-tech/Products/TechWriter/TechWriter%20pro.html) was never ported, as 20+ years back it was by far the best TeX based editor around.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/23
| 646
| 2,703
|
<issue_start>username_0: Principal investigators (P.I.s) are not immune to things like traffic accidents, fatal diseases, or acts of terrorism.
Is it common to have contingency plans as to what will happen with funding, experiments, PhD supervision, and everything else that a P.I. is supposed to be responsible for? And if so, what do these plans look like?
[Full disclosure: I'm asking this because I personally have had a close encounter with death in the middle of a project I'm a co-P.I. of.]<issue_comment>username_1: No. The nice thing about most academic departments is that the [bus factor](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bus_factor) is fairly high such that if an individual PI is incapacitated, there is generally enough slack in the system to compensate.
Most funding bodies allow for contingencies. They understand that things happen and that the funding often affects people other than the PI. In the case of the death of a PI, the funder would likely allow for a change in PI to take place. If there is not a single PI who has the required administrative and scientific experiences, co-PIs can be appointed (e.g., someone who has managed grants before and a post-doc who understands the research).
Experiments being run by PhD students, post docs, and RAs, would likely continue unchanged. Experiments being run directly by the PI would probably cease immediately unless there were ethical concerns (think a drug trial). In these cases there is probably someone else involved or a contingency plan in place.
Supervision of PhD students would likely be covered by someone else on the thesis committee.
Teaching and committee responsibilities would simply be reassigned. Immediate teaching duties will often be given to a post doc or graduate student.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have seen this happen--we had a professor at my undergraduate institution die of cancer. This is a little different, I suppose, because it was not sudden and so arrangements could be made. In this instance, his PhD student(s?) were allowed to continue their project in a group that did similar work. Mind you, this was a student near graduation. I suspect a newer grad student would probably not have been far enough along in their project to see it through to the end, and may have ended up making a bigger shift.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: At the institute where I did my PhD (in the Netherlands), a contingency plan was made at the outset. A PI doing similar work signed a form saying he was ready to take over supervising me if my own PI was unable to for any reason. I don't know how common it is for educational institutions to have such a policy.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/23
| 1,609
| 6,880
|
<issue_start>username_0: A week ago In one of my classes I e-mail the professor and asked to reschedule one of my quizzes due to illness generated from sleep deprivation, she accepted and was highly considerate of my situation.
Now, due to my intense anxiety & stress of exams (to perform excellently) and lack of sleep for the last couple of days as well, my body is failing me and now I woke up to dizziness (fainting/falling sensation), fluctuating irregular heartbeat, and confusing feeling I can't focus on my work at all...
I'm going to the clinic as soon as it opens in a few hours and the exam is also in a few hours, I feel as if the professor will not believe me but as I visit the clinic to be sure this is not serious, I will ask for a medical note. Will my professor tolerate this again? In our syllabus an exam can be re-scheduled for medical emergencies. I believe this is a medical concern.
I maxed out my body for school too much, trying to do well and sleeping less (creating "more time").
Bear with the writing, I'm not in a perfect mental state...<issue_comment>username_1: Go to the hospital **NOW** and worry about the exam and your professor later.
If you tell your professor that you had to go to the hospital, she'll most likely just accept that. Of course, you can ask for that note nevertheless, just in case.
Once you are ok again, think about how you can reduce stress and get enough sleep regularly. On the long run, constant lack of sleep and stress will hurt you (even more than it already did so far).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There are extenuating circumstances that prevent you from preparing for an exam and there are extenuating circumstances that prevent you from taking an exam. Those that prevent you from preparing for the exam, but still allow you to take the exam, should be discussed with the instructor as soon as possible. Circumstances that prevent you from taking the exam should also be discussed with the instructor as soon as possible. In some cases the discussion could happen prior to the exam, while in others, the discussion will obviously have to happen after the exam.
What the instructor is willing to "tolerate" is irrelevant. Students need to do what they can do. If you cannot prepare, but can take the exam, then you take the exam unprepared and then follow the procedure for extenuating circumstances that do not allow you to prepare. If you cannot take the exam, then you follow the procedure for extenuating circumstances that prevent you from taking the exam.
The outcome of having an extenuating circumstance that results in you missing an exam might mean you get a zero on the exam, but there is nothing you can do about it. There are many situations where a relatively healthy individual is experiencing symptoms that the recommend course of action is a visit to the ER. The decision on extenuating circumstances will hopefully not depend on what was actually wrong with you, but rather the symptoms that lead you to miss the exam. If you do not feel the condition would be exacerbated by a few hours delay, then it is not clear how you can justify not taking the exam.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This sounds like a potentially long-term problem that could affect all your courses. You should probably bring this up with the people in charge of your degree programme, rather than trying to arrange things each professor individually. Your university's disability office should also be able to help and give advice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Any academic institution worth bothering with will have a procedure in place to take this sort of thing in their stride. Hand them any sort of legitimate document from someone with medical qualification, and the system should take care of you. Whether or not your professor is prepared to "tolerate" it is irrelevant; the procedure defines what sort of considerations you'll get, and the professor is required to abide by that.
The point of a system like this is to prevent the sort of worry you seem to be suffering from. It's not in anyone's interests for students to be ignoring potential health concerns for fear of academic reprisals, so the system is designed to protect you academically as well as medically. The rule is simple: health comes first, and the academia will make reasonable effort to fit around that.
I developed migraines, chest pains and spiking blood pressure in the middle of my final year of university. I ended up seeing multiple doctors and getting prescribed meds that could leave me unable to focus on *anything*, let alone my dissertation or exam revision. My advice to you is a combination of what I did, and what I wish I'd done:
* **Work only when you feel able to work effectively.**
This goes for any scenario, even just minor sleep deprivation. You'll get further by not having to go back and fix mistakes you made while tired, ill, or otherwise not thinking clearly.
* **Get to a doctor as soon as possible.**
Two reasons: it's on record that you're seeking medical advice so that you can't be accused of making it up later (it's rare, but better to be covered) and it stops the problem going on any longer than it has to. Many health things are easier to fix if you catch them early.
* **Let the faculty know.**
Tell them that you feel unable to work because of health concerns, that you have a doctor's appointment, and you'll keep them posted. Again, it's easier if you don't pull it out of nowhere right before a deadline. Sometimes that's unavoidable, but if you can avoid it, it helps. If they understand why you're absent and they see you being conscientious about it, they're more likely to overlook a brief absence if the doctors tell you it's nothing. They tend to be much less accepting of unexplained disappearances.
* **Follow medical advice to the letter.**
Don't worry about the work you may be missing: if a doctor says you shouldn't, then don't. *The qualification is less important than your health*.
* **Keep the faculty advised.**
You don't have to be too specific; feel free to say generic things like "taking medication" rather than "antidepressants", for example. They only need to know the bits that directly impact them; you don't need to tell them anything you'd rather keep confidential as long as they know whether you're able to attend lectures, do your coursework, sit exams etc. Phrases like "unpleasant side effects" and "not feeling up to it" can cover a lot without giving them details.
* **Make reasonable effort to meet them halfway once you're well again.**
A little goodwill goes a long way, and once you're healthy again it doesn't hurt to offer things like catch-up work, meeting with professors to discuss your options, that sort of thing.
In the end, this all boils down to one thing: health first, then work.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/23
| 987
| 4,264
|
<issue_start>username_0: One of my friends (a math graduate student from my department) didn't work hard during his undergraduate studies, and his GPA was, naturally, low. He barely (and with some luck) got into grad school, where he works harder.
The problem is that as it seems, most of the professors have a very bad impression of him, both because some of them had him in their classes, and because our department is relatively small and professors exchange a lot of information and opinions about students.
Part of the problem is that his reputation is not (just) of someone who is not hard-working (that would have been easier to fix, perhaps), but at least some of the professors simply don't consider him as smart or talented enough, and that is based solely on courses he participated in -- neither of those professors had any actual mathematical interaction or deep conversation with him, except for his advisor (who knows he wasn't serious enough about his studies) and perhaps a few others, who seem to have a somewhat better opinion of him than most.
Is there a way for this student to change the impression people have of him? From your experience, do people really change their impression of someone, once new information is presented (or are they likely to still think of him as not smart enough to be a mathematician, but who manages to go through grad school with hard work)?
This question might be related, [How to change the idea that supervsiors got about you?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14935/how-to-change-the-idea-that-supervsiors-got-about-you) however I find the situation different: First of all, an advisor has a lot of interaction with the student, so he is likely to notice a change. Also, in the case of my friend, the advisor does believe in his potential, but probably doesn't share his thoughts with people since he's not one of those who talk about students with others, and mostly keeps to himself.<issue_comment>username_1: Your friend needs to involve himself in department life. If he is just as invisible as his supervisor, no other professor is going to change their opinion unless they somehow get a new impression (or forget who he was).
One of the best things your friend could do is to give a department seminar if he has some interesting results to present. Make sure that it is well written and rehearsed! He should also chat with professors during social occasions, turn up at department talks and ask interesting questions; things like that.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Absolutely! Some of my worst students have made serious efforts to turn things around and I always make it a point to recognize that. I wasn't exactly the greatest undergraduate myself, and that can be true for any number of reasons -- some of which might not have a single thing to do with how "lazy" someone is. Honestly, I'd rather see a good student work hard to turn things around than watch a great student coast and rest on his/her laurels.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I have a suggestion that may help: Your friend could go to one of the professors that has a poor opinion of him, and ask for something (e.g., can you recommend a good book for learning X). In the conversation, your friend should mention that he's been working a lot harder in grad school and is enjoying it.
Life tip: In general, when you have a bad relationship with someone, it often helps to ask a favour of them. That may sound strange, but I believe there's solid psychological research behind it. Supposedly once we've done a favour for someone, we deal with the cognitive dissonance (I did a favour for someone I don't like) by deciding that the person we did a favour for isn't so bad after all. However, that explanation feels a bit manipulative to me. The way I prefer to think of it is that by asking a favour of someone, I am making myself vulnerable (they may say "no"), which reduces some of the tension in the relationship. It works especially well if the favour you're asking for implicitly acknowledges that you're trying to improve the relationship. (E.g., the very fact that you're asking for advice from this professor suggests that you take your studies more seriously now.)
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/04/23
| 275
| 1,229
|
<issue_start>username_0: I obtain many of my reading sources from online, instead of form a hardcopy in the library, even for books or book sections. The APA citation requirements for citing printed books and citing e-books are different. If my source IS indeed an e-book, I wonder whether I should really cite e-books according to the e-book citation requirement, which includes URL and all kinds of extra information than citing a printed book. Can I just cite it as if it is from a printed book?<issue_comment>username_1: The purpose of the different citation information for e-books is to deal with the fact that some purely electronic books are much more mutable that electronic books.
In your case, however, you are dealing with a persistent, expected immutable document that just happens to have been delivered to you in a more efficient manner. Therefore, it is appropriate to cite it as an ordinary book, just as when you are citing a journal article, you don't have to say whether you obtained a paper copy or a PDF.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Do not take it for granted that different versions of a book are identical.
Either cite the version you've used, or use the version you want to cite.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/23
| 1,058
| 4,328
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a student from India and I have been reading a lot about graduate admissions in US lately. I have read in some article that an average(below average) applicant from the "maybe" pile is moved to an "accepted" pile when their resumes contain something like "hiked in Himalayas".
Now I realize that it is a great achievement but it does not correlate with the capacity to publish quality research papers at all. So how do universities measure the applicants future in academic prospects?
P.S. Sorry, I do not have the link of the article.<issue_comment>username_1: I've never seen a graduate admissions committee take anything like this at all seriously, and I would certainly not recommend it as a strategy for getting into grad school. If anything, emphasizing irrelevant experience makes applicants look clueless and may hurt their chances of admission.
But I agree that you can read all sorts of strange things in discussions of graduate admissions on the internet. Some commentary is by people who simply don't know what they're talking about, but some is by faculty who have actually served on admissions committees. The best explanation I can give is that certain faculty are just eccentric. If you gather opinions from enough professors, you'll presumably find people who honestly believe that some non-academic experiences (such as hiking in the Himalayas) are so formative or telling that they are enough by themselves to salvage an otherwise mediocre application. I haven't run across this particular opinion myself, but I've certainly worked with admissions committee members whose judgments differed from the rest of the committee's in other ways.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that you are making a mistake in how you are interpreting the [Matt Might article](http://matt.might.net/articles/how-to-apply-and-get-in-to-graduate-school-in-science-mathematics-engineering-or-computer-science/) that others have dug up in the comments. You say:
>
> average(below average) applicant from the "maybe" pile is moved to an "accepted" pile
>
>
>
If you read the earlier part of the article on the mathematics of graduate admissions, though, you'll see that's almost certainly not what's going on. The pool of good applications for graduate schools is pretty deep, and University of Utah is a good school that will draw a lot of good applicants. Anybody in this professor's "Maybe" pile is probably not an average applicant, but a rather above-average applicant, and the extra tidbit is a tie-breaker that nudges them ahead of other good applicants.
In other words: there's probably a whole lot of academic promise already shown, and the "Hiking the Himalayas" bit is a somewhat different dimension that resonates with this particular highly opinionated professor. Another professor might just as easily look at that and say, "Now there's a person who won't be happy in the lab all day!"
And that goes back to what I see as one of the key messages early in the article: "The most important advice from this book is to get in touch with your potential advisor before you apply."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: First, kudos that you are thinking so hard about your application! :-D
My guess is that you should put down in your resume *anything* that you feel qualifies you for the job in question. I tend to shy away from putting hobbies in, but if they brand you in a way you want to appear for the job in question, I think it could help to add them!
I would say "hiking in the Himalayas" could show that you have: An adventurous spirit, determination, an ability to think "out of the box", a well-balanced life...lots of positive qualities that look good in a graduate student! :-) Whatever brands you as the kind of person that would do well in that job. If you're a home baker, it could show that you: have an experimental streak, are settled and comfortable with yourself, or are a nourishing, supportive person.
I liked the previous answer saying that different qualities will appeal to different professors, and it helps if you know them. But ultimately, be yourself and think about the "fit" between your intrinsic qualities and the job you're applying for, and fit them together.
All the best with finding your position!
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/23
| 674
| 2,961
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student in English working on my final paper for a class. I was assigned a particular author to write on, but about halfway through the semester another student wanted to write on that author so I agreed to write on a different author. I had already read some articles on this second author so I thought I would be able to come up with a good paper topic. I thought I had come up with a good idea for a thesis, but as I did my research, I found that my thesis contained essentially the same idea as a supporting argument expressed in one of the articles I had read. I expressed my concern to my professor as I began working on my paper; he read the first few pages and said he did not see a problem. I have cited the author's statements and ideas that I feel coincide with mine, but I still have a troubled conscience -- I feel that my ideas are not sufficiently my own and that my thesis is far too similar to the arguments in this article. It is too late for me to start on another paper, but I'm not sure that I can in good conscience turn in this paper. If anyone has any advice, I would appreciate it.<issue_comment>username_1: From your description, it doesn't sound like a question of *plagiarism* (you say you're referencing the relevant paper, and I assume you're either paraphrasing it or using quotation marks as appropriate), but a possible lack of *novelty*. Lack of novelty is more of an issue when you're trying to publish in a journal or present at a conference. Usually class assignments don't have to be novel; they just have to reflect your own work. If your professor is satisfied, I don't think you have a problem. I would do my best to extend the ideas from the other paper, i.e. add something to their analysis.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think your concern reflects well on you (as does agreeing to let someone else take your first choice), but the way I read your question is that (1) you formed an opinion what to write, then (2) discovered in other secondary literature that someone else agrees with you, and had already made supporting arguments similar to yours.
That's not plagiarism. It just means that your work is less novel than you'd probably hoped. As your professor considers it adequate for purposes of your class, you should be fine.
I'd shy away from reading more of that source though to make it less likely to be subconsciously influenced by their reasoning.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I know this paper probably does not have the rigor of an academic journal publication but in many disciplines it is common to include a section reviewing relevant publications and how they relate to your work.
Perhaps you could include a small section in your paper reviewing other papers and highlighting the difference between those papers and yours (even if the differences may be small) or how your work builds and improves upon the other papers.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/23
| 908
| 3,708
|
<issue_start>username_0: At my school, I see some professors, associate and higher, teach only 1 course per semester while others, assistants and full, teach 3 or 4 per semester. Some semesters, the ones teaching only one course may teach an upper PhD level course, while other semesters they'll teach a junior or senior level undergrad course, but it's never more than 1 course. Meanwhile, the ones teaching 3 or 4 teach all levels of undergrad and grad.
**Why is this?**
Do professors earn less salary if they teach less courses?<issue_comment>username_1: Depending on the department, the rules can be very different, but here are some things that I have seen that can lead to teaching reduction from a theoretical teaching load that is the same across the board:
1. *New faculty*. Think of it as both a hiring bonus and a humanitarian "you are still settling in so we won't burden you too much."
2. *Super big shot*. Some "research stars" can negotiate their way to a semi-permanently reduced teaching load; this is on the theory that their name recognition and the research grants that they can supposedly bring in will benefit the department greatly, and that in theory it is more cost effective to let them spend more time in research and less time teaching.
3. *Grant buy-out*. Certain schools operate on a system where faculty can buy out of their teaching load by obtaining sufficiently large or prestigious research grants.
4. *Other service*. Professors taking on administrative duties (chair, director of graduate/undergraduate studies, for example) get reduced teaching loads on the principle that they are serving the department in other capacities.
5. *Student mentoring*. Some departments have established exchange rates of X graduating PhD students = 1 course, and Y undergraduate research students = 1 course to encourage participation in student research.
Also, some people just love to teach. While professorial contracts usually state a minimum teaching load, I have not seen a case where a maximum teaching load is prescribed.
In addition, at many departments the teaching is, by design, not equal across the board. Many universities hire special teaching faculty or adjunct professors. Sometimes these hires (temporary or not) do not have different sounding academic titles. Whereas research faculty typically have teaching loads of about 3 courses per year, the teaching faculty are contractually obliged to teach 6 to 8 per year (and many adjuncts are paid "per course" so the more they teach the closer to a living wage they earn). You cannot always tell from their titles in which category the professor is hired.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The other answer hits the main points, but here are some supplementary points.
1. Grant buy-outs are not so common in math, from my experience. However some departments will provide teaching reductions for getting grants, or for some departments where there is more of a split between research/teaching and teaching-only, just being "research active."
2. Some departments provide teaching credits for extra teaching work, so one get course reductions for this, in addition to administrative service or student mentoring mentioned in the other example. (E.g., if the normal load is 6 credits/semester but you teach 2 4-credit courses, you get 2 credits in the bank.)
3. Sometimes one can do more teaching in one semester to free up another semester.
4. One might teach more for extra pay.
5. I think this is rare, but I know one department which will let faculty teach less in a semester for lower pay. I think the intent is akin to that of a sabbatical program, but at least one person uses it quite regularly.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/24
| 597
| 2,242
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is a three years bachelors degree in Commerce and three years bachelors degree in Law from India termed to be equivalent to have a four years graduate degree from the US?<issue_comment>username_1: Many universities in the US will not admit students from India (or other commonwealth countries) with 3 year bachelors degrees into graduate programs. In such cases the expectation is that students will have either completed an honors year or gotten a master's degree before applying to the graduate program in the US. In this sense, a 3 year bachelors degree from India is often not considered to be equivalent to a four year bachelors degree.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: US does not have centralized rules about such things. It's in the hand of each university how they want to handle it.
Very few US universities will admit students with a 3 year bachelors from India. You can check that by writing a mail to the admissions office of the respective university.
Majority of the universities however will not accept the 3 year bachelors. For these universities, you will have to complete 16 years of formal education(10+2+4). This means that **you will either have to complete a masters degree or some additional one year degree**.
Note that most of the B-schools accept Indian 3 year bachelors nevertheless.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: IISc, IITs etc have BSc/ MSc (Only very few Indian university can offer BS/ MS after proofing that their name will not create any contradiction, like ISI is offering MS(QE), MS(QMS) and MS(LIS), BS/ MS is reserve for Bachelor/ Master of Surgery) degrees equivalent to BTech/ BS/ MTech/ MS, Which are four year Degrees, In addition IITs also conduct MSc programme through JAM, Which are equivalent to traditional MSc degrees.
Most of the tier one US Uni doesn't consider 3 year degrees for postgraduate admission in general circumstances (I know some guys who made their appearance in PhD program of Stanford/ Pennsylvania/ Harvard with 3 years degree from ISI) but more than 80% of Uni do accept 3years degree, provided that student has studied in a college having A++ NAAC Grade(3.5+ cgpa) and scored more than 60% or 6.5/7.5 cgpa on 10/9 scale.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/24
| 9,022
| 35,342
|
<issue_start>username_0: College admissions in the U.S. takes into account many factors that are rarely considered in other countries and seem unrelated to academics. For example, legacy status (children of alumni may be given preference), athletics, extracurricular activities, etc. Why do these nonacademic criteria play a larger role in the U.S. than they do elsewhere?<issue_comment>username_1: Many of your questions are difficult to answer without a larger industry/history lesson, but you can find much of that information by searching for it.
As for your actual question, why do schools care about non-academic things;
There are many reasons, but these 'non-academic' things are what makes well rounded people that are likely to succeed. Leaving the country and helping people in need is just one of many ways to show that your mind is broader, which helps creative thinking, which helps problem solving, which helps you to succeed.
The act of doing something non-academic in a group setting shows ability to work cooperatively. It shows a diverse background, which is regarded as important by many prominent institutions because diversity in academic settings helps improve educational experiences.
In essence, your question is the same as "Why do undergraduate students in Engineering need to take non-engineering classes?" If you don't know the answer, im sure you can find other posts about this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As with any complicated social phenomenon, there is no simple and conclusive answer. However, here are two important factors:
1. The U.S. didn't have world-class universities until the 20th century. Even ones that are world-famous today (such as Harvard or Yale) did not particularly impress 19th century Europeans. These universities had started out as vocational schools for pastors and gradually turned into finishing schools for the elite, but they weren't scholarly powerhouses. In the early 20th century, there started to be more academic competition for admission. This was very upsetting to the traditional students (largely wealthy young men from prep schools), who didn't want to be around too many Jews or other minorities or to have to compete with nerds for grades. One tactic universities used in response was quotas for Jews, but the Nazis made that look bad. Leading U.S. universities then moved on in the 1930's to develop other methods to ensure that they could pick whichever students they wanted. For example, geographic diversity (you should take students from Kansas to avoid having too many New Yorkers), preferences for children of alumni, athletic recruitment (you really need a strong lacrosse team and fencing team), well roundedness (students should study hard but not be too nerdy), extracurricular activities, etc. <NAME> has documented this history in his book [The Chosen](http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Chosen.html?id=1Nf3FxMIEB8C).
2. What is Harvard's purpose in educating students? People often imagine the goal is to educate smart people, and that corruption is the only explanation for why Harvard would deliberately admit a wealthy applicant over someone more talented but poor. However, this is thinking about it completely wrong. Harvard's primary goal isn't to educate smart people, but rather to have an impact on the world by educating influential people. They want to educate the people who are going to grow up to become leaders of all sorts (social, political, commercial, academic, etc.), and while they are happy to help shape who becomes a leader, they know perfectly well that wealth and privilege play a major role. When Harvard admits someone whose wealth exceeds his intellectual talents, it's because they want to help set the national agenda by providing this person's education. From this perspective, all the strange admissions criteria are an excuse for Harvard to select whoever they feel has the most potential to change the world, taking into account all aspects of their talents and background.
So what about other universities? The first axiom of higher education in the U.S. is that everybody imitates the most prestigious universities. If Harvard, Yale, and Princeton are doing something, then everyone else will follow. Not necessarily in exactly the same way: different universities may employ very different criteria for admission, thanks to different goals regarding who they want to educate. But they almost all use the same basic framework for what information is relevant to their decision.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: I'll answer the less-obvious point that other answers so far missed:
>
> * *Colleges practice sport recruiting, whereby athletes are recruited by the colleges for their athletic promise, over other applicants who might be more qualified in terms of academics.*
>
>
>
The reason for this is that most US colleges are funded in large part by college Alumni donating money.
And college Alumni donate more money if the college has a successful sports team(s).
Here's one study showing causation
<https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/03/report-finds-alumni-giving-among-other-areas-correlated-football-success>
>
> Anderson’s report found that for NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision teams -- teams that compete during the season and are potentially eligible for postseason bowl games -- winning football games increases alumni athletic donations, enhances academic reputation, increases the number of applicants and in-state students, reduces acceptance rates and raises average incoming SAT scores.
>
>
>
Please note that the other benefits are also somewhat explainable - college athletics is pretty visible in US culture, and therefore a university's brand among possible applicants is raised significantly - a LOT more people can name top NCAA winners than top colleges with best biology superstar professor.
A totally unrelated reason is tradition - USA has a very long tradition that sound body is a big plus for a sound mind (it's not a uniquely USA thing, of course - the same idea was held from Ancient Greece to Russia to modern scientific studies results). As such, a good student was always expected to be able to do athletics for well-roundedness.
---
Interestingly, the "legacy" point also is influenced the same monetary way - a wealthy Alumni is more likely to donate to the college if their family member, especially offspring, will attend.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Extra-Curriculars
-----------------
There are a few reasons why US Colleges make some of these selection criteria. Having extra curricular activities shows a number of potentially important things:
* the ability to juggle more than just school (I can volunteer and play a sport on top of keeping my grades
* travel can indicate a wider range of interesting experiences
* Interesting students will do interesting things, which can be good for recruitment
* Being successful in a variety of areas indicates a general ability to succeed better than being successful in only one (and Universities here gain prestige by having successful alumni).
Something worth noting - in most places in the world University is about specializing. You take one subject, gain mastery in it, move on to work in that subject. In the US this is not the case. We value a "broad" education where you are required to study many subjects that have little to do with your major - in fact many people do not decide their majors until a year or two in (we feel this creates "well-rounded" people). As a result students who have evidence of non-academic achievements can be favored over those who focused their efforts (especially if both candidates have comparable grades).
Affirmative Action
------------------
You highlight on "quotas" (often referred to here as "Affirmative Action"). Ultimately it is a political issue. The idea is to ensure fairness. At one point (basically any time before 1970) a perfectly qualified black woman would be passed over in preference for a white male. Rules (and often laws) were enacted to say that women (and other minorities) needed to be fairly represented in the school (and business) - the quota was the way to ensure the school would look at the non-preferred candidates. Legally Affirmative Action is not discrimination, and in many jurisdictions it is still legally mandated.
Whether the practice is discrimination or not is highly subjective (to my incredibly intelligent mother who likely got a chance at earning her BS and MS in Computer Science **only** because Duke had to let women in for their "quota" it was not discrimination).
Finances
--------
(Disclaimer, there is a large amount of politics in the discussion over what is "necessary spending" for universities in the US, and the high cost of tuition)
The rest of your questions are actually talking about the same point. I am not familiar with universities in India, but in many places in the world universities are fundamentally part of the state - the state either directly runs the institution, or it subsidizes most to all of the cost for the students attending.
In the US there are a few state sponsored schools, but individual US States get to determine the amount of support those schools get, and most schools are not well funded in the state's budget. In addition there are a large number of private schools that do not receive any funding (Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, etc.). For most schools in the US, they have to fund their own budgets. These budgets include facility/maintenance fees (paint, lights, utilities, etc.), staff pay (student, faculty, and non-faculty employees), expansion to the campus, and all the other things the school pays for (e.g. having a gym, hosting symposiums, etc.).
Tuition is very high ($20000+ per *year* is pretty common), but even still is often not enough to cover the budget. Thus the school relies on other things to pull in revenue - research grants can help, but are earmarked for specific projects and do not help with general budget goals. The two other major sources of income Universities can get are donations, and "event fees".
Donations often come from alumni who are grateful for their success. The school does not want to upset great donors - nor potential future donors - and will give preferential treatment to children of alumni as a result.
"Event Fees" can come from a number of things (e.g. hosting a conference/symposium, putting on a play or concert, etc.), but in general Universities believe that Sporting activities bring in the most money (for the rest of this I will assume that is true, even though there is evidence that is not always the case). Sporting events bring in money through a few avenues:
* More donations from fervent supporters of the school's teams
* Ticket sales
* Merchandise sales
* Advertising
* Concessions
* Some competitions pay winning teams in some way
Because the schools with the best teams get the strongest support and thus the most income from all of those avenues, schools do what they can to ensure their teams are the best. Sometimes the best athletes are exceptional academically, but more often they are not. Since the school wants the best athletes they will provide scholarships and admission to candidates who might have been disqualified academically.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: My dad was admitted to the university in Novisibiersk in the late sixties, which was indesputably one of the top three technical universities in Russia. He said the only admission criterion was an exam with olympiad-level math questions, which kids studied for all through high school much like some American kids study for the USAMO etc.
Now, the reason I mention this is because he said the reason why admissions here are different not only from Russia but from most of the rest of the world is because in other countries, the students study to serve the state, while in America, the universities provide education as a service to students.
In most other countries, a student is accepted on the basis of the expected value he can bring to society if he is given the appropriate educational opportunity, and then his education is subsidized on the expectation that by studying he can improve the general economy of the state.
However, in America the state pays little (especially for private schools) because education is not a service the individual is doing so he can better the state: it's a service being given to the individual so he can better himself. Even when the government expands measures to pay for student loans etc. the main motivation is to aid poor people in improving themselves, not aiding smart people in improving the state. There isn't anything inherently wrong with this, it's just different and perhaps less efficient.
So that's why American schools don't care so much about academics: they don't care as much about how you do because they aren't investing in you. In fact, you're investing in them, and the return on that investment is an education you can use to get a better job. So they take into account criteria related to how much you'll improve their image, how much you'll be likely to donate later in life, etc.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_6: One further point that I haven't seen yet in the other answers relates to a general philosophy of education.
My impression is that in many countries, the philosophy of education is centered around the development of technical skills. In the United States, however, it is often held that the primary purpose of education is to develop a creative and insightful mind.
This philosophy is reflected in the "breadth" or "common core" requirements that appear at many universities, which assume that a student cannot be considered "well educated" unless they have been taught to think in ways other than is preferred by by their discipline. For example, as an undergraduate at MIT, I was required to take classes from a range of scientific disciplines (math, biology, physics, chemistry), and also a humanities course in every semester, as well as doing a humanities focus entirely unrelated to my major.
This notion that intellectual "breadth" is as important as intellectual "depth" seems to play a strong role in the way in which admissions are handled for US undergraduates. Whether it is truly a good or bad thing is something there is currently no clear answer to, but some have argued that this philosophy may be an important contributor to the highly successful US "startup" and small business culture.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Specific example of why this is considered: MIT has been known to turn down people with top grades when there's evidence that they will deal very poorly with no longer being at the top of their class. Someone who can draw good grades and sustain extracurricular activities is more likely to survive in that environment than someone who got those grades by doing nothing but study.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I always assumed parents would complain that their precious child was not being measured accurately if admissions criteria did not include ridiculous things like hiking in the Himalayas.
But there’s also not really any choice. As a current college student in a fairly elite college with fairly elite stats, I of all people know that high-school GPAs and the SAT are meaningless for college success. A lot of high schools, like inner city or rural schools, produce kids with high GPAs and the inability to do basic math. The SAT is something you can study maybe three weeks for and get a full score on. The most impressive thing I can see on a resume is doing well in Math Olympiad or high-school programming/robotics contests. That is not something available to everyone.
In the end, colleges need to separate kids somehow, and the basic criteria, like GPA and standardized test scores are just not adequate. So they turn to feel-good things like trips to Nepal. It’s almost not the college’s fault... except they could imitate the Asian system and administer their own personal examinations for entrance. That would make a lot more sense, but you would have to refer to my first comment about over-sensitive parents and college administrators as for why that would not work.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: Extra curricular activities indicate levels of involvement and discipline that grades alone don't always reflect. If two students have equivalent grades and equivalent coursework, it's more impressive if one student was able to do that while participating in a sport, a music group, and volunteering while the other student did not have these additional time constraints. A university would likely see a student with strong extracurricular involvement as one who would be more likely to be involved in activities in college, which can benefit the school by improving its image ("look at our students giving back to the community") or through research (the "do it all" types may be more likely to participate in undergrad research). Colleges like well-rounded students, and having extracurricular involvement shows well-roundedness.
Legacy students...that's an entirely different matter in my opinion. That may be more to appease the alumni parents who might donate. Also, if the parents are alums, the kid may be more likely to matriculate (because colleges want a high matriculation rate among accepted students) and be successful (if the parents were able to graduate, the kid probably would as well).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_10: I think a lot of the other answers here have some good points, but I think the most important thing you need to remember about universities in America is that they are BUSINESSES. Education is the primary service that they provide, but they are also selling things like prestige (how good does your University degree look on your resume/CV?), contacts/networking, sports programs (many professional athletes start at colleges that have top-notch sports teams), etc.
My guess is that the United States probably has more universities than any other country and therefore has the most competition amongst them than in other countries. A university's admissions "formula" is like a food company's recipe or a technology company's patents - it provides a competitive advantage (hopefully) and is constantly reviewed and tweaked in an effort to maximize profits.
When looked at through the eyes of a business looking to maximize profit, it's pretty obvious why legacy students, promising student athletes, minorities and foreigners, etc are admitted - it all ultimately leads to more revenue over time.
Some examples:
* Endowments are the #1 source of funding for universities. Harvard's is around $35B (yes, that's BILLION) while Yale's is around $25B. Thus it's obvious why sons and daughters of alumni are given preferential treatment in admissions.
* College sports is BIG business. Recruiting and admitting talented student athletes is a no-brainer for universities.
* Part of the "university business" is hiring and keeping the best professors. Famous people like former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, <NAME> Jr., and Cornell West can teach anywhere they want. I bet they don't want to teach at a university with a homogenous (i.e., dull) student body. Professors are also very liberal and therefore support initiatives like affirmative action. Also, they want to go where the money is!!
Like I said, other people have some good points, but having received my undergraduate degree from Harvard and my master's degree from New York University I've seen firsthand how these educational institutions are just like any other business in America.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: In the US, it all comes down to decentralized control and funding.
>
> Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United
> States.
>
>
> [[source]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html)
>
>
>
This is actually a consequence of the US constitution which limits the reach of the Federal government in States affairs. Even in the few instances where some Federal funds are allocated to education, the Federal government will usually disburse those funds and leave the implementation details to the States themselves.
>
> It is States and communities, as well as public and private
> organizations of all kinds, that establish schools and colleges,
> develop curricula, and determine requirements for enrollment and
> graduation. The structure of education finance in America reflects
> this predominant State and local role.
>
>
> [[source]](http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/role.html)
>
>
>
In other words, there is not one single academic standard that runs across the entire United States and there is not a single standard way to measure the abilities of students. One could say that the SAT and the ACT are such standards, but those are not government-sponsored, nor government-mandated, they're just private and proprietary products owned and licensed by the companies that developed them, and those tests are just partial bandaid solutions that have evolved over time as a direct result of not having standards in the first place.
In any case, even if academic abilities could be measured accurately, there is still the issue of which entities and special interests are funding the University. If it's a particular State, it wants the children of its electorates (this is usually written in their charter). If it's private donors, then it means they want their children and the children of their friends to be accepted (that's also written in their charter, but instead of using the word "nepotism", the euphemism "legacy" is used instead). If it's the military (through the ROTC, or the GI Bill), it wants its recruits and its veterans and/or their dependents to be accepted by the schools it funds (keep this in mind if you ever want to become a Medical Doctor and don't have the best absolute grades for it).
If a University was started by funds from a particular religion, or if it is supported by local politicians, or by local private interests, that are predominantly one religion, then it will tend to favor members from that particular religion. The same goes for Universities that practice racial discrimination (whether be it the negative kind of discrimination and preferential nepotism, or affirmative action which is supposed to correct past discrimination and past nepotism).
And if a University depends on the funds from college sports, either franchising, rebroadcasting rights, increased publicity, and/or increased donations from Alumni, then it will do its very best to recruit athletes for its sports teams through its admission process.
In the US, professional sports leagues are government-backed monopolies (exempt from anti-trust regulations). Those sports leagues artificially limit the number of teams they allow to very low numbers (at least compared to our population size). And semi-professional college leagues end up filling the gaps left by professional leagues, except that schools are legally required not to pay their athletes (except for tuition and expense reimbursements), thus creating a real bargain for each school.
Also on the athletic side of things, even if you're not good enough to play on a college league for a University, having attended school both in France and in the US, I'll disagree with you and say that athleticism probably has a bigger role in France than in the US. The French school system has a standardized and a rigorous way of testing high school students for general physical education, which will figure as a part of their Baccalauréat and therefore indirectly be a part of the overall criteria used for University admissions. But physical education in the US is largely dependent on the particular high school you attended. In California, where I attended, it was basically a joke (and thus can not be relied on for University admissions, unless you took sports as extracurricular activities, thus this would explain why they would want you to list those extracurricular sports on college applications).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: Because it is a way for universities to discriminate students while keeping plausible deniability.
Universities in the US have a history of discrimination. After WW1, universities were faced with an influx of immigrant students, in particular Jewish students. To "cope" with this, they started by creating quotas of students (again, in particular, Jewish students). This soon became unacceptable for obvious reasons. This is when universities started to introduce more unusual criteria when evaluating incoming students, such as "geographic diversity", "character", and "familial ascendancy". This in particular included so-called "legacy" criteria, where students were given a bonus if their parents went to the same university.
A key point in all this is that the universities never reveal how much weight they give to each criterion. This makes for a completely opaque selection system. A student can never be sure *why* they were rejected. They can rationalize it by thinking that their "extracurricular" activities were not good enough. But how would they know? It may be another, less tasteful criterion that prevented them from getting in, such as who knows who, where there parents studied, the personal biases of the selection committee regarding ethnicity and religion, and so on.
In practice, this is simply a way for the elite to remain the elite. For example, at Harvard, 29% of students had a parent who went to Harvard. (Think about it; this number is insane.) More than half the students come from the 10% richest families. Students from the 1% richest families are as many as students from the 60% poorest. Students from minorities account for 12.5% of candidates, and 6.7% of accepted students. A study found that in the top 10 US universities, being a "son of" (a former student) gave you the same increase in chances as a 160 points boost on your SAT. In 2011, another study found that in the top 30 universities, children of former students had 45 points more in chances of being accepted (i.e. if based on qualifications the student had 40% chances of being accepted, then their "legacy" means that they actually have 85% of being accepted).
---
Note that unfortunately this is not limited to the USA. This year's changes in undergrad admissions in France are starting to implement similar ideas, although on a smaller scale, and some universities try to be open about the weight assigned to each criterion. I would not be surprised if this happened in other countries too.
---
A lot of the information in this answer comes from [this article](https://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/2018/06/KAHLENBERG/58772) written by [<NAME>](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Kahlenberg). The article is not freely accessible and is written in French, but below is the (freely accessible) list of references used in the article, most in English.
>
> (1) <NAME>, « Legacy preferences in a democratic republic »,
> dans <NAME> (sous la dir. de), Affirmative Action for
> the Rich, op. cit.
>
>
> (2) <NAME> et <NAME>, « Meet the class of 2021 », The
> Harvard Crimson, 2017.
>
>
> (3) <NAME>, <NAME> : How the American Upper Middle
> Class Is Leaving Everyone Else in the Dust, Why That Is a Problem, and
> What to Do About It, Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC,
> 2017. Lire également « Classe sans risque », Le Monde diplomatique, octobre 2017.
>
>
> (4) Cf. <NAME>, The Price of Admission : How America’s Ruling
> Class Buys Its Way Into Elite Colleges — and Who Gets Left Outside the
> Gates, Three Rivers Press, New York, 2007.
>
>
> (5) <NAME> et <NAME>, « Admitting the truth : the effect
> of affirmative action, legacy preferences and the meritocratic ideal
> on students of color in college admissions », dans Affirmative Action
> for the Rich, op. cit.
>
>
> (6) <NAME>, <NAME> et <NAME>, «
> Admission preferences for minority students, athletes, and legacies at
> elite universities » (PDF), Social Science Quarterly, vol. 85, n° 5,
> Hoboken (New Jersey), décembre 2004.
>
>
> (7) <NAME>, « The impact of legacy status on undergraduate
> admissions at elite colleges and universities », Economics of
> Education Review, vol. 30, n° 3, Amsterdam, juin 2011.
>
>
> (8) <NAME>, Sozi <NAME> et <NAME>, « No
> distinctions except those which merit originates : the unlawfulness of
> legacy preferences in public and private universities », Santa Clara
> Law Review, vol. 49, n° 1, 2009.
>
>
> (9) <NAME>, Who’s Running America ? The Obama Reign, Paradigm
> Publishers, Boulder (Colorado), 2014.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_13: As [<NAME>](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9646/najib-idrissi) pointed out, nonacademic criteria play a large role in the admissions process in the US, because it is a way for universities to discriminate students while keeping plausible deniability. It is a common misconception, however, that it's mostly rich White men who benefit from this:
>
> Perhaps the most detailed statistical research into the actual
> admissions practices of American universities has been conducted by
> Princeton sociology professor <NAME> and his colleagues,
> whose results were summarized in his 2009 book No Longer Separate, Not
> Yet Equal, co-authored with <NAME>. Their findings
> provide an empirical look at the individual factors that dramatically
> raise or lower the likelihood of acceptance into the leading American
> universities which select the next generation of our national elites.
>
>
> The research certainly supports the widespread perception that
> non-academic factors play a major role in the process, including
> athletic ability and “legacy” status. But as we saw earlier, even more
> significant are racial factors, with black ancestry being worth the
> equivalent of 310 points, Hispanics gaining 130 points, and Asian
> students being penalized by 140 points, all relative to white
> applicants on the 1600 point Math and Reading SAT scale.
>
>
> [source](https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/)
>
>
>
Here's how it typically works:
>
> Consider the case of <NAME>, a Chinese immigrant student raised
> in the Silicon Valley area, where her father worked as an engineer.
> Although English was not her first language, her SAT scores were over
> 100 points above the Wesleyan average, and she ranked as a National
> Merit Scholarship semifinalist, putting her in the top 0.5 percent of
> high school students (not the top 2 percent as Steinberg mistakenly
> claims). Nevertheless, the admissions officer rated her just so-so in
> academics, and seemed far more positively impressed by her ethnic
> activism in the local school’s Asian-American club. Ultimately, he
> stamped her with a “Reject,” but later admitted to Steinberg that she
> might have been admitted if he had been aware of the enormous time and
> effort she had spent campaigning against the death penalty, a
> political cause near and dear to his own heart. Somehow I suspect that
> a student who boasted of leadership in pro-death penalty activism
> among his extracurriculars might have fared rather worse in this
> process. And presumably for similar reasons, Tiffany was also rejected
> by all her other prestigious college choices, including Yale, Penn,
> Duke, and Wellesley, an outcome which greatly surprised and
> disappointed her immigrant father.
>
>
> There was also the case of half-Brazilian <NAME>, with slight
> black ancestry, who came from a middle-class family and attended on a
> partial scholarship one of America’s most elite prep schools, whose
> annual tuition now tops $30,000; her SAT scores were somewhat higher
> than Tiffany’s, and she was an excellent dancer. The combination of
> her academic ability, dancing talent, and “multiracial” background
> ranked her as one of America’s top college recruitment prospects,
> gaining her admission and generous financial packages from Harvard,
> Yale, Stanford and every other elite university to which she applied,
> including the University of Chicago’s most prestigious academic
> scholarship award and a personal opportunity to meet Chelsea Clinton
> while visiting Stanford, which she did, before ultimately selecting
> Yale.
>
>
> Finally, there was the case of <NAME>, a girl from a very
> affluent Jewish family near Beverly Hills, who attended the same elite
> prep school as Julianna, but with her parents paying the full annual
> tuition. Despite her every possible advantage, including test-prep
> courses and retaking the exam, her SAT scores were some 240 points
> lower on the 1600 point scale, placing her toward the bottom of the
> Wesleyan range, while her application essay focused on the
> philosophical challenges she encountered when she was suspended for
> illegal drug use. But she was a great favorite of her prep school
> counselor, who was an old college friend of the Wesleyan admissions
> officer, and using his discretion, he stamped her “Admit.” Her dismal
> academic record then caused this initial decision to be overturned by
> a unanimous vote of the other members of the full admissions
> committee, but he refused to give up, and moved heaven and earth to
> gain her a spot, even offering to rescind the admissions of one or
> more already selected applicants to create a place for her. Eventually
> he got her shifted from the Reject category to wait-list status, after
> which he secretly moved her folder to the very top of the large
> waiting list pile.
>
>
> In the end “connections” triumphed, and she received admission to
> Wesleyan, although she turned it down in favor of an offer from more
> prestigious Cornell, which she had obtained through similar means. But
> at Cornell, she found herself “miserable,” hating the classes and
> saying she “didn’t see the usefulness of [her] being there.” However,
> her poor academic ability proved no hindrance, since the same
> administrator who had arranged her admission also wrangled her a quick
> entrance into a special “honors program” he personally ran, containing
> just 40 of the 3500 students in her year. This exempted her from all
> academic graduation requirements, apparently including classes or
> tests, thereby allowing her to spend her four college years mostly
> traveling around the world while working on a so-called “special
> project.” After graduation, she eventually took a job at her father’s
> successful law firm, thereby realizing her obvious potential as a
> member of America’s ruling Ivy League elite, or in her own words, as
> being one of “the best of the best.”
>
>
> [source](https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/)
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/04/24
| 268
| 1,079
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently studying at an university in Europe (undergraduate, first year)and would like to transfer (next year or in two years) to an university in UK. UCAS requires a reference to accompany your application.
I have a very successful academic career, I have taken all exams of my year and also some of my next years, and have obtained the highest mark ("cum laude") in almost all of them. The reason for transferring, therefore, is to get into a more challenging university.
Is it appropriate to ask a professor of my current university for a reference letter, given that it will be used as part of an application to another university?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes!
----
In fact, it would be inappropriate **not** to ask at least one professor at your current university for a reference letter, as direct evidence of your success.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: No professor is going to be "upset" that you're forsaking them. They just don't have any position in it, and so the answer is an overwhelming YES.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/24
| 1,030
| 4,589
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am getting closer to the end of Ph.D. studies and in some months I expect to stop the research to seriously work on the thesis. My supervisor has two other students working on slightly different fields than mine. He is involved in many projects and loves to help other people.
I think he trust me deeply, sometimes he tells me about his issues with his other students/people he is following and when I have chance to attend their seminars I understand that they require much more supervision than I do.
We keep talking, off course, but in the last months he welcomed every my initiative without critics. I prepared three conference papers and he basically only corrected few typos, while other people gave me more constructive comments (together with compliments) that boosted the quality of the papers. Getting closer to my defense I would expect a bit "stronger" supervision, maybe some suggestions on how to polish my work. Overall, I am still a student, not an independent researcher. I am worried that at a certain point he may examine my work with more attention, spotting some bad holes and that this may happen too late to properly fill them.
This doubt is stressing me quite much and I think that is also starting to have some negative impact on my productivity. Should I somehow address this issue to him?<issue_comment>username_1: Some advisors have a style of viewing supervision the same way ER doctors look at treatment. The key word is triage. Where there's a need to make things okay, he/she will be there. My advisor had the same viewpoint as he was very busy with other work and saw our meetings more as a checking-in as a friend than supervision. I thought that when all the other students graduated, he'd give me the same amount of time as they got, but that was untrue. He continued with the same amount.
I asked him about this at the end, and he just said there weren't many crises (there was exactly one, in which he met me within 8 hours to make a game plan with me). Rest assured that your advisor probably is allowing you to create your own research programme and become independent earlier than usually scheduled. This will help your letter from him. From having more of a mentoring friend instead of being strongly supervised, I had an easy transition to postdoc, which is basically how your advisor is treating you now. In my fourth year, I felt almost abandoned. A year into my postdoc, I see that my advisor was the best advisor I could have asked for.
Seems like you're doing great as an independent researcher and your advisor will give you his input if needed but is curious what you'll come up with on your own. A loose leash is a good thing if you're self-motivated.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You most definitely still need strong supervision, it is just that the type of supervision that you need is shifting. From what you have written, it sounds like you are following a very typical trajectory for a strong graduate student.
Early on, you needed help at a technical level, in order to building basic research skills. Now, however, you need coaching on how to make the transition from student to independent researcher. Learning self-assessment as a researcher and having a *reasonable* degree of confidence in your self-assessment (not too high or too low) are important skills to develop in the range from late graduate school through postdoc and early PI years.
You speak about worrying that your advisor will spot bad holes in your work. Where do you think they might be? If you reflect carefully, I am certain that you will find that your feelings are not uniform across your work, but that there are some parts that you are more confident or less confident about. This judgement is something that is important for you to build skill and confidence in, and will also help you to ask for help in a more focused and effective manner (e.g., "Can you check my narrative in Section 3" or "I'm a little worried about this part of this proof").
This is something that is totally reasonable for you to ask for help with from your advisor. To do this, I would recommend that you shift from asking for a general "review all of this work" to instead asking for a second opinion on your judgement of which things are reasonable to worry about and which are under control. It's also entirely reasonable to get feedback from other mentors and peers, not just now but throughout your career: more perspectives are often better, especially as you are preparing to leave the nest and fly on your own.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/24
| 3,976
| 15,002
|
<issue_start>username_0: A comment on [this question on undergraduate admissions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/44122/why-do-undergraduate-admissions-in-the-u-s-take-into-account-nonacademic-criteri/44132?noredirect=1#comment98485_44122) notes that a good college might get 10x more applicants *who all have the maximum possible grade point average*, than the college can admit. *(The rest of my question is based on the assumption that is is actually true. If it is not, my question might be based on an incorrect premise.)* Coming from The Netherlands, this sounds strange to me. We have a standardised test at the end of secondary school, and few people score average grades higher than 8/10 (passing is 6/10), with people scoring 10.0/10 being practically nonexistent (I seem to recall reading about one such student in the newspaper many years ago). The overall average is [6.4/10](http://www.nu.nl/eindexamens/3419226/scholieren-halen-gemiddeld-zes-examens.html) for the school category granting admittance to university. For universities I don't have hard numbers but I would be surprised if more than 1 in 30 students score 10.0/10 in undergraduate introductory calculus. Most students seem to score mostly around 6–7/10, which I believe would translate to E–D in the American system, but I'm not sure. Grades 6–10 are passing grades, grades 1–5 are failing grades. My question is for pre-university tests though, the ones that are used to test if people should be admitted to university.
Why is there so much grade inflation in the USA? Is there no standardised testing for whatever tests are used to establish the grades used for undergraduate admissions? This system would make it very hard for Dutch students to gain admission to American universities, because getting the maximum average grade is virtually unheard of.
See also: *[Do price and value of degrees correlate much?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/38679/1033)*<issue_comment>username_1: There are a couple standardized tests used for undergraduate admissions that are generally taken near the end of high school. The [ACT](http://www.actstudent.org/) and the [SAT](https://sat.collegeboard.org/home) are the most common ones.1 However, they are only part of the admissions package, and a relatively small part at that (varies by school, but my guess is they get a weight of around 25% or less at most schools).
There are many reasons not to base admissions solely on a single standardized test.2 One of the biggest is simply that standardized test scores often test studying and resources as much as they test intelligence and preparation. There's already a huge industry built around SAT-specific test preparation, and it's very difficult to argue that this extremely-targeted studying is doing anything beneficial for most student's academic preparation.
Also, keep in mind that the US is a much larger country than European countries, and there is a high amount of geographical mobility among the upper-/middle-class. Undergraduate enrollment in the US is [around 18 million](http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98); that's larger than the entire population of The Netherlands. Because there is a huge prestige factor in going to a top school, almost all of the top students from that huge population will apply to the same 5-10 top colleges in the US. Even if the distribution of scores is the same as a European country, the much larger applicant pool means that top schools are inevitably going to be swamped with near-perfect applications.
1: The number of perfect SAT scores is actually quite low (I am less familiar with the ACT). In 2014, there were only 583 perfect scores out of 1.6 million test-takers. Though if you consider only the two more-important sections, there were 1,922 perfect CR+M scores. Even considering scores that are basically perfect (say, 1550+), less than half of 1% of test-takers reach that level. [Source](http://research.collegeboard.org/content/sat-data-tables). However, that 0.5% translates into Harvard getting probably 5,000 applicants with 1550+ scores, which is already over 3x their regular incoming class.
2: The [wikipedia article](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standardized_test#Disadvantages_and_criticism) talks briefly about some of them, but there's a huge literature debating the advantages and disadvantages.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: While not directly an answer to either the titular question, or even the statement that there are 10 applicants with perfect GPAs and SATs for every spot, I think the answer is that you do not need a perfect GPA and SAT to get into a top school. For example [Harvard](http://features.thecrimson.com/2013/frosh-survey/admissions.html) publishes self reported GRE and SAT scores of incoming students. While some have perfect, or near perfect, scores on both, there are tails, not very long, but tails none the less. There seems to be many more students with 4.0 GPAs than perfect scores on the SAT.
While GPA inflation likely exists, a [4.0 GPA is only a 93% average](http://www.collegeboard.com/html/academicTracker-howtoconvert.html) so is not a perfect score. This means you can in fact get a 4.0 GPA with B's (or even lower) in a handful of classes if you offset them by getting g A+'s in other classes. You can also get a 4.0 without ever getting a top grade of A+.
The SATs may also be inflated, but they are [standardized](https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-crit-reading-math-writing-2014.pdf). The mean score in each of the three categories is around 500/800 with a minimum scores of 200. Less than 1% get over a 780, and only about 5% get over a 700 in any one category. Presumably less than 5% have a composite score less than 2100/2400.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think you're comparing apples and oranges. Grade point average (GPA) is a reflection of a student's average academic performance across all their classes. It is not based on a single standardized test, and "maximum GPA" does not imply perfect test results.
Setting that aside, though, you're also running into a difference in grading philosophy. [This article](https://www.nuffic.nl/en/library/grading-systems-in-the-netherlands-the-united-states-and-the-united-kingdom.pdf/view) compares the grading systems in the US, UK, and Netherlands. Quoting from there:
>
> When the 1 through to 10 scale was officially introduced [in the Nethherlands] back to the late 19th
> century, it was decided that a 10 should only be awarded in cases of absolute perfection. Furthermore, as at the time it was felt to be almost blasphemous for mere mortals to be judging what constituted absolute perfection, a 10 was hardly ever awarded. A 9 was considered to be only a slightly less impossible goal to reach.
>
>
>
In contrast, getting a top mark of "A" in a US class only requires you to answer 90% of the exam questions correctly, and often accounts for things like attendance, class participation, and more. This is eminently achievable.
Grades in the US are often [normalized](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grading_on_a_curve), with the **top 10%** of students being awarded an "A" grade(1). In contrast, a 10/10 in the Netherlands represents the **top 0.1%** of students.
Based on the conversion tables in that article, I'd say a "maximum GPA" in the US would be roughly equivalent to an "8" in the Netherlands.
So I wouldn't say that the grades are *inflated* in the US, per se, just that they're defined differently.
(1) There is some evidence of true [grade inflation](http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2011/04/19/average-high-school-gpas-increased-since-1990) in the US in recent years, but I don't think that's relevant to the disparity between the US and the Netherlands systems.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: While this is not a proper answer to your question, it applies to the part regarding what happens when you want to compare grades between countries. Consider it an extended comment.
Non-standarization of grades is a huge source of unfairness, in particular in Europe where the common job market it atomized into many sub-systems (countries), each with their own long standing tradition of grading. I have first hand experience with the university grading systems in Spain, Italy and Ireland (so this does not apply to undergrad bachelors admissions, but perhaps masters and doctoral). I now work in a Finnish university but I am not familiar with how the grading is done.
In Spain the grading is 0-10, with 5 being a pass. Anyone scoring above 8 average would be rare. However a passing grade then translates non linearly to a 1-4 scale, where the number of 4s is actually limited per year and subject to the willingness of the teacher to give. What is more, every time you fail an exam this lowers your average, so if you fail once then get say a 6.5/10 on the next exam this will get you a 0.5/4 on the final grade.
In Italy the grading is 0-30 with 18 being a pass. However I observed in my one year in an Italian university that one can actually negotiate their grade with the teacher and if they're not happy simply repeat until they get a grade they're happy with. Any decent student will thus finish with averages above 26/30 and even higher averages in the 28s or 29s are not that uncommon.
In Ireland it matters whether you get "first class honors" or not, which I think in practice means getting above 7.5/10 average or so. First class honors will e.g. grant you access to a PhD program skipping the masters. Failing students is a bit regarded as "not nice" in Ireland, and as a matter of fact any good student putting some effort will finish with a first class degree.
The three systems above work in their respective countries because people understand how the grading is done and how that reflects on the student's abilities. Whether any of them is inflated is irrelevant within the country because the same bias applies to every student. The issue is when we try to compare students who come from different systems, in particular in the context of the unified European market. I myself had quite a bit of trouble with my admission to an Irish university for a PhD, since my grades were in the Spanish non-linear system. This meant that even if I was a strong student I was put on "probation" for a year so I could prove that I could get a PhD despite what my "poor" grades indicated.
I think a) standarization of grades or b) official homologation of grades taking into account the countries traditions and renormalization are in great need in Europe.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: An obvious reason for the exceptional degree of grade inflation in US high schools is that the public school system is extremely decentralized. Different local school systems are each funded not so much according to the number of students they have (as I imagine would be the case in a civilized country like the Netherlands) but according to the property values in their local community. This means that in any given area, neighboring school districts are in competition with each other. When there is a perception that a community has "good schools", more families will move there. This perception will in turn help to elevate property values, and therefore to increase the revenue base available to fund the schools.
Here is an interesting illustration from Farifax County in the state of Virginia, as [reported in Time magazine](http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1874266,00.html).
>
> Residents of the high-powered Washington suburb have been battling the school district's tough grading practices; chief among their complaints is that a score of 93% gets recorded as a lowly B+. After forming an official protest group called Fairgrade last year and goading the school board into voting on whether to ease the standards, parents marshaled 10,000 signatures online and on Jan. 22 gathered nearly 500 supporters to help plead their case. After two hours of debate, the school board passed a resolution, a move critics consider a defeat in the war on grade inflation.
>
>
>
[...]
>
> The vote is good news for local business leaders who have joined the Fairgrade effort, warning that families worried about their kids getting into good colleges may move out of the county if the school district doesn't change its grading system. Talk of a possible exodus killing off businesses and destroying property values sounds a tad melodramatic, but given the tanking market and ongoing credit crunch, it's no wonder people are trying to do everything they can to shore up the local economy.
>
>
>
So there you have it. The article points out that this is getting worse as the trend in university admissions is to emphasize grades more and standardized tests less. It says that "75 districts in 12 states have relaxed their grading standards since 2005." This wouldn't even be an option in most countries and if it were there would not be the same economic incentives to do it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I don't think you can conclude, at least based solely on the observation that universities are seeing more applicants with high GPAs than they can admit, that the problem is grade inflation. Another possibility is that the effect is due to students applying to so many colleges. According to [this survey](http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/nyregion/applications-by-the-dozen-as-anxious-students-hedge-college-bets.html?_r=0), the number of students applying to at least 7 colleges has tripled since 1990. There are a number of potential causes for this, but that discussion is probably out of scope for the discussion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: By "grade inflation," I think you are really asking why are the grading scales so different. I don't have much supporting evidence for this, but I suspect a large part of it is due to the American individualistic and consumer culture, with a penchant for heaping praise and awards on students (see also [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/41264/19607), and the first link in username_3's answer) and being effusive in recommendation letters. The consumer culture part is related to economic incentives mentioned in username_5's answer.
Another factor to consider, which I don't think has been mentioned before, is that the student population is **extremely heterogeneous**. I suspect there was a historical trend of higher grade averages in US than Europe even when the US population was not as varied as it is now, but I think the diversity in population (e.g., many students who don't speak English as a first language, or have supportive homes) pushes schools and teachers to be more "forgiving" with grades to give the kids with disadvantages more encouragement and a better chance to catch up. (This is not to suggest US academics is even close to being equal opportunity, sadly.)
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/24
| 442
| 1,839
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently a postdoc in a US University (I'm French).
I am in between astrophysics and computer science.
My work is currently funded by NSF (work related to the Dark Energy Survey).
Are there some program/award/grant out there I could apply to, to gain some autonomy (additional funding I could use in the way I want to for travel expenses/collaborations/organizing workshop).
Because my problem is that most program I've found are either for PhD students or for professors. What about post-docs?<issue_comment>username_1: Due to their (traditionally) short terms, postdocs are usually limited in what they can apply for. There are [NSF Postdoctoral Fellowhips](https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5291) in your area, as well as almost every other area NSF funds. The other funding agencies in the US (DoE, NIH, etc.) also have fellowships available for postdocs. You should search the Internet more carefully for other opportunities.
That being said, whatever grant is funding your work almost certainly has travel funding included in it. Have you talked with your supervisor or PI about the kind of travel you'd like to do? You should.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Addressing the organization part of your question, there are NSF grants specifically targeted to support conference and workshop organization. To get one of those, you will likely need support from your PI, but these can be fairly fast and relatively easy to get.
An easier and cheaper way to organize workshops in many cases, however, is to attach them to an existing large event in your field. This has the advantage that it can be easier to get the people you want to come, because they are likely to already be coming to the main event, and often the costs are covered entirely by the main event.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/24
| 2,598
| 10,918
|
<issue_start>username_0: As stated by the title, I want to know what a researcher in his early career, i.e., having not had any graduated PhD student yet, can do to attract good candidates. The reason I am asking this question is because PhD applicants usually look for supervisors who have many successful PhD students.<issue_comment>username_1: Presuming you have some way to fund their work, and you have positions to offer, I suggest you start by recruiting bright undergrads from your upper-division courses. Get them involved in your research before they graduate. Offer them positions as PhD students before they apply everywhere else\*. I was so excited by my PhD supervisor's work (our work really), the lab environment, and the place where I was living, that I didn't want to apply anywhere but where I already was.
Some people will object that students should move around between their undergrad and PhD, and there's some merit to these arguments, but if you have funding and can't recruit, you may want to think outside the box a bit. If you don't have any money, or your department won't give you any positions (or whatever the system is at your university), get some!
If you want to recruit from outside, keep publishing. Publish in the best places you can. Become a hot shot. Advertise openings on your website and at the end of your conference talks (if that's acceptable in your field). Be aggressive about finding good students.
\*: If they do want to apply elsewhere, write them the best letter you can and wish them well. Maybe they'll stay anyway. Don't be one of those profs with a reputation for trying to control the lives of your students by refusing to write recommendation letters!
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Adding to [username_1's excellent answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/44161/4140):
Become known to other professors. Bright undergrads who may want to switch places for their graduate studies may ask their professors for good places... so be known to those professors so they can recommend you! (After all, few undergrads already have enough of an overview of the field to know an up-and-coming junior professor.)
Collaborate with people outside your institution. Become active in your scientific organization. Volunteer for program committees. Write good reviews. Offer to review for other things than journals/conferences, e.g., if a conference you attend awards travel grants to students.
Yes, all this is a lot of work, especially since you have your career to jump-start. But to be honest, forging connections *now* may be a much better investment of your time in the long run than yet another paper - both to attract bright grad students and in other respects.
---
EDIT: so, the above addresses attracting grad students "in general". What about attracting *good* grad students?
First, get *enough* applicants. If you have three applications for every position you can fund, you have the luxury of picking the best applicant. Fill your [sales funnel](http://www.marsdd.com/mars-library/stages-of-the-sales-funnel/) with enough candidates!
Second, see the above advice. Once someone approaches you and says you were recommended by professor so-and-so, you can deduce something, at least to some degree. If you know that so-and-so is good in his field and you have a good relationship with him, you likely can trust the candidate that so-and-so sent your way not to be a total loss. It makes sense for someone at the early stages of his career to give a little more weight to this kind of signal than later on, after you have had your share of Ph.D. students. You will likely end up with some better, some worse students over the course of your career, and you will learn what to look out for in a candidate - but you don't have that kind of experience yet.
Bottom line: work on your relationships.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Adding to Bill and Stephan's answers. There are many good PhD students who aren't just looking for advisers with massive reputations. Some sense of personal connection can go a long way in attracting students. Volunteer to teach introductory level grad courses and commit yourself to being responsive to your students. You will develop a following of people willing to pass up the opportunity to work with a more prestigious adviser for an adviser that has demonstrated a commitment to his students.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: All the answers above are good, but there is one more important thing I have learned from observing the woes of some colleagues who need graduate students. [Good ones, of course; no one that I know is actively seeking not-so-good ones!]
Good research! Ph.D. students are attracted to good and interesting topics. I have a colleague who thinks he is doing wonderful work but privately many colleagues are not surprised he's having trouble attracting students. Masters students have different goals and shorter timelines.
In my experience ultimately it has less to do with personality (exceptions, of course) and / or the stage of career you're at (early, mid or late). Students might come visit for the decor, the ambience, the attractive appetizers, but they stay only for the main course!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I joined a new advisor's lab; he was in his second year as a PI when I joined, and there was only one other graduate student. I am now in my third year and we have six graduate students, one postdoc, and potentially three new postdocs on the way. We have done very well in terms of funding so far. The plural of anecdote is not data, but perhaps this will be of some help. I nearly joined a more established professor's lab, but decided to go with the new professor for these reasons, not necessarily in any order:
* Other faculty spoke highly of him.
* Older graduate students who had taken a class from him spoke very highly of him.
* The prospect of helping to build a new lab excited me.
* He was *excited* about his research.
* He had several interesting research projects available, with clear and understandable 3-minute summaries of each.
* He comes across as intelligent, capable, passionate, kind.
* In my first interaction with him, he handed me a paper containing the description of an experiment, and asked me to draw out the physical diagrams of how the system should respond to the experiment. He then pushed and challenged me for about two hours, and I wound up learning a lot. This gave me the impression that he would push me to become the best scientist I could be, while aiming to teach me along the way. I haven't been disappointed.
* I wasn't worried about depth of knowledge after this interaction, but he went out of his way to mention that as a member of a new lab, I would be forced to gain a great breadth of knowledge and skills, as well. This was a plus for me.
* The senior graduate student assured me that it was incredibly easy to schedule one-on-one time with the advisor, but that he did not micromanage.
Students interested in working for a new advisor will be looking for, among other things, a challenge, greater personal attention from their advisor, and interesting research. You might during the first few years feel a lot of anxiety about publishing, but you should hopefully be able to keep that anxiety in check to allow your students to grow and climb the learning curve for the first few years before putting them under too much undue pressure. You don't want to earn the reputation of the nervous overly-demanding associate professor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: From the perspective someone who recently went through the PhD application process, I'd say that the best way to recruit good PhD students is to *recruit* good PhD students.
While I make no judgment as to whether or not I fall in the "good PhD student" set, I can say that my experience (and from what I've heard--most people's experiences are) was extremely opaque. The best way to convince someone to work with you is to make them feel like *you* want to work with *them*. There's nothing wrong with reaching out to students whose applications look promising in advance. In fact, most of the faculty I heard from before decisions were younger faculty. They often arranged informal Skype conversations with them and any current students they had, and they brainstormed interesting ideas for research projects that met our mutual interests. As an applicant, this made those groups much more appealing, as it seemed that the professors were excited to work *with* me rather than me work *for* them.
Then again, this answer is more specific to the US system where departments tend to make decisions about candidates rather than specific professors. I believe in Europe it's a bit different.
I would also say that if you're concerned about students choosing more established professors over you, maybe approach this the way some borderline applicants do: find the diamonds in the rough. That is, find the students that might be passed over by more prestigious/experience professors for one reason or another, but have some promise to them. This is kind of a hard thing to quantify, but sometimes a raw applicant can become your best PhD student (and similarly a new/young professor can be the best advisor).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Well, the other way of looking at it would be the 'Theory Y' approach.
Instead of thinking 'what do I need to do to attract good PhD students', think 'what do I need to do to GROW good PhD students?'
Consider that how someone comes to you is relatively insignificant compared to what you can make them in five years. (especially at typical PhD age)
I knew a guy who was an executive at one of the largest companies in the country, and he told me "give me a rag-tag bunch of misfits, a project, and nine months, and I'll give experts, specialists, and a completed project"
I think the important thing is you have to have people that are willing to change, even if it means loosing face.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Given my scholarship I was relatively free to choose my PhD supervisor. What drew me to my current supervisor, is that although he is young he has an awesome **publication list**! this gave me the impression that
* he is a successful researcher,
* his work meets the standards of top conferences in our field and
* I'll learn a lot from him.
These three points were enough to make me go through a long and risky procedure with my scholarship provider, in order to transfer to my current supervisor's department. It all worked well and indeed I am thankful that I work with him now.
So I would say, focus on advertising yourself and your work. His personal homepage was always updated with his most recent projects and publications, his name appeared everywhere when I searched for his research area, and his work was cited a lot.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/24
| 801
| 3,614
|
<issue_start>username_0: We have had a couple of papers rejected from conferences quite a while ago, and we now would like to post them in arXiv. We are considering indicating on the paper which conference it was rejected from, mostly to state when the paper was actually written (we are also writing a new paper with additional results). Is this an acceptable practice?<issue_comment>username_1: What would be the purpose to the reader to state which conference it was rejected by? If the idea of a paper is to transmit information to a reader, then what you write should be guided by this fundamental principle, and everything that is not relevant to the reader should be omitted.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: No, you should not do that. Rejections are not to be advertised. Everyone who will read the paper will be prejudiced against it and you simply do not want that. After all, many papers are initially rejected before being accepted at a suitable venue. You want other people to know when your work got finally accepted and not the other way around.
If you want to establish the initial date of the paper, next time I would suggest to upload immediately after rejection and after addressing the reviewers' comment that lead to your rejection. This way, you have a better paper uploaded, you establish priority before submitting to the next conference and you can cite your work in subsequent publications.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There's no real reason why you *can't*. Unless the conference organizers explicitly asked you to agree to a nondisclosure agreement, which would be very surprising indeed, there's nothing stopping you from doing it. The conference organizers will probably be weirded out by it but little more.
There's also no reason why you *should*. Nothing sets negative expectations like you saying "Hi! Here's a paper that [respected academic committee] found unsatisfying." It sets a negative tone that will be very hard to undo with the paper, for no benefit at all.
Think instead of *why* you want to do this. Is it to associate the paper with the conference? That will simply not work. Is it to indicate the sort of area you think the paper belongs to? There's a much better way: say it directly, most importantly by your choice of arXiv category, keywords, and abstract.
If what you want is to indicate when the paper was written, simply say that! Add a single line, in small font, below the abstract (or a comment to the arXiv submission) saying
>
> This paper was written on -----, with minor revisions before the arXiv submission on -----.
>
>
>
If you ever need to actually prove this, say, because of a priority dispute, you can then contact the conference so they can confirm it.
If what you want is some form of authoritative datestamp on the date the manuscript was written, it won't work and it is not the right metric anyway. It is not a credible way to establish priority as it is still your say-so; very little other than confirmation from the conference will really convince outsiders that your claim is in fact true.
More importantly, the date that really matters for the academic community is the date the manuscript was made public. If you write a result but then sit on it for a year, no one can make use of that result. As far as other researchers go, the result does not exist until you upload it, so even if you can prove that you discovered independently from some other group that published before you uploaded but after you wrote the manuscript, they still get the credit because they made the result available.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/24
| 800
| 3,559
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've read that after you "pass" the first year of your Ph.D.program you can either continue normally or stop and get a masters degree.
What procedure should one follow in the latter case? Do you get any official document (diploma, certificate) and if so, does this document have any value?<issue_comment>username_1: What would be the purpose to the reader to state which conference it was rejected by? If the idea of a paper is to transmit information to a reader, then what you write should be guided by this fundamental principle, and everything that is not relevant to the reader should be omitted.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: No, you should not do that. Rejections are not to be advertised. Everyone who will read the paper will be prejudiced against it and you simply do not want that. After all, many papers are initially rejected before being accepted at a suitable venue. You want other people to know when your work got finally accepted and not the other way around.
If you want to establish the initial date of the paper, next time I would suggest to upload immediately after rejection and after addressing the reviewers' comment that lead to your rejection. This way, you have a better paper uploaded, you establish priority before submitting to the next conference and you can cite your work in subsequent publications.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There's no real reason why you *can't*. Unless the conference organizers explicitly asked you to agree to a nondisclosure agreement, which would be very surprising indeed, there's nothing stopping you from doing it. The conference organizers will probably be weirded out by it but little more.
There's also no reason why you *should*. Nothing sets negative expectations like you saying "Hi! Here's a paper that [respected academic committee] found unsatisfying." It sets a negative tone that will be very hard to undo with the paper, for no benefit at all.
Think instead of *why* you want to do this. Is it to associate the paper with the conference? That will simply not work. Is it to indicate the sort of area you think the paper belongs to? There's a much better way: say it directly, most importantly by your choice of arXiv category, keywords, and abstract.
If what you want is to indicate when the paper was written, simply say that! Add a single line, in small font, below the abstract (or a comment to the arXiv submission) saying
>
> This paper was written on -----, with minor revisions before the arXiv submission on -----.
>
>
>
If you ever need to actually prove this, say, because of a priority dispute, you can then contact the conference so they can confirm it.
If what you want is some form of authoritative datestamp on the date the manuscript was written, it won't work and it is not the right metric anyway. It is not a credible way to establish priority as it is still your say-so; very little other than confirmation from the conference will really convince outsiders that your claim is in fact true.
More importantly, the date that really matters for the academic community is the date the manuscript was made public. If you write a result but then sit on it for a year, no one can make use of that result. As far as other researchers go, the result does not exist until you upload it, so even if you can prove that you discovered independently from some other group that published before you uploaded but after you wrote the manuscript, they still get the credit because they made the result available.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/25
| 3,155
| 13,396
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a high school student so I don't know much about academia, but I would like to clear up some confusion I have over research in mathematics. Please excuse my naivite/ignorance on this topic.
I get the impression that mathematics research at the graduate and post-doc level is hard. It could take months of getting nowhere before you make some progress on a problem, and depending on how good you are and the difficulty level of the problem, you could go an entire year without publishing any papers. I get the impression that proving interesting or important results is even harder and is really only for the best - the real mathematicians. By important I mean results that will be noticeably useful to other researchers in the field.
I am guessing that not every person who gets a PhD and goes into research is good enough to prove interesting or important results, and I'm guessing that the percentage of PhD's who go into research and who will become successful mathematicians is less than 50%. I'm wondering what do these people do? If they can't publish enough papers and they aren't successful in solving any problems, they can't continue like this forever right? I mean at some point the university they are employed by will reject them? Do these people leave academia entirely and go into industry, or switch fields into physics or something like that?
Please let me know if my understanding is correct.<issue_comment>username_1: Many people who complete PhD's in mathematics end up leaving academia within a few years after completing the degree. Many others settle into teaching oriented positions at community colleges, four year colleges and regional comprehensive universities where they typically end up publishing little or no research. A small percentage of all PhD's in mathematics end up as tenured faculty in research universities (much less than 20%) and even among these mathematicians at research universities there is huge variability in research productivity (e.g. as measured by papers published per year) and impact (e.g. as measured by citations of these papers.)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: It's true that not every person who gets a PhD has a successful academic research career, but I want to emphasize that that is different from being a successful mathematician. Many people who get PhDs want to go to work in industry/govt or some more applied field, and many people who get PhDs want to focus primarily on teaching. This does not mean they are automatically not successful, or couldn't be successful academic research mathematicians if they wanted to. (I know many very talented researchers who have gone to industry, or into teaching--not because they couldn't do research, but because they preferred something else--and ended up quite happy. Occasionally people will come back to academic research also.)
Incidentally, there is some survey data on jobs PhD's get, e.g., [The Annual Survey of the Mathematical Sciences](http://www.ams.org/profession/data/annual-survey/2013Survey-NewDoctorates-Report). For instance, Table E.6 says in 2012 848 new PhDs took academic positions and 456 took govt/business/industry positions. This is out of 1843 PhDs awarded with about 9% unknown employment status and 4-5% unemployed at the time. (**Edited:** According to Table E.7, 600 of those academic positions are postdocs, not tenure-track, but those on the research track will almost certainly do a postdoc first.) So it may be that a majority of PhDs are successful in a broader sense (I don't know about long-term data or job fulfillment).
PS I know this isn't the kind of answer you were looking for, but you can see Brian's answer for that. I just wanted to clear up a possible misconception.
**Added:** I just saw [this data](http://www.ams.org/notices/201505/rnoti-p533.pdf) in the most recent Notices issue, which says that recently a little recently there have been about 850/year tenure-track positions filled in the US in math or stat/biostat. This suggests most people who stay in academia right after their PhD have a good chance a getting a permanent position.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: A lot depends on what you consider to be interesting or important results. A lot of research gets used by others and could be reasonably called noticeably useful to other researchers. Often there will be several people working in a subfield of math and they will use each others' work in various respects. Other times there will be a hot field with a lot of things to discover, and many mathematicians will be picking up the "low-hanging fruit" and publishing results that will be used. It is still true that key developments that become major tools for other mathematicians are usually done by leading mathematicians, sometimes in collaboration with students or non-leading mathematicians, but this is fully consistent with the above.
As for the fate of mathematicians who don't become research mathematicians.. there are thousands of colleges in the US that need professors and most of them don't really emphasize research. Many also go into industry, such as the NSA or government labs. Some become actuaries and others go into finance. Others become computer programmers and can end out being quite good at that. And there are various perhaps unexpected directions some choose to go in. For example, I know of not one but two who went to top-notch law schools and became lawyers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think this boils down to the question of how to become/be/stay successful in science.
First of all success can be defined in many ways. If we just disregard the field of mathematics here for a second and look at the whole natural science branch, being successful is always a difficult trade off between good science and quick and dirty publications.
Without a good portion of time investment, there will never be any good science down the line (You may get lucky and profit from the time your PI has spend on her/his field, formulating a genius thesis though, but that's just underlining the importance of time investment).
As a matter of fact, a good portion of basic ground breaking discoveries have already been made. As time/research goes by things get more and more complicated and intertwined. That is true for Math, Physics, Biology and Chemistry, as for any other field.
That does not mean that there are no new things that can be discovered, but the pool of new insights gets deeper and deeper as research goes on (solving one problem just opens a new space of many more new problems, harder to solve than the initial). If you want to publish new amazing research you have to stand on a lot of giant's shoulders, and being that far away from the ground makes the air dangerously thin.
New ideas are needed for new success stories.
Nowadays, these ideas are coming from inter-field communications (cross branch collaborations), where e.g. math talks to physics, taking insights from biology, which has borrowed from chemistry and so on. That again needs time.
IMHO, bottom line, it's very naive to assume a publishing rate stays the same, with the same astonishing impact, over time.
There has to be a slow down. So taking that as a measurement of success, as appealing as it may be, is flawed.
Luckily, everyone has to deal with this, and as a mathematician, assuming you love what you do, you have a very analytical brain, which is, to say the least, a good starting point for being "successful" in anything you do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: It should perhaps be noted that in mathematics there are a *lot* of problems to consider. If you're a high school student it perhaps does not feel this way to you, but it's really so (I know I didn't feel that way until about the time I was finishing my undergrad). As mathematics develops, new objects get defined - and new questions become possible.
In addition to *interesting* problems, there is also an endless supply of... other problems. Of course, there is no good definition of interesting, and it varies a lot depending on who you talk to.
In any case, there are much more problems than the really good mathematicians can hope to solve, so there is enough work for the others as well. There are even a lot of problems that the "experts" basically know how to solve, but they never really bothered (it would seem that those whose position is fairly secure care more about quality than quantity). There are many universities where people can get a fairly permanent (research or teaching) position without publishing ground-breaking research.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: in the past, a lot of maths phds who found that academia wasn't for them went into banking and became quantitative analysts or "quants". They then got paid several multiples of an academic salary.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: Having completed PhD, with or without a post doc, you are a trained mathematician.
Disregarding having found any new results, one should hopefully have the ability to understand existing results.
This means one can apply mathematics (as opposed to research applied mathematics) in a number of fields, be it banking, IT, defense or many other fields.
There is an additional key skill required: an ability to translate a real world problem into a mathematical format. This is in itself usually the most challenging part of being a working applied mathematician.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: <NAME> (a famous mathematician) has a good answer to this question. The following excerpt goes to the heart of the matter, and you should [read the whole post](https://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/does-one-have-to-be-a-genius-to-do-maths/):
>
> even if one dismisses the notion of genius, it is still the case that at any given point in time, some mathematicians are faster, more experienced, more knowledgeable, more efficient, more careful, or more creative than others. This does not imply, though, that only the “best” mathematicians should do mathematics; this is the common error of mistaking absolute advantage for comparative advantage. The number of interesting mathematical research areas and problems to work on is vast – far more than can be covered in detail just by the “best” mathematicians, and sometimes the set of tools or ideas that you have will find something that other good mathematicians have overlooked, especially given that even the greatest mathematicians still have weaknesses in some aspects of mathematical research. As long as you have education, interest, and a reasonable amount of talent, there will be some part of mathematics where you can make a solid and useful contribution.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_9: >
> I get the impression that mathematics research at the graduate and post-doc level is hard. It could take months of getting nowhere before you make some progress on a problem, and depending on how good you are and the difficulty level of the problem, you could go an entire year without publishing any papers. I get the impression that proving interesting or important results is even harder and is really only for the best - the real mathematicians. By important I mean results that will be noticeably useful to other researchers in the field.
>
>
>
To a great extent, one could say that this is true in any of the STEM fields.
It is not true of some of the social sciences. I have read some truly awful theses in the field of education. And those people got doctorates based on that drivel!
By the way, your description seems to me to fit pure math more precisely than applied math.
It is natural to feel some uncertainty -- will I be good enough? Will I cut the mustard?
Fortunately, the path from high school towards the PhD is one that can be adjusted each semester. It's not necessary to pick the exact path and then stick to it no matter what!
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: Very astute question from someone who at the time of asking it was only a high school student!
Mathematical research is indeed difficult, and even overcoming this rigor, there is a good percentage of chance that your work depends on. Being at the right place at the right time, making the right mental connections (possibly even before someone else has beaten you to the theorem), etc.
I have the perspective of someone who started out as an engineer in training, fell in love with pure mathematics, completed a Ph.D. at a very respectable public school, did not get a postdoctoral position, and ended up in a rather unenviable adjunct instructor position at a community college in Illinois. Six years and many minimum wage jobs later, I decided to go back to engineering, as it is a much more rewarding career, and to undergo post-math Ph.D. graduate-level training. In these six years, I worked on mathematics in places unusual under extreme hardship, even at times living in a vehicle, on (a) theorem(s). Ten years after I was introduced to the problem, I found a *partial* solution and feel very proud!.. albeit with less than $2000 in my bank account.
This is what happens if your research isn't there in time for an academic job and when you have a pathological obsession with proving theorems.
Whether you would like something like that, I don't know... but there is that "career path".
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/25
| 4,274
| 17,772
|
<issue_start>username_0: If you change your name, can you list both names as authors?
For example, consider a PhD student named <NAME> who after finishing his PhD undergoes a sex change and name change to <NAME> before starting a postdoc. After the sex change Jane continues to work on a project that she started as a PhD student. Assume that the authors on the resulting paper are the PhD advisor, the postdoc advisor and Jane/<NAME>. Can both Jane and John be listed? What happens if Jane never worked on the project, can she be the author or does it have to be John?<issue_comment>username_1: This would be a much more common situation if you just asked about name changes after marriage, which is a very common thing for women in the western world (at least). There are lots of strategies here, but some women choose to keep their "academic" name the same even if the name they use in the rest of the world changes. This keeps the continuity of their name for citation counting purposes, professional recognition, and other aspects of an academic career. Others choose not to change their name at all. And others just deal with the change. I don't think anyone puts both their names, and I don't think many journals would accept it.
If you search the internet, there's plenty of articles with advice and stories about what women who married between their first and subsequent publications did and should do.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This is indeed a weird question, though not an uninteresting one.
Fundamentally a name is a pointer to a person, of a formalized and official sort, but of course for every person there are multiple phrases that point to them. Any article byline gives a mapping to the set of objects named, and the idea that perhaps this function need not or should not be one-to-one is a very curious one. I don't know a general principle to invoke from which to deduce the "injectivity of authorial bylines", but multiple names pointing to the same person would be highly nonstandard and powerfully confusing to many.
I'm not sure what to make of the fact that your example of a name change is motivated by a sex change. Name changes are common occurrences for people of all genders, and the percentage of name changes which are motivated by issues of gender identity and/or sex changes is very small. The largest percentage is surely when people (not just women, though still more women than men) get married, and then comes people who have moved from one part of the world to another where their name is difficult to pronounce, written in a different alphabet, sounds like something undesirable in the language of their new home, and so forth. Also papers published in one language are often translated into another, with the effect that e.g. many Russian authors are known by several moderately different names in the anglophone academic community. Adding a clarifying note that say that multiple spellings point to the same person could be helpful. In [this recent preprint](http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.3055) the byline is "<NAME> (Zarkhin)", which is perhaps the closest thing I've seen to the practice you're asking about.
However, there are nuances in your question that suggest the sex change example is not accidental: you actually mean to consider deeper issues of personal identity. In other words, what if beyond changing their name, someone considers themself to actually be **a different person**? I get this for instance from
>
> What happens if Jane never worked on the project, can she be the author or does it have to be John?
>
>
>
The obvious answer is "What are you talking about? <NAME> and <NAME> are *the same person*. So of course Jane worked on the project. The fact that the name 'Jane' was not applied to this person while she was working on the project is totally irrelevant." However, it could be that Jane feels that she is really a different person from John. Maybe she arranges [illegally, perhaps; I don't know how this works] to get a new social security number and otherwise systematically denies and delinks her new identity from her old one. In that case it could be meaningful -- even critical -- to her that Jane didn't work on the project, rather John did. However, though Jane's perspective is a highly interesting one, it is not going to hold up in the practicalities of an academic career, as she presumably wants to regard John's training and credentials as her own. If she tries to make a CV of <NAME>'s work only, she is going to at best confuse everyone and more likely shoot herself in the foot.
It would be worth hearing from a transgendered academic [I am not one] for more nuances about this. My understanding is that the above exigencies essentially require them to explain carefully in their CV that they have changed their name from <NAME> to <NAME> and thus cannot professionally behave like they are two different people. If you are including the identity "<NAME> = <NAME>" anyway, then if it has deep personal significance to you to list yourself as <NAME> on a paper that you worked on while you were <NAME> even though you now sign all your papers <NAME>, you can make that choice (and certainly it is *your* choice: the idea of anyone else telling you what to do here is somewhere between cruel and absurd). What you cannot do is list both <NAME> and <NAME> as authors. Well, not unless you wish to be truly transgressive: perhaps there are some areas of academia in which the jarring, confusing nature of such a byline would be viewed positively.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Name changes are quite common among both sexes for reasons other than sex change or marriage. Apart from the reasons mentioned in the previous answers, I have come across people who have changed their name after a parental divorce, deciding to use the last name of the mother.
Irrespective of the reason for name change, the process I think would remain the same for all practical purposes. Definitely, there is no question of both names being included as that would establish John and Jane two different individuals, while in fact, they are the same person.
Additionally, while a footnote that explains the name change would suffice in a publication, I feel a copy of a legal document establishing the name change should be submitted to the journal. That would make the disclosure complete and would prove that John and Jane are the same person. In my country, usually an affidavit is done to legalize a name change. I'm not sure how it is is other countries, but I strongly feel some such document should be produced as evidence.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: **TL;DR**: A transgender woman is unlikely to want her dead name in a publication. You can safely assume Jane wants to publish under "Jane" and under no other name. In the unlikely event that this is wrong, she's not going to be upset about her co-author thinking she would like to publish under her real name.
---
Allow me to offer my perspective (sorry, I didn't see the question earlier). I no longer consider myself transgender, but I've "been there".
Please accept that there is no "John". Jane has been falsely imprisoned in a male gender role since birth. **Every time Jane is referred to by her dead name, she will think that she is not welcome, that people don't want her to exist, and she may even contemplate suicide.** (Every time I've asked a transgender person about suicide, they have described detailed plans for how they would kill themselves.)
If you insist on deadnaming her, don't be surprised if she dumps the project, and severs contact with you. Other possibilities are jumping in front of a train, or filing a complaint of discrimination. (If people did this to me, I would catch a taxi to the airport, move to a new city/country and start a new life/career outside of academia. I have organized my life so that I can do this at any moment. However, I'm fortunate to have found a work environment where this is not an issue, and I'm now a very loyal employee [unwilling to leave even if somewhere else offered me a far higher salary].)
The best analogy I've found to explain how deadnaming feels: **Imagine a husband referring to his wife by his ex-girlfriend's name, and then, when she gets angry, he tells her it's easier for him to refer to her by his ex's name, and that she's overreacting.** His wife was never that person. Jane was never that person either.
From most transgender peoples' perspective, there is no "sex change" (it's one of many misleading terms non-transgender people use to describe transgender people [other popular ones include "woman trapped in a man's body" (instead of "woman") and "preferred name" (instead of "name")]). There's possibly a moment of realization ("Huh. I'm a girl.") followed by negotiating a pathway to being accepted in society as one's true gender (or a sufficiently close approximation to make life liveable). Often this involves adopting a gender-appropriate name, which will help her fit in and be one of the girls. **Irrespective of which forms she's filled in, and irrespective of other people's opinions, Jane's name is Jane** (until she says otherwise).
Jane may undergo medical procedures to correct her bodily mismatches (which are very expensive, probably will be the most physically painful experiences in her life, and might make her incapable of having children). She endures this partly to stop people mistaking her for a man; to live as Jane in every aspect of her life. **Jane suffers greatly for the sake of being called Jane.**
Jane will also be aware that **if she refers to herself using her dead name, it gives others an excuse to follow suit**. And when others see people deadnaming her, they think it's okay too, and it grows out of control quickly. (For this reason, I *never* use my dead name. Anyone who uses it is doing so against my will---they are backstabbing me. I have both threatened to sue or file a human rights complaint against those who have used it against my will.)
Being transgender should also be considered in a medical context---**it's intimate and confidential, and not something she will want immortalized on permanent documents**. However, one medical aspect is important to be aware of here: the [real-life test](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-life_experience_%28transgender%29). International guidelines for treatment of transgender people require that patients live a life consistent with their stipulated gender (the phrase is "consistent, insistent, and persistent"). As such, **it's important for her to publish under the name "Jane" to access medical care**, which is probably more important to her than the publication itself. (As it was for me. As another example, I deliberately stood at the front of [this conference photo](http://sms.victoria.ac.nz/foswiki/pub/Events/ACCMCC/WebHome/accmcc-group.jpg) so I could later use it for the real-life test.)
With the above in mind, **the idea that Jane would want that other word on a publication is preposterous to me**. It would be a huge step backwards in life.
(*Caveat*: Transgender people are a diverse group, so there is no universal narrative.)
---
Some comments about username_2's answer:
* I'm not aware of a transgender person who considers themselves as a different person after transitioning (although they might use something along the lines of "the person I was" metaphorically). The typical transgender narrative is that they are *affirming* their gender; something along the lines of "I was always a girl, but was mistaken for a boy at birth". Some transgender people actually consider themselves as a different gender than prior to transitioning (which might be because of different interpretations of the word "gender"), but not a different person.
* The ability to correct one's documents varies from document to document, state to state, country to country, and fluctuates with who's running the country/state you were born in, live in, or are a citizen of. While messy, it's perfectly legal. Keep in mind, however:
+ Transgender people tend to value who someone is, rather than what's written on documents, and
+ There's also no such thing as e.g. "legally a woman": in a court of law, you are whatever the judge says you are. Outside of a court of law, it's ordinary for transgender people to have mismatches between their gender, driver's licence, passport, and birth certificate.
[I find it amusing when lawmakers talk about how simple it is to tell who's a man and who's a woman, then proceed to propose laws with definitions of "man" and "woman" inconsistent with the definitions in laws proposed by other lawmakers who also talk about how simple it is to tell who's a man and who's a woman. (99% of the time it is easy, and these definitions are consistent, but there's some exceptions, and this is what transgender people are---the exceptions.)]
* Transgender people often avoid transitioning until the point where they become suicidal, where the choice becomes "transition or kill myself". **They have no choice but to accept the consequences of transitioning, no matter how severe.** They have likely accepted a host of negatives to live an authentic life, including a constant fear of being physically attacked, being arrested arbitrarily (and being raped in a gender-mismatched jail [along with [forced prostitution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_people_in_prison#Physical_and_sexual_abuse)]), being rejected by their families and religious groups, becoming homeless and having to turn to sex work to survive, unwanted sexual advances (trans people are often considered fetish objects, rather than human beings), and so on. **Jane is probably unconcerned other people's momentary confusion about which papers she's authored**.
**By transitioning, Jane has accepted a lower chance at getting a job, and a lower salary if she does get it, all to live an authentic life.** Her identity (who she is as a person) is more valuable to her than her career. Some of my stories:
+ I'm fairly sure I was turned down for a job for no other reason than my gender. The rejection letter was inaccurate, and I was even told I could not even give a seminar at that institution. While prior to transitioning, the professor would email me and be happy for me to visit (where I once gave a seminar), they have not returned my emails in about 3 years.
+ I was accepted for some short-term contract work. Admin requested my documents, but since they weren't corrected at that stage, I refused to supply them citing privacy reasons. They said that if I didn't supply the documents, I would be given a "without PhD qualifications" salary, to which I agreed explaining that my privacy was more important to me than money, but they eventually put me on the "with PhD qualifications" salary anyway.
+ My work under my dead name is listed on separate MathSciNet, Google Scholar, math.SE, etc., pages.
+ I had two (or maybe three?) papers in the "minor revisions" stage when I transitioned. It took me something like six months to actually make those changes. As the corresponding author of one paper, this is what I wrote to the journal editor:
>
> I must apologize about this, as the delay [was] caused largely by myself (not my co-authors) due to personal reasons (which will be apparent from my change of name).
>
>
> I've attached the relevant documents to this email. Please let me know if there's anything else required. Also please forgive me for not using the [submission system] to respond; I do not wish to use that account.
>
>
>
The editor asked me to create a new account, which I did, and the paper was transferred there. Noone said anything about the name.
+ I had a grant under my dead name. After transitioning, I claimed reimbursement for conference travel on that grant, and I was asked for proof of the change of name (a "linking document"), which I refused citing privacy reasons and told them not to worry about the reimbursement. They apologized for asking, and reimbursed me without the document.**There's workarounds in a lot of instances**. It's not as bad as you might think. E.g. I've been publishing a lot recently, attempting to bury my dead-name publications; when applying for a job, I first email someone on the panel who I know from conferences; on my CV and website, I list surnames only; and here's a snippet from an email to someone I'll visit next week, who previously didn't know about my transition:
>
> Hi [collaborator],
>
>
> Hopefully you remember me (and can figure out
> who this is---perhaps ask [another collaborator] if there's any
> confusion).
>
>
> Anyway, I'm thinking of going to the Design Theory conference in
> Istanbul... [snip]
>
>
> Many thanks,
>
>
> <NAME>
>
>
>
Many people have no difficulty with this. I'm starting to get emails about papers published under my dead name, but addressed to me. Journal editors are somehow still sending me referee requests. I've had two professors say they would write me letters of recommendation, which I've actually had to turn down (I guess they perceived me as having difficulty obtaining these).
And in response to some of the comments:
* The idea of adding a footnote "previously known as <NAME>" is just as preposterous to me as adding a dead name co-author (I would sooner write "I have genital herpes" as a footnote than my equivalent).
* "If Jane didn't work on the project as Jane..." "What if, for example, <NAME>'s work on this project..." There is only Jane; there is only Jane's work. Please try to stop clinging onto the imaginary person, and see the real person.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/04/25
| 735
| 3,103
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been accepted into Cornell for M.Eng in Biomedical Engineering. I had originally applied for an MS but since they've stopped enrolling students for MS I got into M.Eng which is an industry oriented course. I would like to get a PhD eventually in the field. Will going for an industry oriented course (M.Eng) over a research course end my hopes of getting a good PhD admit?<issue_comment>username_1: In the United States, the distinction between MS and M.Eng is not terribly large. An MS is typically a somewhat more "heavy" course than an M.Eng, but the distinction is unlikely to matter to any significant degree for US Ph.D. admissions.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally speaking, the main difference between an M.Eng and an M.S. is in research. An M.Eng is usually a course-based degree and usually does not involve any research. There is often some sort of "project" course which students will be required to take for credit, but that is still far from research.
An M.S would usually involve a research project and thesis, and it would give you exposure to the type of work a PhD student would be doing. That being said, many schools also offer course-based M.S. programs, so the name of the degree does not really mean much.
I would not recommend enrolling in an M.Eng program if you wish to study for PhD. In the U.S. in many schools having a master's degree is not a requirement for getting into a PhD program. I would advise you to inquire whether it's possible to be admitted to the PhD program at Cornell instead of the M.Eng.
For schools, the advantage of admitting students without master's degrees to PhD programs is that they will be around longer and probably have more time to do good work. In the case that the student doesn't quite meet up to their expectations, the can arrange for the student to leave with a M.S. halfway through the program. This to some extent compensates for the risk involved in admitting an undergrad (since they will likely not have much research experience).
M.S. students on the other hand have research experience. They have also written a thesis and possibly some papers. This gives the admission committee better insight into the applicants capabilities. Furthermore, a student with an M.S. degree will likely need less time to get started on their research and will not need to take as many courses, so they will probably hit the ground running once they enter the graduate program.
A student with an M.Eng degree will have a shorter PhD than the students coming in with B.S. degrees but will not have the experience the students with M.S. degrees have. So they will be at a disadvantage compared to both groups. Because of this admission to a "top 10" school would be a bit more difficult with an M.Eng degree.
Another thing to consider is that if your goal is a top 10 school, many of them give priority for PhD admission to students already pursuing M.S. degrees at their school. These are typically the schools which require master's degrees for PhD admission (such as Stanford and MIT).
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/25
| 800
| 3,015
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the U.S., colleges typically don't use entrance exams to select students. For test results they rely instead on standardized tests like the SAT or ACT. I heard that the top technical math/science schools in Russia administer entrance exams which are similar to math Olympiads. I am wondering: is this a Russian thing or do universities in other countries use difficult problem-solving/Olympiad tests like this?<issue_comment>username_1: Another bit of anedoctal evidence from my experience: in Italy, the [Scuola Normale Superiore](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scuola_Normale_Superiore_di_Pisa) (a very highly-rated honors boarding college for the hard sciences and the humanities) uses [Olympiad-like problems](http://www.sns.it/didattica/ammissione_ordinario/proveesame/) for its admission tests in mathematics and physics for bachelor and master students.
Up to a few years ago, admissions to the university-funded PhD positions in mathematics in many Italian universities also required solving Putnam-style exercises. [Example 1](https://www.math.unifi.it/node/56) [Example 2](http://www.unipi.it/studenti/offerta/dottorat/test/index.htm).
*(All problems in the links are in Italian, sorry for that).*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In Japan, many universities have their own entrance exams. For the entrance exams for mathematics that I've seen, there are several challenging problems (maybe about 5) to be solved in about 2-3 hours. For instance, [here is a recent exam from Tokyo University](http://www.u-tokyo.ac.jp/content/400010479.pdf) (this is the math exam for science students--humanities students get a different exam). If you're a bit rusty on your Japanese, it's 2.5 hours for 6 problems.
Entrance exams in other east Asian countries are reputedly difficult also, but I haven't seen those exams to compare. Maybe someone else can comment on that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Actually, today's Russian entrance exams are quite as standardized as in many places abroad. Besides this, state exam in mathematics not only contains the part, filled with test questions, but also staffed with an extra one,
where contestants are required to write down all the solutions in details. It's not an obligatory - it's possible to pass the exam without solving this part, but it's impossible to gain a result, which would be sufficient to be accepted to the undergraduate programs in technical universities.
Moreover, regarding olympiads, for the last years some universities tend to organise their own olympiads, results of which are always taken into accout in the process of application. In most cases, the contests' problems looks like classical entrance exam ones, which inherited traditions from the past times. Although, some olympiads enable
contestants to solve difficult problems( IMO style), which require a strong background and sufficient level of training. (such as Moscow Mathematical Olympiad or the Russian Mathematical Olympiad).
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/25
| 767
| 3,124
|
<issue_start>username_0: The [*Manager Tools* and *Career Tools* series of podcasts](https://www.manager-tools.com/podcasts) are industry-oriented, but I find great value in them as I retool for an academic career. I was never a manager in my industry career, but the communication skills and practical understanding of organizations imparted are gold.
For example, my adviser does regular 1:1s with his students and places a big emphasis on giving and receiving feedback, both *MT* fundamentals. Some other concepts apply less directly--for example, delegation of tasks as project leader where no one is my actual "direct report". Academic politics differ from industry politics, but fundamental principles (relationship power!) carry over.
It makes me wonder if there's some podcast series or (only slightly less desirable) Web site to help academics improve communications and ability to navigate organizational politics. I'll see what I find with [obvious Google searches](https://www.google.com/search?q=communication%20skills%20for%20academics) but I wonder if anyone out there has some favorites to recommend.<issue_comment>username_1: Most academics don't bother with this type of stuff because they don't care. Research is the number one priority and who has time to listen to a podcast that isn't a relevant talk about their research where they can ask a question that shows how smart they are.
The only people who care about politics and management styles are the few who are looking to move into the Administrative side. Perhaps there is someone who wastes time looking up how to be a good dean. Or maybe I should say how to be the type of Dean that the Provost wants you to be.
You should check out the Chronicle for articles on such stuff. I'm not sure if they have podcasts. <http://chronicle.com>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I spent a little while searching around various podcast directories for something like this, and came up blank. I suspect the main cause is that running a lab is really not that much different from running any other group of people, and the difference between PIs/advisors and managers really isn't that big. Because of that, anyone looking for podcasts on running a lab can look to any of a number of management podcasts and follow the advice there. If you're a *bad* advisor, you don't care anyways, so you're not looking for advice.
That said, I was surprised that I wasn't able to find *any* podcasts focusing on being an academic, rather than about the topic of academia itself. (I did find [this one episode](http://teachinginhighered.com/podcast/practical-productivity-in-academia-podcast/) of [this university-level teaching podcast](http://teachinginhighered.com/), but that seems to have been a one-off episode.) Interestingly enough, [someone recently posted a very similar question on reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/academia/comments/3balbk/looking_for_bookspodcastsother_media_on/), with no good answers other than "Check out [chronicle.com](http://chronicle.com)." I'm starting to suspect that the answer to your original question is "no".
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/25
| 1,822
| 7,885
|
<issue_start>username_0: My question has to do with whether my responsibilities as a reviewer also includes copyediting duties.
I am in the midst of reviewing a manuscript for a mid-tier applied health sciences journal. While the topic is potentially important, the manuscript is poorly written and the methods used were simply inadequate to answer the research question. The manuscript read like a first draft, rather than something that has undergone some degree of polishing and internal review before being sent out to the journal. Given a manuscript laden with spelling and grammatical errors, awkward sentence construction, and incomplete ideas, how detailed should reviews be for very bad manuscripts? Is it my job to "copyedit" (correct the grammar, spelling, etc.) the manuscript, or should my constructive criticism be focused on improving the big picture issues, such as:
* Whether the authors convinced me that the study was timely or necessary. (No.)
* Whether the methods were appropriate for the research question. (No.)
* Whether the authors' conclusions were supported by the data they presented. (No.)
My annotated hard copy of the manuscript is full of comments in the margins about spelling errors and awkward sentences, which can be found every 2 or 3 sentences. I am of course more than happy to put in the review, but at the same time, I do not want to "embarrass" the authors by essentially saying that they do not know how to write.
I am curious to hear others' experiences with bad manuscripts and how they have handled them.<issue_comment>username_1: I view my job as a reviewer to be about triage and the "first order" issues with the manuscript. Thus, for a very good manuscript, I will point out minor copy-editing issues, because those are the first-order issues remaining. For a not-so-good manuscript, I will note if the manuscript needs language editing but focus on the scientific issues instead, because any specifics of copyediting are likely to be obsoleted in any case by the larger repairs that are necessary.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I do not bother with detailed comments about writing *unless* there is reasonable hope that the submission could be made publishable. Even then, the main reason to include comments about writing is to make clear to the author to what extent the paper is unintelligible as written. Although it is (in some fields) traditional to list all of the punctuation, grammar and spelling errors, this is a waste of your time. I've frequently had to give very detailed comments on writing because the author had valuable material that should be made available, but they had no idea how to communicate effectively. In those instances where I've understood the point, I will take the time to explain why A is a better way to put it than B. But if the venue has a single-revision policy and the paper is a clear reject, then there is little point, unless you are encouraging the author to try again with a different journal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Here are some intuitive thoughts:
* No, no one expects you to copyedit
* Your primary duty is to help protect the integrity of literature in your field. Therefore, as username_2 suggested, if the paper is hopeless, there's nothing there that should occupy a lot of your time.
* However, as a good citizen of your scholarly community, it would be good to "pay it forward" by giving some sort of actionable feedback that will help the authors to improve not just this paper but in general.
So, my recommendation would be to give *brief*, actionable feedback (maybe one or two paragraphs), focused on the biggest shortcomings that could be corrected in the authors' future work. A sentence or two for each of your bullet points would be quite adequate.
Wise authors will heed your terse feedback and improve; other authors don't care, so don't benefit from the attention you're giving them.
**Meta-point**: If you're marking up the hard copy as much as you say, and you're not the authors' English composition instructor, then you're also not using your time optimally.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: By the time that an article arrives for peer-review, I've come to expect that it's been thoroughly edited by the authors. If it hasn't — and this is especially true considering that you're offering your time freely as a reviewer — comment that the manuscript, as it stands, needs major linguistic fine-tuning in the relevant sections, and suggest that authors re-submit once they've ironed those out. That way, you don't waste your time on work you really oughtn't be doing (I agree with username_3's reply, here), and are streamlining the process by giving a quick reply.
I've spent time working in both academia, and for a service which helps foreign researchers get their manuscripts ready for publication in English journals (we've also had people send in other academic manuscripts, just for general edits). It was pretty common to have academics reach out to us to help edit their work after receiving a "you should consult a scientific publication editing service" comment from the peer-reviewers. Most of the time these comments would also include a critique of the methodology/analyses/etc., but I don't think that you're obligated to do so if the writing is so poor that you're struggling to understand what's going on.
Lest this read like a sly advertisement, the editing job sucked, and I hated doing such mind-numbing garbage on the daily; unfortunately, that was my job, and I had to do it. As a reviewer, you don't have to. There are enough problems with the academic publishing system without making peer-reviewers play copy editor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I stopped pointing out spelling and grammar errors midway through grad school. These days I'll give a one-sentence summary of the state of the writing, with an exhortation to do a thorough editing pass if necessary.
I'll make exceptions for errors that critically affect the science presented in the paper or the conclusions, such as
* typos in mathematical formulas;
* sentences that say the opposite of what the authors likely meant;
* technical terms that have been misused;
etc.
If a paper is unintelligible I will carefully read it twice (in case later parts of the paper clarify earlier sections) before giving up and skipping parts I don't understand (and noting as much in my review).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: You wrote that "the methods used were simply inadequate to answer the research question." Unless I've misunderstood that statement, it looks like a sufficient reason to reject the paper regardless of any other problems. So, if I were reviewing such a paper, my report would begin by explaining why the methods are inadequate. Then I'd say something like "In view of this inadequacy of the methods, I recommend that the paper be rejected." After that, I'd mention, as a secondary issue, the defects of the writing. I'd probably include a few examples and then say that there are a great many similar examples.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: I find these the quickest to review, but I usually blame on the editor to have passed them on. (A desk rejection would have been in place if issues are so apparent.)
What I do is it write a short comment stating that the study is not clearly written, followed by trivial examples. I do not attempt to correct anything. Finally I state 1-2 main shortcomings in the Methods, and wrap it up. Should take 40 mins in total.
(Disclosure: Since lately I have been avoiding giving a clear recommendation of the kind Accept/Reject unless forced because I think ideally an Editor should take that decision based on his/her own impression in view of the reviewers' reports. Too many editors nowadays just fish out recommendations to add up.)
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/25
| 906
| 3,836
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've been asking around my department recently for opportunities assisting with research (I'm in electrical engineering). Some of my professors work in labs, but others do largely computer-based work. The computer-based work interests me more.
I understand research experience is very important when applying to grad school. What do graduate admissions committees really consider "research", though? Is it working in a lab? Is it "contributing to some certain extent to a research project?" Is it simply helping out a professor with his research? Is more independent-study type work considered research? Or is it necessary to be actively helping a professor with their research program?
As an undergraduate sophomore, I'm really not in a position to do groundbreaking research. What's considered a good research experience for me?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is more independent-study type work considered research? Or is it necessary to be actively helping a professor with their research program?
>
>
>
In my experience, it's best to be actively interacting with a professor. But in most cases it's unlikely you'll be actively assisting with their research programs (they have usually have graduate students/postdocs for that).
You could be given either a small project related to their funded work or possibly some crazy idea they're unwilling to let a grad student spend time on. Or anything in between.
>
> What do graduate admissions committees really consider "research", though?
>
>
>
If you can do any work that results in something published in a journal or conference, or even a poster, will be very valuable for graduate school admissions. It doesn't matter if that work is lab or computer-based. (Better yet if you can prove (with a publication/poster) that you can do both "wet" and "dry" lab work.)
>
> As an undergraduate sophomore, I'm really not in a position to do groundbreaking research. What's considered a good research experience for me?
>
>
>
When I was a junior I emailed every professor in the department. Two responded and I ended up doing "independent research credits" with one of them. It worked out really well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Pretty much all of the things that you list count as research. The best possible thing would be to end up as the first author of a publication, but that is rare. In general, anything that gives you some experience with the process of research and demonstrates that you are able to contribute to it is a good thing.
More to the point: anything that will cause your *professor* to feel they can honestly write about what excellent potential you have to become a researcher is good.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In my university the faculties of medicine, pharmaceutics and physiotherapy have a 'position' you can acquire called student-researcher. This is classified as a course and you get credits for it. The purpose is to spend and work at least 20 days in a research lab during the summer holidays (and eventually during the school year). All you have to do is pass your classes and contact a professor who conducts research in your field of interest. Usually for the day-to-day you will be supervised by one of his PhD students. There are not many students that participate, even though it is highly regarded at our university (although it's popularity is increasing). In some cases student-researchers will end up being co-author to a publication and very rarely even first author. There is also an abstract competition and seminar organised for participants.
[Here](https://med.kuleuven.be/nl/geneeskunde/student-onderzoeker) is the link to the site. Even though it is in Dutch, if you would want more information you could run it through a translator or ask me in a comment.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/26
| 615
| 2,657
|
<issue_start>username_0: My Department – Physics – is preparing to modernise its entire syllabus at all levels, from undergraduate through to graduate courses. We are looking at what material should be taught, as well as methods for teaching that material. This will be a significant, multi-year project.
I have found plenty of accounts of how others have changed a single course, or a few courses. However I’ve not come across an account of a department changing its whole programme of study, root and branch, in the manner we are contemplating.
Do you know of any physics – or similar – departments/schools which have gone through such a major renovation?<issue_comment>username_1: It's not physics, but a cousin at least: if I remember correctly, the MIT Mechanical Engineering department went through a major restructuring of its courses about 10-15 years ago, in which they changed nearly the entire undergraduate curriculum. I can't find any material about it online, but you may be able to to contact people who were involved to find out more.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: You might want to take a look at Germany (and possibly other countries an Europe). Due to the Bologna reform, physics departments (and many other ones) were forced to switch their curriculum from the old diploma system to a bachelor–master system somewhere around 2005 (the exact year depends on the university).
At least my university used this for some restructuring of the contents and, e.g., did the following (just to give you an idea):
* Introduced separate math courses for physicists (before, students of physics and mathematics attended the same courses).
* Introduced special courses each for IT, presentations and numerics (before, students were supposed to learn this by themselves on the way or when they actually needed it)
* Moved theoretical mechanics and electrodynamics one semester earlier.
* Merged the courses on atomic physics and condensed-matter physics as well as the courses on nuclear and particle physics.
Other universities might have undergone even more radical changes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My answer is only tangentially related to your question, but you may want to see if there are documents produced by some of the relevant professional organizations that outline how a modern curriculum should look like. For example, in Computer Science, this is the normative document: <https://www.acm.org/education/CS2013-final-report.pdf> . If such a document existed for physics, it might very well make your task vastly simpler because at least it already outlines what most of your courses should be about.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/26
| 1,019
| 4,060
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student working for a professor this summer. Up to this point, I have referred to the professor as Dr. LastName. I have met his research group; his graduate and PhD students refer to him by his first name. Moreover, he signs his emails to me with his first name.
Is it acceptable to ask, through email, how he would like to be addressed? Or is it proper etiquette to wait for him to correct me? I would prefer to ask him in person, but I will not be seeing him for several weeks.
For example, in an email: "I have noticed that you sign your emails as 'FirstName'. Would you prefer that I address you as 'FirstName'?"<issue_comment>username_1: Yes,
it is completely acceptable to ask how you should refer to someone via email.
In fact, I think I still have the email I sent to my supervisor.
Here is the (edited) last line of one of my early emails while sorting out our first meeting:
>
> I should also ask, what is your prefered form of address? Would you
> prefer I address you as Dr. L'astnamé, or by first name, or in some other
> way?
>
>
>
The response was:
>
> Regarding forms of address I think Dr. L'astnamé will be fine
>
>
>
and so that is what I called him all through my undergrad project, as a short-term research assistant under him, and now into my Ph.D.
I'm sure he will tell me if he would like me to change.
It is generally acceptable to ask people matters of etiquette concerning them.
(Life would be hard if asking what was polite was normally impolite.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In contrast to other answers voiced here, to me, signing a mail with {Firstname} is a clear indication that one can address the sender by {Firstname}. It would be unreasonable for the prof signing with {Firstname} to expect otherwise. I don't agree with the "always better to play safe"-advice, as I strongly believe in that an academic discussion should be based on arguments, not on status. If I expected my students to call me in a formal way, then I would have to address them in a more formal way as well (at least, that's what I feel). When I indicate that I as prof feel comfortable with the informal route (which I do by signing my mails in this way), there is no reason not to accept that offer.
Having said that, it is of course highly dependent on culture and language.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It is almost never impolite to ask how to be polite.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Interesting question... Let's put aside *opinions* and try to list the *facts*:
### 1. Variability
The preferred for of addressing a prof, much like anyone else, will vary immensely. It ultimately depends on many factors like:
* culture in that country ...
* and in the country of origin, if the prof in question has a different background
* culture in that particular faculty/department (usually less formality/honourifics in Maths/CS/Physics etc)
* how down-to-earth that particular person is
* ...
### 2. Uncertainty
If you don't know something regarding another person, you essentially need to acquire that piece of information. It won't magically dawn on you... So your options are either to ask that person, or to ask someone else that knows this person.
The risk is, if you ask another person, you might be making the assumption that the person you ask has a different level of relationship with the prof. It might be so that the grad student you ask "goes way back" with the prof, and while they might be on a first name basis, you might not have the same grounds to stand on.
---
**Bottomline:** If you don't ask you can't know the right way to address the person. Noone can really blame you for asking how to refer to a person, especially if they are at a higher position than you, implicitly or explicitly.
You might be considered unnecessarily formal, or stiff, but still it's better than making an assumption and making a rude mistake, especially if the person in question comes from a culture where titles are taken very seriously.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/26
| 685
| 2,996
|
<issue_start>username_0: Can someone explain the difference between *hypothesis, thesis statement* and *research goal* based on an example?<issue_comment>username_1: I had this same question recently and did some research on it. The definitions I found weren't consistent, but from them I derived the following.
**Thesis statement** -- A definitive statement about the way the world (or your system of interest) works, especially what is most important in causing or influencing the behavior of the system.
>
> "Family expectations has primary significance on the performance in college for Latino girls in the Western US" is an example of a thesis statement.
>
>
>
**Research goal** -- Expresses what you hope to learn or shed light on in your research. Specifically, the goal should specify what *type* of results you are hoping to achieve. It contextualizes your work in relation to other research, especially theory. It also feeds into your choice of method.
>
> "My research goal is to develop a theoretical model of cultural influence on college performance, contextualized by gender and ethnicity" is an example of a research goal.
>
>
>
**Hypotheses** -- What *specific* conditions or relations do you aim to test or evaluate in your research. Any research that does not include a method for hypothesis testing should *not* claim to test hypotheses. A hypothesis statement must be specific enough that it is testable by the methods you choose, and also it should be falsifiable -- i.e. it is clear what evidence might prove the hypothesis false, and such evidence should be plausible and possible.
>
> "Low family expectations has a detrimental effect on the college completion rate and time-to-complete for high-achieving Latino girls" is an example of a hypothesis statement.
>
>
>
Notice how there are specific, testable conditions and metrics -- "college completion rates" and "time-to-complete". These conditions should appear as metrics in your research methods -- i.e. instruments and analysis methods.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A thesis statement usually helps guide the research paper. It is a short sentence or summary containing the central idea of the research paper. It helps a reader have a clear glimpse of what the paper is about.
The Hypothesis statement comes in different format but with the intent to help prove or disprove a phenomenon. The hypothesis can help defend, support, explain or disprove, argue against the thesis statement.Usually the hypothesis measures specific issues or variables-two or more and therefore should be testable. The thesis statement creates a background while the hypothesis creates a means to measure the interrelationship.
The research goal takes a look into the future of your study or research paper. |It tries to help you state what the outcomes you seek to achieve by the research work. With a research goal you can set specific milestones to accomplish at the end of the research work.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/26
| 1,025
| 4,495
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm teaching an advanced undergraduate computer science course that requires a 5-7 page term paper worth about 20% of the student's grade.
The class has several international students, and some of them do not have a strong command of the English language. Clearly, these students are at a disadvantage when it comes to this assignment.
To complicate matters, the course is part of the university's "integrated writing" curriculum, so, according to university policy, the quality of the writing must be evaluated as part of the grading process.
I'm trying to devise a fair scheme where non-native English speakers are not graded as stringently as native English speakers, yet not have the grading be so lenient for non-natives that it becomes unfair in the other direction.
I've already decided that some criteria can be graded on equal footing (such as overall paper organization, and the quality of the overall research), while others (such as word selection and sentence structure) can be looked at on more of a two-tier scale.
I'm wondering if anyone here as dealt with this dilemma before and, if so, how they might have approached this problem.<issue_comment>username_1: I teach at a Dutch university, where undergraduate teaching is in Dutch, gradudate teaching in English. We thus deal with grading non-natives on a daily basis and have a general policy of being more lenient when it concerns non-natives. For example, in our thesis guidelines, it is explicitly stated that a thesis has to be faultless, but it specifies that for non-natives, it should be near-faultless. In practice, this translates to allowing a higher number of spelling and grammar mistakes, and, as in you suggest in your question as well, is independent from structure and organization of the text.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Grade everyone the same on things like word choice and sentence structure, but make that portion of the grade a small part of the overall grade for the paper. (If you are in the United States, you will find students who are the product of U.S. high schools with limited vocabulary and no idea of sentence structure.)
Edit: If you *don't* grade everyone on the same scale, you will inevitably get complaints. I'd argue that what is important (for learning) to students in your class is the formative feedback on their writing, not the specific number of points. If the dean complains, 'splain that you teach computer science.
*{Time passes}* As Damian has said in the comments, you will need a grading rubric that assigns relatively low points to word choice and sentence structure, more points to overall organization, still more points to quality of research, etc. Then you'll need to show how the overall grade was computed, using the rubric. To repeat myself, the formative comments you make, particularly on word choice, sentence structure, etc. will be more important to learning than the actual points.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to what others have already said, it may be worth differentiating between "writing" and "composition". My best guess is that your university's writing courses are actually mostly geared toward "composition" -- i.e., towards producing documents with a coherent structure, introduction, conclusions, etc, and that have a consistent narrative that develops ideas and arguments. This is independent of word choice, size of vocabulary, correctness of grammar, etc (or at least largely independent as long as the poor command of language does not affect the ability to understand the text).
You may therefore want to develop a rubrik that weighs composition more heavily than word choices, grammar, or spelling.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As a non-native English speaker who teaches mathematics in an English-speaking university in Canada, I have little sympathy for the English struggles of international students. In my experience, most of the students who have big struggles with the language are those who bought the TOEFL result instead of learning. The students who are really committed come a year earlier to take English full-time, and they don't have major issues when they start their specific studies.
Now, to address your specific question, in 13 years teaching here I never had reason (nor interest) to take marks off because of grammar. I will reduce the grade when I read nonsense, but that happens with Canadian-born students too.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/26
| 195
| 768
|
<issue_start>username_0: How can a search be made at google-scholars, Scopus etc for only patents?
I want to search patents on a given topic or a set of keywords, but the results mostly include papers. Where I have to scan through all the results manually to reach a patent.<issue_comment>username_1: To search for patents only, [Google Patent Search](http://www.google.com/patents/), rather than Google Scholar, is the right tool for the job.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: European Patent Office has a really nice tool called [Espacenet](http://worldwide.espacenet.com/advancedSearch?locale=en_EP), which allows you to make worldwide searches. I have linked the advanced search option, but there are simpler search forms as well.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/26
| 547
| 2,478
|
<issue_start>username_0: Suppose that a certain school is very popular for its computer courses, but its non-computer related courses are virtually unknown. Is it possible for that school to have only one or few students finishing, say, a degree in economics?<issue_comment>username_1: Possible but uncommon.
The liberal-arts departments at MIT, for example, generally only have one or two students actually planning to get a degree in that area (usually, of course, as a double degree alongside something in the sciences or engineering.) Friend of a friend was the sole music major at one point. Small department since it isn't the school's primary focus, but I'm told the professors are excellent and of course you get a heck of a lot of attention from them. Of course first you need to get into MIT.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: At the smallest colleges it is common. There might be zero students enrolled in some subjects beyond the general education level. Advanced programs can still be available as individual instruction or in collaboration with another institution.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is, to my knowledge, currently one undergraduate reading Jewish Studies at Oxford, so yes, it's very possible. More commonly, where a university enables courses to be combined for a joint honours degree, someone taking an unusual combination of subjects may well be the only one in that situation (and hence the only one to obtain a degree in *X and Y*).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: It is also possible if a particular college has just started a discipline that is relatively unknown to many people. They might be wishing to promote this field, but since the discipline is not yet very popular, it might not get adequate number of students.
Also happens with offbeat combinations, especially in small colleges. A friend of mine from pure humanities had taken up mathematics as an optional subject and there were just three students in her class.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: It is possible even in bigger universities, as some allows you do create your own degree if you make a reasonable petition, why you need it and why you think this degree is different from the already existing one. Note that in a credit-based education system it is possible to create a new degree without extra costs, assuming that student goes to already existing classes, only she/he has a unique combination of requirements for graduation.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/26
| 704
| 2,867
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have some research papers in PDF format that are actually scanned (and then OCRed) instead of being the original PDF. Some are so badly created that text cannot be properly searched inside.
For example [this paper](http://www.aaai.org/Papers/AIPS/1994/AIPS94-037.pdf) published in 1994 is all about advanced computer technology and there is no proper digital copy. This [extended report](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.196.7474&rep=rep1&type=pdf) related to the above paper is even more horribly digitized.
*edit: I am unable to access the actual [horribly scanned paper](http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=239773&preflayout=tabs). That extended report also had issues in copying.*
Why is that? Why are some computer-science publications, which are not even so old, not available in a proper digital format?<issue_comment>username_1: In many cases, even through the early 2000's, publishers produced print journals using older type setting systems and did not produce PDFs of the papers for online publication. Once the papers were type set for printing, the publisher might have discarded all of the files associated with the papers or they might have just kept a file containing a print-ready image of the paper.
Many journals had old material of this sort dating back decades. Since it would take a huge effort to type-set all of those older papers again, journal publishers have settled for simply scanning the earlier papers (or retrieving saved images of the papers) and then publishing the images of the papers online.
Using optical character recognition (OCR) is one way to extract the text from these images. However, OCR isn't 100% accurate, and in any case it can't preserve all of the formatting of the paper. Thus OCR text from a scanned image of a published paper may be somewhat useful for indexing, but it really isn't equivalent to having the original document as a text PDF.
A different issue is that you may have received a copy of a paper from someone other than the publisher. For example, if you made an inter library loan request to get a copy of a paper, it's possible that someone at another university library scanned a printed copy of the paper and sent that scan to you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: PDF is a younger format than you think it is, having only been invented in 1993. Before that, documents would have been in PostScript at best. Many things you might think are OCR are actually bad PS conversions: it is very hard to unscramble the PS egg in some cases. The first linked paper appears to be of that type.
For others where is no version even that good, it is simply that the cost of a better conversion is higher than the value per old paper. Maybe this will change someday, but right now the high quality OCR systems have higher priorities.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/26
| 1,132
| 4,621
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm from the US but I work as an engineer in the UK. In the US, part-time engineering PhD students at high-profile universities are possible, but rare and usually limited to special cases.
* In the UK, it seems nearly every school has a part-time PhD option. How does a part-time engineering PhD at elite schools [Oxford, Imperial, Cambridge, UCL] work?
* Is it possible to work full-time and obtain and obtain a part-time PhD at these elite schools?
* What are your chances of being admitted to these top programs as a part-time PhD student (I'd assume there would be a bias against part time students)?<issue_comment>username_1: Full-time PhD student here (my office mate is part-time).
As you say, many universities will have a part-time program. It probably is possible to work full-time and do research part time, but it will be even more challenging than usual. PhDs tend to work best if you immerse yourself fully and spend your energy exclusively on research (especially if you want to have some spare time). My friend finds it difficult to balance a 20 hour workweek and a part-time research position. I've never met anyone who has a full-time job on top of the PhD.
Re funding: AFAIK grants are typically used for full-time studentships. In my group, we have often broken down a full-time position into two part-time ones, but only for postdoctoral researchers. I guess the assumption is at a postdoc level people will be better at juggling all their commitments. My supervisor won't admit to it, but I reckon he would prefer one full-time student as opposed to two part-time ones, as the former is more likely to complete.
EDIT: I spoke to my supervisor. If your day job is related to the research and is likely to help you (as opposed to holding you back), he said he would consider it a plus.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Two big differences between US and UK PhD programs are that full time UK programs are designed to be 3 years (with a pretty hard limit at 4 years) and many students, even in engineering and science, are not funded.
Admissions to UK PhD programs, even the top programs, is significantly easier than in the US. Ignoring funding for a moment, admissions in the UK is almost entirely dependent on finding a willing supervisor, while in the US having a supervisor is not generally enough to gain admissions. So if you can find a supervisor who is willing to take you on as a part time PhD student, your chances of getting in are pretty good.
Funding is a whole different story. Externally funded studentships in the UK are generally for full time students and departments generally do not like to commit themselves to 6 years. That said, tuition and fees in the UK can be much cheaper and self funding a UK PhD is much more common.
In terms of finishing, I think a part time student in the UK has advantages that part time students in the US do not. Full time students in the UK lose their funding after 3 years and must be finished by 4 years while part time students have at least 6 years to finish. As some aspects of the PhD cannot be rushed, there are times were working less for longer is a definite advantage.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a part-time masters(but will be switching to PhD part-time) in Ireland, where conditions are broadly similar to the UK.
I found no bias against me as a part-time student as my application process was exactly the same as if I was a full-time student.
Part-time PhDs will normally have the same criteria as the full-time one but you will in general get double the time to finish it. One thing to watch out for is that a potential supervisor is fully aware of the lengthier time-frame to possible completion.
Just from my own experience, on working full-time and doing post-graduate study. It can be done but it is hard. I have a nine to five job. I'm lucky in that my work place is a 10 minute walk from my university where I have a desk in a post-graduate research centre. I would generally start about 6 and finish around ten or eleven. There are also full days done at the weekend. I think even with everything going perfectly you are a least committing to 4-5 years. I'm in the Humanities so holidays/vacations are now trips to archives for research!
In relation to funding, as noted in the other answers, it is near impossible to get tuition fees funded. You may also be able to apply for some internal grants within the university you study in. I have been able to receive some funding from within my university from a travel bursary to help fund my research trips.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/26
| 675
| 2,677
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am not sure if this holds true everywhere, but here in Germany you only get two attemps at getting your PhD. I am currently wondering at which point it counts towards those two attempts. If I were to start a position and quit during the first few weeks, would it still count?<issue_comment>username_1: I think you are conflating the issue of being a *Wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiter* (research personnel) with that of receiving a PhD. It is possible to work in a "research" position for an extended period of time without being part of a PhD process, so such positions obviously would not count towards "two attempts."
In addition, it is entirely possible that people might have to move or change positions because of personal circumstances (health, parental leave, or the two-body problem, among other reasons). Restricting people to two "shots" in this manner would be unfair.
Instead, I believe what you are referring to is the rule that there are at most two attempts at the *thesis defense.* If you fail the first one, then you must wait for a prescribed period of time (but not longer than another period of time), and attempt again to defend your thesis. If the second attempt fails, then you are not allowed further attempts. (However, if you work with your advisor, there shouldn't be a problem here, as you shouldn't be allowed to hold a defense if there's a substantial risk of failure!)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think this is quite true in Germany either - or at least not in the generality that I read into your question.
Here is [example 1](https://www.uni-muenster.de/imperia/md/content/fb7/promotionsordnung_vom_01.06.2010.pdf) (Promotionsordnung (PhD bylaws) for psychology and sport, Muenster), and another randomly selected [example 2](http://www.math-nat-fakultaet.uni-bonn.de/Wob/images/33630625.pdf) (Promotionsordnung math, Bonn). Both stipulate much more restrictive conditions that relate to your question. They somewhat overlap, but not completely - so there is also no uniform answer for Germany. Simply stepping away from a PhD early on would not be a problem in either case. The restrictions on the number of attempts to be successfully awarded a PhD are as follows:
Example 1: you get one and one only attempt to resubmit a declined thesis, and to re-take the oral defense each
Example 2: no restrictions are mentioned on the number of failed thesis attempts. You get one attempt to re-take a failed defense
In particular given that even these two sources don't agree, you just need to pull your program's Promotionsordnung, and confirm which rules apply to you.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/27
| 1,703
| 7,626
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have done some research on this, but I still don't know what is carried out in a workshop. What activities are arranged? How are they different from conferences?<issue_comment>username_1: Most workshops are there to teach you a skill, or set of skills. While a conference is mostly about passively listening to talks and reading posters, in a workshop you are actively engaged in doing something.
This can be learning a new piece of software, learning a mathematical method, how to use a specific machinery or an instrument, etc. There are also going to be talks about the subject: theory, applications and possible more.
Not all workshops are like that - I've been in a one day "workshop" where all we did was sit in a lecture hall listening to people talk about a common topic. In an ideal workshop you would hopefully be actively doing something.
Also, in conferences you are usually able (and expected) to present something, be it a talk or a poster. In workshop this is rarely the case, and the agenda is predetermined.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Sometimes, a workshop is just a conference, but the organizers decided to call it a workshop instead for one reason or another.
So while a lot of people will have some idea of what the difference should be, in practice the difference can be non-existent, so one will need to look at the details of each individual conference or workshop to decide which will be of interest.
(Note that my entire experience is from mathematics, so it might be different in other fields).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In CS subfields related to HCI and related topics of communication between users and software, a workshop is almost the same as a conference, that is, there are speakers who give talks about their papers. However, the following differences can be observed:
**Organisational:**
* A workshop lasts just one or half a day.
* A workshop is "embedded" into a conference; it doesn't take place on its own, but it takes place at the day before or after the main conference. Sometimes, conference registration includes workshop registration.
* The audience tends to be much smaller. This is partially because often, several workshops are scheduled at the same time, and partially, because not all conference guests attend any workshops (especially when the workshop needs to be registered and paid for separately). In any case, it is not untypical for smaller workshops to have just a handful of attendees, each of which will present something.
**Contents:**
* There is less of an expectation of presenting fully finished work. Work in progress, or results based on a preliminary study, are usually accepted, if not explicitly invited.
* Likewise, remarks about future work can be a bit more central than in normal talks, as the workshop may prove as an opportunity to find collaborators who would like to help tackle the suggestions for future work.
* While conference sessions typically feature an opportunity for questions and answers on every single paper right after each talk, workshops sometimes schedule an additional (sometimes considerable in duration) wrap-up discussion that is supposed to provide some time for discussing everything that was presented during the workshop, identifying common issues and chances, and possibly developing ideas for further work together.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The reason why it is difficult to tell what workshops are about is because it is a catch-all category that many different types of academic meeting are labelled as. To illustrate, let me give examples of the nature of some of the events that I have attended in the last two years that all use the same word "workshop" to describe themselves:
* A "baby conference" attached to a full-size conference, where the small meeting simply isn't large enough to meet on its own yet.
* A project meeting for researchers who are all funded by the same large grant
* A planning and discussion session aimed at helping determine the direction of a field
* A joint industry/academia fact-finding meeting sponsored by an industry consortium
* A specialty conference attended by around 100 people
* A premier conference attended by several hundred people
* A working meeting by a standards development group
The length of these meetings ranged from a single afternoon to a full week. Their programs ranged from nothing but loosely structured discussion to a full-on tightly packed conference schedule. The level of peer review ranged from non-applicable to minimal to full-on single-blind review and revision.
In short: a workshop is whatever it wants to be, and different ones serve different purposes in the academic ecosystem.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: A workshop is designed to teach something or develop a specific skill while an academic conference is about presenting original research and getting feedback from peers. A workshop doesn't necessarily have to present original research; it is directed more towards teaching and learning in an interactive environment. Active participation from attendees is encouraged in a workshop, and small activities are often conducted to keep the participants engaged.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: A Workshop is as the name suggests a shop where we work to produce some products. Here the participants are workers, the methodology used like presentation of papers, question answer sessions, group discussions, debates, group and individual problem solving sessions are the tools/machinery in a workshop. The theme proposed by the organisers is the raw-material and the recommendations/models and answers arrived at is the finished product.
<NAME>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: A conference literally means "bring together" so it's just a big meeting of people. In professional life, a conference usually means going to presentations and meeting colleagues. Academic conferences usually mean that you write a paper and receive feedback to make it more publishable.
A workshop can be a conference (because it also "brings together") but as the name implies, it is about using a space as a place to build something hands-on. In the academic case, this typically means new research skills, improving papers, building knowledge and inevitably defending a research position because academics like to fight over ideas and theories. The upshot is that because you are building rather than presenting, it is quite common to see papers in very draft mode or even just some data looking for ideas on analysis. You are meant to help people learn by working collaboratively.
Other "conferences" include:
1. A Symposium is based on Greek drinking parties, but usually means a number of people try to answer a common question (drinking comes later). It is popular in the humanities.
2. Colloquium/Seminar is mostly an opportunity to discuss a topic.
3. A panel is a series of speeches, often moderated by a master of ceremonies.
4. A "camp" uses [Open Space technology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Space_Technology) to moderate informal sessions about just about anything under a common theme.
5. A "hackathon" in the academic world usually involves trying to come up with a research question and a way to answer it in a short period of time.
6. A roundtable involves different experts all having equal time to discuss a particular topic.
Other ideas and definitions about [types of conferences](http://port.modernlanguages.sas.ac.uk/different-types-conferences.html) are available online as well.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/27
| 412
| 1,745
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have a Masters Degree in Computer Science from India.
I have been working in IT sector from last 10 years
From last 5 years I am working in US
I am very much interested in Teaching Undergrads(Bachelors Degree) at College.
I am not aware of Education /Degree/Credentials needed to teach at College Level in US. Can someone kindly let me know how to go about this.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not aware of any officially required qualifications for teaching higher education. While often universities "require" supervisors, committee members, and examiners of PhD students to have a PhD, these can often be waived if the person in question holds another comparable degree (e.g., ScD or MFA) or has sufficient experience.
From a practical standpoint, to be competitive for a full time teaching positions in the US, you will likely need a PhD, or the equivalent terminal degree in your field. Individuals without a terminal degree and lots of work experience can sometimes teach individual classes in their area of speciality. Even at community colleges, a PhD is a desirable qualification that improves your chances of getting a job.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It seems like with your qualifications you could get a job teaching an adjunct class, and possibly get a full time job at a community college. I personally have seen many professors without PHD's at my college, but they are generally in charge of teaching courses like Microsoft office or beginner level Networking and Hardware repair. It depends on what you want to teach, if you're looking for a career as a professor at a 4 year university in Computer Science / Computer Engineering you will probably need a PHD to be competitive.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/27
| 1,223
| 5,253
|
<issue_start>username_0: I recently defended my Ph.D. dissertation (Information Systems) and now it's time to apply for some positions. While I would love to stay in academia, my current highest priority is to find a good job in IT and/or management consulting. Since I've designed my coursework with partial industry (consulting) focus in mind, most of the courses that I've taken during my Ph.D. program are very relevant to potential work in a consulting environment. I've read [this related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/5961/12391), but it has only academic focus, hence my question.
Currently I'm working on converting my former resume into two CV variants: one, focused on industry/consulting (updated and improved resume), and another, focused on academia (CV per se). My strategy is to include (mention) the relevant (practically, full) Ph.D.-level coursework into the industry/consulting CV variant and exclude that information from the academic one. **What do you think of this strategy?** Also, I'm **interested whether it is beneficial** to include my master's level coursework into the industry-focused CV. Any other advice and suggestions will be greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: My first job after my PhD was as a consultant. I suggest being selective with respect to what, and how much of your coursework to include.
Your degree speaks for your potential, and there is little use adding too much detail that is implied by it (in particular if you graduated from a reputable school). You want your CV to be *one page only*, so don't clutter it.
Begin with a brief executive summary, which generically could read like "Information system PhD with strong skills in (insert - say, system programming/data analysis/...) and communication (from X years as a teaching assistant)." Find something jazzy that you think fits you.
You can add relevant course work experience in a "skills" section, as appropriate, and further add anything valuable under "awards and honors" (if nothing else fits, don't shy away from mentioning performing well/near top/top of class in course work). It's also ok to maybe highlight some particularly relevant coursework (with grades). It would definitely help if your thesis work (which you should summarize) could be linked to the typical consulting job (bringing structure where little was before). At the bottom of the page, add three academic references if any of your faculty might be known in industry.
Two more points: I don't remember what the person's job name and description was, but in my case, I found someone at my school who proof-read my CV with lots of feedback (my initial version sucked badly). Secondly, you tend to read to de-emphasize your academic background in industry (eg, "list it after professional experience"), but this is simply not true for at least 2-5 years, depending, as your PhD will stay your greatest achievement for a while.
Take it with a grain of salt as I've been out of this for a while. Best of luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The structure of a CV might differ from a country to another, but the *real* goal of a CV is always the same: to get you a job interview (and not to describe yourself).
As a result, for an industry CV, everything that is in favor of you getting the job interview can be helpful in your application and coursework definitively should be included. Whether you want to add them in the "Education" or "Skills" section is up to you but keep in mind that you must stay concise (e.g., just give a list of *intelligible* coursework titles). If some of them are particularly relevant to the job, you can add further details but the cover letter might be a more appropriate place for that.
Finally, about adding or omitting the coursework in an academic CV, just ask yourself the same question: Will it help me to get an interview? So you might want to consider if the skills (technical, management, etc...) developed in the coursework are pertinent for doing or conducting the research and teaching aspects of an academic position.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: There is more than one type of industry, and you should adapt your presentation accordingly. One major flag is whether they ask for a CV or a resume, and you may want to explicitly clarify which.
Industrial jobs with a strong R&D component (such as at the company where I work) will often want a CV. For those jobs, keep the full academic CV, but also add in a "Skills" section near the top where you can talk about what else you learned that's not reflected well by the publications, etc. on the rest of your CV. Don't bother listing individual course names---the reader probably won't be able to meaningfully evaluate them---but your goal here is to demonstrate the breadth and flexibility that is likely to be necessary in the broader scientific community.
Other jobs are more "normal industry" and just want to know about your job-relevant skills, and will want a resume. Don't give them a CV, give them a 1-page resume, summarizing your skills, goals, etc. They too will likely not care about the individual classes, but rather what you can claim as skills as a result of having taken them.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/27
| 1,447
| 5,827
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my language, name structure are different to Western names, and they have a lot of diacritics. To make it less confusing and easier to use for international work, we usually "transliterate" it to a non-diacritics version and reorder the position of components. The problem is, for different people, they will choose different way to change. For example, in my language, the name *<NAME>* will have these kinds of transliterate (I'm not going to list all "combinations"):
* Du Nguyen
* Nguyen VD
* NV Du
* Du NV
* or keep using Nguyễn Ví Dụ
Since the complexity of how a name is formed in the language is large, I can't really say which kind of "transliteration" is better than the others (it may even depend on the policy of the journals). And honestly, I don't think this is a problem to **the authors** if they decide to use a particular "transliteration". I know that I should keep those names as they are when citing the authors because that's how they get the credits.
**Question:** However, when I list some authors (say in my CV), one will easily notice the differences between how the names represented. If the reader doesn't really care about that, that's fine, but if they do, I don't know if they will have bad impression? For worse, three professors who wrote LORs for me referred my name in three different ways, same as how they write their names. And I myself have decided to [just write my name as it is](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43859/how-to-cite-titles-in-latin-based-languages-that-use-many-diacritics#comment97729_43860), which will make my application has four representations of my name. Should I worry about this?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think this will make a bad impression with anyone. If this *were* to make a *bad impression* on someone, then you'd probably not want to work for that person.
In particular in the U.S. (but mostly in all Western countries at least), nowadays, it doesn't matter which name you choose. What matters is that you decide on one name, and stick to it. If you don't, you create unnecessary confusion and, at least until you'd be well-established, a never-ending need to clarify simple things.
If it's not too late, I would consider discussing this with your letter writers, and ask them to kindly all use whichever name you decide on. If it is too late to ask them, but you haven't sent anything out yet, do as the comment suggests and add a few explanatory words to your cover letter. And if you've already sent your application out, I wouldn't worry too much about the name issue.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Among those names you listed, the only place for concern about confusion is that the second representation (Nguyen VD) is not obviously the same as the the third and fourth (NV Du or Du NV). Now in your question you seem to have a couple of concerns.
1) You're worried about authors' names on your CV (I guess in your list of publications). Here the only likely concern should be for it to be clear which author you are. If you're in a field like math, where author order doesn't matter, you don't even need to list your name, just say "(with ...)" to list your coauthors. Otherwise, it's normal to list names as they appear on the paper. If you want, you can take some liberties by expanding to full names or adding diacritics as long as it is easy to identify the author list on the published paper with that on your CV. If for some reason it is still not clear which author you are (e.g., if other authors have some abbreviated name which might be yours), you can highlight your name on each paper (e.g., with an asterisk or use a different color).
2) For your LORs, it's common that different professors refer to people in different ways. Since these will be LORs for you, there should be no confusion of who they're referring to, as long as it's reasonably related to your name on your application. Also, if you list them as references, enter their names in their preferred format is reasonable, at least if you are writing in free form (e.g., you're not given certain spaces for family name versus given name). The committee will then see that the way you entered their names matches with the way they wrote their own names on their letters.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's only part of the solution, but you could look at [ORCID](http://orcid.org/), which gives you a unique ID to link together all of your publications etc. regardless of the exact form of your name you use. Use isn't widespread yet, but more and more publishers are starting to adopt it, as are increasing numbers of research institutions (at least in the UK).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It's not entirely clear to me what your worry or question is.
In your first question, you mention that "when I list some authors (say in my CV), one will easily notice the differences between how the names represented." But why would you as a Vietnamese person order the names of other Vietnamese people in multiple different ways in your own CV?
In your second question, you say that "three professors who wrote LORs for me refered me in three different names". But the only reason they did that must be that you failed to inform them how you wanted your name to be rendered (in English, I presume?).
My suggestion to you is to mention at the top of your CV (and on your website) that in the East Asian tradition, your name (using the same example name as you did) is rendered as Nguyễn Ví Dụ (family name - middle name - given name), but in the Western tradition, it is rendered as Dụ Ví Nguyễn (given name - middle name - family name). Once you just mention that Nguyễn is the family name, no one should have any difficulties figuring out how to refer to you.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/27
| 2,217
| 8,668
|
<issue_start>username_0: My graduation ceremony is coming up in a few months,
and I have the option of buying or renting a graduation cap and gown.
I will be starting an assistant professor job this year, so I suspect (but am not sure) that I will need to wear the dress at graduation ceremonies at my new institution.
If I were to buy the graduation dress, would I ever need to wear it again?
**Location:** My new job will be in an Asian university.
**What I did** I asked a colleague at the institution where I will be working,
and he told me that indeed, I could rent a gown for free
if I were to attend a graduation ceremony.<issue_comment>username_1: Don't bother. It's over 10 years since my ceremony, I've been in academia all that time, and I've never seen the need. I've also seen very few faculty with their own robes. For graduation most institutions I know of will organize robe hire (and pay for it), so there's not even that incentive.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Different institutions have different policies on robes for faculty members at graduations, although most will arrange for robes for faculty who do not have their own. However, if you take advantage of this option, you might not get much choice in your regalia - so if the institution that you are graduating from has its own particular design for regalia that you love, it might be worth getting your own. I have heard that there are institutions who will require that all faculty members wear the same design of regalia for graduation ceremonies, in which case spending a lot of money on a non-traditional set - which you then cannot wear at commencements - would be less than optimal.
Since you have an assistant professor job lined up, you could just ask someone at your new institution what the policies are there.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I bought my Harvard doctoral robes in 1973. And I have worn them a few times over the years. Probably fewer than 10 times. Deans and higher administrators probably attend many more of these events.
At Ohio State, a representative group of faculty attends each commencement ceremony. You can wear your own robe, or our department had a few generic robes for use by those do not have one. Of course I would always be noticeable in my crimson robe among all the black.
The robe is made of some synthetic fabric, and should be dry cleaned, not just stuffed in a washing machine. I only needed that once: we were in a procession walking through the rain.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: As noted in the comment, the location might change our opinion of the problem, however I will make notes from my experience.
When I graduated with my first degree I hired a gown as I could not see the value of owning one and knew I would study for higher degrees, and perhaps I could buy one later in my career. I received my second degree in-absentia because I knew that I would graduate again with a third degree in due course.
Now I attend ceremonies on a regular basis my institution can provide my gown for any formalities. Someone really parsimonious might say that you never need to buy a gown.
However, I have great regret not getting the earlier gowns. Time has changed things in a way I could not predict when I was making the decisions. The gown from my first university was designed by the hippest fashion designer of the 1960s. It was real 1960s cool in colour, shape and cut. No black gowns and mortarboards for them. As the institution matured they felt hip fashion icons of the 1960s were no longer cool and switched to plain black gowns and mortarboards. Now, in present times, it is *impossible* to source the original gowns. They are collectors items that rarely come on eBay and go for huge prices. All the original graduates, like me, now realise what a fantastic item they missed and want to get them. (Because, today, they look quite fantastic again).
The Computer Science Class of 1976 - Note the curved Hats
The gowns from my second university, which some of my colleagues own, have changed in quality over the ages. When I graduated they were made by fine tailors from excellent cloth with fine silks and quality trimmings. Today they are polyester and so forth and mass produced identically to all the other university gowns.
My rented gown just does not impress half as much as the originals that others wear at these fine ceremonies.
Only you can know how fine are the gowns that you could buy. No one can know what the future brings.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I think the biggest question will be whether or not you are required by your department head, dean, provost, or university head to attend some number of graduation ceremonies every year. There has been a push at my university to get faculty attendance up at these events, and they require a cap and gown. As such, and with the increased attendance, there probably aren't enough loaner robes to go around, so at least some faculty need to buy their own.
Now, since you're still a presumably poor student, why don't you rent your robe for your own graduation and then get the lay of the land when you get to your new university? There's some lost money, but in the long run it will seem small in comparison to the sunk cost of buying a robe that it turns out you don't need. You can always buy one next year at your new university (even in the style of the one you graduated from) once you get there and find out if it's worthwhile.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: I actually wish I had. (At this particular stage in my life it seems no longer necessary, but fifteen, twenty years ago I seriously contemplated it --- and then promptly procrastinated.)
It probably does not make much sense to buy one just for your own graduation (I didn't even attend mine), but if you intend to make a career in academia, you will likely be expected to attend commencement ceremonies for your students. Sure, you can rent a gown once or twice a year, but the rentals are all so uniform, and your institution may not even offer the degree you were awarded, so the colors are all wrong, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: When I got my doctorate I bought the whole set - gown+hood+octagonal hat. The friendly people at the ND admin building overseeing the orders strongly advised me to also rent one for the commencement festivities. Their reasons: A) the fully tailored robe would not be done in time, B) there's the risk of getting champagne poured all over the robe at the commencement party. They exaggerated item B, but item A was compelling enough.
During the last 25 years I have needed to wear the set less than ten times at various academic festivities: At the defences of my own grad students (in these parts they are very formal occasions in comparison to US) when I've been presiding the event. And elsewhere in doctoral defences as an opponent / external examiner / whatever. This is not too often, so the argument that it's wasted money is not without merit. However, getting extensive use of it was not on top of my list of reasons for buying the doctoral outfit in the first place. It has always also been a souvenir / memorabilia and also a uniform / badge of rank.
And I still get sentimental every time I dig out the gown, dust it and put it on. Also, because it's different from our local norm academic white tie + top hat outfit, my robe always attracts some positive comments. I'm too vain to fully ignore those :-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I didn't attend my final graduation and didn't see the reason to buy a gown with so many other expenses adding up moving to my tenure track job. However, I quickly found out that at my new institution, I had to wear regalia for freshman convocation, 1-2 commencements, and now a few other special events, and at $60-$75 each for rentals, I paid the same amount renting as I ended up paying for my decent (but admittedly bargain basement) doctoral hood/gown. I also splurged for the cool soft hat because I hadn't seen the fancy flock of seagulls option of the poster above. Until today, I hadn't regretted that.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: The best point at which to make the transition from renting to buying is when you get tenure, if you are in a tenure-track position: it means that you're likely in this for the long haul, and don't have to deal with the expensive and frustrating logistics of renting anymore. Before that point, there's always the possibility you'll leave and go to industry, or something of that sort.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/27
| 1,625
| 7,101
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm doing my PhD in computer science and am working in computer vision. I have come up with an algorithm that my supervisors consider to be promising and publishable. It took me a long time to get these results.
Now the thing is that I have to compare my code to other recent papers tackling the same issue. Which I understand is very necessary as to show how my work compares to previous work. My supervisors want me to compare against at least 4 or 5 other recent papers.
The problem is that the database I am using is very recent and no journal papers have till yet used it. So the other solution left for me is to read the journal papers, understand it and try to implement their code.
This will definitely take way too long and in my opinion waste a lot of time. These journal papers are very advanced (obviously) and implementing their results on my own will take up a lot of my time whose only sole purpose is to get a result.
One solution would be to email the authors and ask politely for their source code, but I found out that many authors don't reply.
This question [Can I request the code behind a research paper from the author?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/26159/can-i-request-the-code-behind-a-research-paper-from-the-author) stated that they were more likely to get a response if they promised to add that author as a co-author in their paper. I do not want to do that as that would be being dishonest as I see no sense in adding the author to my paper just because I compared my work against his, and if I am to compare against 5 papers then that will be a *very* long list of authors.
Maybe I am asking for something that is frowned upon. Or maybe not asking in the right manner?
I emailed the authors and asked for their code solely to test their work on my database for comparison purposes, which gets no replies. Am I doing something wrong?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I'm doing my PhD in computer science
> This will definitely take way too long and in my opinion waste a lot
> of time
>
>
>
Well, that is what a PHD in CS in experimental algorithms and areas is all about. You must prepare your algorithm, implement it, implement previous works and compare your work with them. So, how much time it will take you it is of no interest to anyone else but you and your supervisor. So, this line of argument is naive.
>
> One solution would be to email the authors and ask politely for their
> source code
>
>
>
Yes, but it not the only one. You could ask for their datasets and run your algorithm on their datasets, instead of making yet another dataset. Moreover, experimental algorithm communities have well-known benchmark instances and all related papers work on them for easy comparison of results. Why do you need to build yet another dataset? It is OK to use this extra dataset AFTER you tested your algorithm on those community benchmark instances. You could also send your datasets to your "competitors" and ask them to run their experiments on your datasets and just give you their results. Prepare you experiments relatively to older papers, notify them of your PC specs (and provide alternatives PC configuration - you probably have different PCs on your lab) and tell them to repeat all your suggested experiments on an PC close to your suggested specs.
If you like so much to share code, you can also send them the source code of yours, provide explanation how to compile it and use it and then let them run experiments on their PCs and give you the relative results to their work. I know that this thought probably never crossed your mind. Why? "*They might steal my work, how do I know they will give me correct results, it is too much work to do so, I don't trust them with my src code*". And now you know why people do not want to share their code.
But you also probably forgot the most easy way out of your problem. Let your supervisor contact the first author AND the rest of the authors. Unless you are an exceptional PHD student with many amazing papers you are practically Mr Nobody and people will easily brush off your requests. It is harder to do so to your supervisor (unless he is Mr Nobody as well). Usually people do not want to say NO to future reviewers, collaborators and respected members of the community. Also it is important to CC all paper authors. The first author (PHD student) might be protective of his code and hide your request from his supervisor. If you CC the supervisor, he might be forced to share his code or at least reply.
Last but not least: Be nice when asking.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Reproducibility in computer science is an important area for improvement. It is reasonable to expect authors to to make source code available for algorithms that they present. I've heard that some journals and conferences are putting pressure on authors to make source code publicly available (although I haven't personally encountered that).
In my experience, most scientists do make their source code available. Not doing so both casts serious doubt on the legitimacy of their result, and is counter to the normal premise of public-sphere science. It's also pretty tough to to justify, since sharing source code has no cost associated to it.
Being a PhD in computer science is most assuredly *not* about re-implementing existing algorithms, except maybe for pedagogical reasons. You're right that it's a waste of time. There is simply no good reason to do it when the code could be hosted on github for free!
A good strategy is as follows.
* Start with the corresponding author, or first author. Tell them what you're doing, that you intend to cite their work, and that you'd like to benchmark your method against theirs. Do be cordial, and feel free to tell them what you like about their work. Most likely they're a cool person.
* If they don't respond after a reasonable delay, say a week, send essentially the same email to the entire authors list, explain that you're having some trouble getting in contact with the corresponding author, and inquire about who is in the position to speak on behalf of the group. This has yet to fail for me.
* They should provide their source code at this point. If they don't, it's fair game to inquire as to why not. Since it's published work, there's sort of a premise that they should make it available except if there's something really making that a problem. It's pretty fishy if they don't. You can also remind them that you wouldn't want to make any mistake while implementing their work, so that the comparison is legitimate.
Don't worry about being a "nobody". The idea that a researcher should only respond to high-status people is just ridiculous. What you do need to be aware of, however, is that a prominent researcher can receive a lot of incoming communication. If they're professional, they'll have set up triaging for that. The best thing to do is make it *easy* for them to respond, and they will probably be pleased to help you, a student, which they once were.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/27
| 1,034
| 3,959
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I have taken an idea or quote from somewhere I will of course reference it properly.
However my question is every time I mention someone e.g
'<NAME> said..."
do I need to reference every time I mention that person if I have referenced him at least once?
Or if I say 'this proof is given by xyz book'
if I have ready referenced xyz book do I need to reference it every-time I mention the name of the book?<issue_comment>username_1: In short: **Yes.** For every quote or idea that is not your own, this must be made clear to the reader. However, depending on the citation style, this does not always need to be in the form of “Joe Bloggs said” (which I have never seen in academic literature anyway), but may, e.g., just happen via a foot- or endnote.
If you are intensively quoting somebody or following another work, it may be feasible to have one sentence explaining to what a citation applies:
>
> The following overview of discombobulation techniques is based on Bloggs et al. (1987).
>
>
> Unless noted otherwise, all quotes in this section are from Bloggs et al. (1987). [this requires that quotes are visible as such]
>
>
>
This meets the above requirement.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure I completely agree. Citations should indicate which ideas are not yours and provide pointers to the original sources of those ideas and one should strive to make sure they do that. However, they're not a magic incantation that needs to accompany every non-original thought and walls of citations are often difficult to read.
Consider a paragraph like this\*:
>
> Johns, Jacobs, Jingleheimer, and Schmidt (2015, p. 15) state that "the
> weather is going to be good today", a claim supported by several other
> experts as well. (Jones, 2015; Xu, 2015b p. 9). However, we argue
> claims like "the weather is going to be good today" are meaningless in
> New England, where the conditions change rapidly and unexpectedly.
> Relying on a claim about how the 'weather is going to be today' for the entire day may cause the listener all sorts of discomfort.
>
>
>
Repeating the entire 50-character citation\*\* three times in three sentences would not add much value. The phrasing and punctuation clearly indicate what Jones and colleagues thought and, at the first mention, the citation is right there if the reader wants to follow up on it. However, there are two important caveats.
Books--and even papers--aren't necessarily read from beginning to end. To ensure that the goals of the citation are achieved, you need to ensure that anyone reading the uncited or "informally-cited" parts encounters the citation too. People are unlikely to pluck a sentence from the middle of a paragraph, but they might skip from section to section or paragraph to paragraph, so the citation should be repeated anew in each section/paragraph/figure legend. You may have a bit more latitude if the text is *clearly* a critique of one specific work: if the document is entitled "A critique of 'X, Y, and Z, 1995'", don't pepper every other sentence
with the full citation\*\*\*.
Citing something for one fact/idea/quote also doesn't "absolve" you of the need to cite them for a second fact/idea/quote, even from the same document. The reader may not know that Johns and colleagues also made predictions about the stock market and the fifth race at Belmont.
In summary, make sure that it's clear which ideas are your own and which are borrowed, and indicate where the borrowed ideas may be found. Once you've done that, make the text as readable as you can.
---
\* Example cribbed from a now-closed question on the same topic.
\*\* Some citation styles do have a "short form" for subsequent mentions of the same work. That certainly helps here too.
\*\*\* Though you may want to be more liberal if the repeated citations include useful information (e.g., a page number).
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/28
| 532
| 2,057
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm about to graduate and would like to give my research mentor a book as a gift. It is common in my institute (which is in the US) to give professors gifts as students graduate. However, the problem is my research mentor last year became the dean of the college, and I'm not sure if there is a different set of rules for the administrators than for the faculty. So is it okay for me to give a gift to the dean? Would it make a difference if I do it before or after my graduation?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it's fine. It doesn't matter when you do it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think the fact that your research mentor is the dean changes the issue. The only minor thing might be that the dean may be even more concerned that they follow official university policy.
Thus, all the general questions about buying a gift for your supervisor would apply:
* [Is it appropriate to buy a "thank you" gift for a PhD supervisor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28149/is-it-appropriate-to-buy-a-thank-you-gift-for-a-phd-supervisor)
* [Is it standard for graduate students to get gifts for their advisors?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32327/is-it-standard-for-graduate-students-to-get-gifts-for-their-advisors)
The core issue from my perspective is that you want to avoid a conflict of interest for the advisor. Thus, I would wait to give a gift at least until after you have passed your thesis.
In addition, it is important that the gift is not too expensive. Many universities have policies about gifts over a certain value having to be declared or are even forbidden. Furthermore, if the gift is expensive, it has greater potential to be seen as creating a conflict of interest. Related to this principle is the idea that the gift should be a small token of appreciation and, in no way, should it represent a form of payment.
Also, as you suggest, custom and policy can vary between universities. So that should be a good guide to what is reasonable.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/28
| 533
| 2,145
|
<issue_start>username_0: This question was motivated by a desire to have a clean set of terms to describe the life cycle of a manuscript from draft to publication from the perspective of the author.
I could say:
>
> I am "revising" my paper and "resubmitting" it.
>
>
>
Obviously, this could apply to (a) the situation where you have submitted a paper and been given the option to submit an updated manuscript (i.e., a revise and resubmit); or (b) you received a rejection letter and you are improving the manuscript with the intention of resubmitting the manuscript to a new journal.
I was wondering what concise language can be used to distinguish these two types of revising and resubmitting?<issue_comment>username_1: I personally tend to distinguish these words as follows:
* "Revise" and "Resubmit" are reserved exclusively for updating a manuscript with the same journal.
* Shifting to another journal is "Editing" and "Submitting again"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: A submission to a new journal is considered a fresh start. So in that case, you would speak of 'a submission', regardless whether an earlier version of the manuscript was rejected at another journal.
A revision (of a manuscript) always refers to an earlier version, and is to be used exclusively in a context where the earlier version is known. So you can discuss a revision with your co-authors (even when that was submitted to a different venue), but towards a new journal you would not do that for an unpublished work, since they are unaware (and typically also not interested) that it might have been rejected elsewhere.
In case that you hand in a extended version of a conference article, then you might speak of a revision (but it would be better to just call it an 'extended version'), since the earlier version is publicly available.
Only when submitting a reworked version to the same journal, you would speak of a 'resubmission'.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: My concept of a lifecyle. I've used a diagram to disambiguate the terms rather than using sentences.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/28
| 960
| 4,139
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had a really reputable person write me a recommendation letter for colleges. He told me that he wrote the best recommendation letter in his life. He told me that the recommendation letter hints that I'm the next <NAME> and that I'm enlightened etc.
I waived my right to view the letter. I was accepted at many colleges. Now, I think as the recommendation letter is very strong and from a reputable person: it may help me in my future elsewhere.
I really want to see what he wrote. Is it okay to ask the college where I am accepted to give me a copy of the recommendation letter? Otherwise, is it okay to ask the professor who wrote the recommendation letter to send me a copy?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, you waived the right to view it so I would be surprised if the college where you were accepted would disclose its contents. Why do you want to see it? I wouldn't do this out of idle curiosity.
But when you say, "it may help me in my future elsewhere," perhaps you mean that you'd like a general letter of recommendation from the prof, which might have more or less the same content as this particular letter. If you ever weren't able to reach the prof in the future, having a general letter of recommendation might be of some marginal value. So I think it's reasonable to ask if you're on good terms with him, although I would frame it in that way (as a request for a general letter).
All he can do is say no, and as long as you're not rude or demanding, it's hard to imagine this request negatively affecting your relationship to any meaningful degree.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Why would you ask to see the letter? If the professor in question tells you it was extremely strong, I presume you believe him. Asking to see one's letter after waiving the right to do so is a strange request, and doing so conveys an ignorance of or insensitivity to the norms of the profession.
I would be taken aback if someone asked me this, and would also feel very uncomfortable either refusing or agreeing. Why strain what seems to be a very positive relationship? It is certainly not worth doing so simply for the idle pleasure of reading flattering things about oneself written in another's hand.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Its pretty normal to waive your right to see a recommendation letter. That way the recommender can say honest things without worrying if you'll ever read it. If you have a good enough rapport with the recommender, you would probably have the best luck asking him for a copy. Realize this request will be view as highly unusual at the least.
Realize he may say no, and don't pester him or the university you've been accepted to if he doesn't want you reading it. Even if you don't get to see it, you should thank him for helping you get into the college(s) of your choice.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You can ask, but it is unusual for a student to ask to see their confidential recommendation letter, and the person who wrote the letter is under no obligation to show you the contents of their letter.
Recommendation letters, even ones that are glowingly positive, can contain extremely sensitive and personal information, and as such it is rare for the contents of the recommendation letter to be shown at any point to the person being recommended.
If you're interested in what positive things this person had to say about you, a better avenue of getting those answers is to *ask the person directly*. Explain the purpose of your question - whether it's for 'selling yourself' in the future for job interviews/resumes, or if it's just simple curiosity or something else - and have a candid talk with the person.
The worst that could happen is that they'll politely decline to comment, and that's okay. Sometimes it's much easier to talk about a person anonymously than it is directly, and while your curiosity is understandable, if they want their feelings to be private, you should respect that.
And of course, you should thank him for writing the letter in the first place - it's a fairly significant thing he did for you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/28
| 1,939
| 8,228
|
<issue_start>username_0: Open any research article and it is littered with citations. I’ve recently been wondering what is expected of us when citing the literature:
1. Are we expected to cite every reference relevant to our research article?
2. Are we expected to cite only the “best” references relevant to our research article, where *best* can be defined as the papers which have appeared in the best journals or papers that are most cited?
3. Do neither of the above apply? Are we simply expected to cite any paper relevant to our research article, just as long as we have cited *something* that supports/is related to our argument?<issue_comment>username_1: There are (in rough approximation) three reasons for citations:
**1. Giving credit**
If our paper builds on other papers, if we have taken any ideas from anywhere else, if anyone did something we are doing before, etc, we *have* to cite them. Questions such as "Is this peer-reviewed?" or "Is this accessible?" do not matter in this category.
**2. For proof/evidence**
Often we will claim that something is true without establishing its truth within our paper. Then we need to refer to other work for this.
Here, selectitivity makes sense: Citing someones blogpost claiming that X causes Y is not going to me particularly impressive. Citing a mathematical proof written in English available online in a journal is better than referring to a thesis written in an obscure language only availbale in hardcopy at some particular university (although do not forget 1.: if the thesis is prior, we may have to cite both). In sciences, it makes sense to some extent to cite multiple independent sources, less so in mathematics.
**3. Providing context**
We also cite to provide the broader context our research fits into. Some citations may have a "If you liked this paper, you may also like the following"-flavour. Here we have more or less full freedom what we want to cite. Pointing to one well-written survey article may be much better than citing 25 individual paper without much comment.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your references should allow the reader to understand the state of the field you are making a contribution to, as well as to place your contribution in the wider context. So you can't really give hard-and-fast rules. It will very much depend on your particular field and your paper itself.
Of course, you should cite everything that is relevant... but the question is how you define "relevance". Don't cite everything that has appeared in your field. But *do* cite references that specifically pertain to your specific question - these are certainly relevant.
The "best" references will probably correlate with having appeared in good journals and having been heavily cited. But you need to find a good balance between the relevance of the content and the impact of a potential reference. If you find a very pertinent article in an obscure journal, by all means cite it.
And of course, if you have taken ideas from the literature, you need to give credit where it is due.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Contrary to [Arno](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12047/arno), I would say that **the primary purpose for citations is to give readers links to papers and books that your work builds on, depends on, or contradicts**. This is related to [Arno's](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/12047/arno) #3 "Context", but sharper. It is not just that these papers and books provide context for your work. These other works provide details or foundations that your work does not. These other works provide theoretical or empirical foundations that your work does not. These other works examine cases or conditions that your work does not. Or maybe these other works present an alternative method, an alternative formulation, or a different theory.
Properly done, citations in the text provide the reader with ***all*** the links to related literature that allows them to understand and judge your paper, both the specifics and the general topics and questions. Without these citations, readers will not be able to judge the merit or significance of your paper.
Besides this purpose: yes, context is important. Yes, giving due credit is important. Yes, providing proof or evidence is important. Just not as important as what I just described.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: References are there to provide a clear path to the sources for the information you use in your article, nothing else. One of the criteria we put on scientific output is reproducibility and in order to be able to verify statements you need to provide the sources clearly. This means that it should be possible to double check your use, or misuse, of earlier work in building towards your new findings.
There are ways in which the system is misused. Some people refer mostly to their own work. It is possible that ones own work is important but it is rather an exception for most. Along the same lines, it is possible that people excessively use particular authors as reference where other references would be just as good or better. The list can go on.
In the end, the knowledgeable scientist will have a fair grasp of the field and quite quickly see if key work is missing in a manuscript, during, for example, review and thus spot potential weaknesses in the structure of arguments. So the references are there to provide a clear trace of information used so that the use of the information can be verified.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: There are a few quality answers already (I specifically second [username_4's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/44387/5674)), but I wanted to give a more practical perspective.
>
> Are we expected to cite every reference relevant to our research
> article?
>
>
>
This would not be practical, or **realistic**, in many fields. I for instance work with data analysis in cancer research. The amount of "relevant" work published every month is absurdly large, so much so that even if I read and only read, everyday I would not be able to maintain a thorough grasp of the literature.
In some other field, where the problem formulation is well-framed, and the boundaries more clear-cut, this might be a more feasible expectation.
>
> Are we expected to cite only the “best” references relevant to our
> research article, where best can be defined as the papers which have
> appeared in the best journals or papers that are most cited?
>
>
>
Interesting you take up this question of "best articles" vs articles in "best journals". There is some **selection bias** here, also known as "[rich get richer](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_rich_get_richer_(statistics))" phenomenon, giving rise to a Power Law distribution among citations.
Articles published in high impact journals ***usually*** reach more people, tend to be written by more renowned scientists in the field. Also people have a tendency to find new reading material based on the number of citation an article gets. Alternatively, the chance of "finding" an article is increased by the number of other articles citing that paper. So the more renowned a particular study, the more renowned it will get.
There's little you (or I) can do about that, sadly.
>
> Do neither of the above apply? Are we simply expected to cite any
> paper relevant to our research article, just as long as we have cited
> something that supports/is related to our argument?
>
>
>
You **should** cite the papers where you get your prior information from. Simply put; you use a particular finding from another article, you cite them. Using prior knowledge might be (and usually is) applicable in multiple scenarios (note that below is **not** an exhaustive list):
* You help make a case in your introduction: e.g. by giving statistics, or portraying the current state of the field (a.k.a *paying your dues*)
* You refer to a particular method, protocol, instrument etc in your Materials & Methods
* You back up your findings, or their implications, by citing similar findings by independent researches supporting your findings (or interpretation of them), typically in Discussion part of your paper.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/28
| 1,787
| 7,417
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is there any possibility that I could be awarded a Ph.D. degree based on my work or life experience and good educational background?
Can you guide me to any institution offering such Ph.D.s?<issue_comment>username_1: Ph.D.s and other academic titles and degrees awarded for "work experience", "life experience" and so on are products of [diploma mills](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diploma_mill). You pay a lot of money (thousands of USD) for a piece of paper that is completely worthless.
Employers know these worthless "titles". Such a "Ph.D." will not help you get a better job, and it will in particular not help you in an academic career. Instead, using such a "degree" in an application will brand you as naive at best or a fraud at worst.
Depending on your jurisdiction, using a "degree" "awarded" by a non-accredited institution, as these diploma mills usually are, may be illegal.
Nobody here will direct you to an institution that engages in such practices.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Many universities award honorary degrees, such as a [honorary doctorate](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_degree). These are not PhDs, but might still be relevant to your question. I have often seen these types of degrees being awarded to people that have contributed a lot to a scientific field from outside of academia (but sometimes for far less, also see this wiki-section on [controversies](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorary_degree#Controversy) over honorary titles), usually for work that has been connected to the awarding university. Since they are awarded for many different types of contributions, the formal criteria for when to award them is also relatively vague. In all cases I know of, they are also awarded based on external nominations, and not self-nomination. Finally, recipients should usually not use the *PhD* or *Dr* titles. An honorary doctorate definately do not carry the same academic weight as a PhD, but can sometimes still be valuable, especially if they are from a reputable institution. As an example, [this page](http://www.uu.se/en/about-uu/traditions/prizes/honorary-doctorates/) provides further information on how the title of honorary doctor is used in Sweden (in this case at Uppsala University).
Also note that besides "legitimate" honorary degrees from reputable universities, some fraudulent insititutions or diploma mills also use the same title for their degrees.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Not as such... at least from a reputable university. I have known a few people to gain a PhD without having to do a full PhD program. However, these people have undertaken a sufficient body of work themselves that, with some additional work, would qualify for a PhD. The people I am thinking of are all 50+, and have had long-term jobs in their field of study. They have already been working alongside academics in the Universities during their career, often contributing to research being produced. They have also had to attend some classes, put together a thesis (which itself requires significant work), do their PhD defence, and any other course requirements. This process still takes years.
On a side note, I would wonder why you want a PhD without putting in the work. Part of the PhD experience is the joy (and at times pitfalls) of conducting your own research.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In my experience, you won't get a Ph.D. degree with just work experience. You need to contribute to the community by producing journal articles and research papers. So as long as you have significantly contributed to the academic or social environment and the university recognizes your talent, yes you can get a Ph.D. on successful review of your publication.
Note: Ph.D. award is given for your contribution alone, not as a company or as a team.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: In the UK, there is such a thing as a "PhD by publication/portfolio/published work". This requires firstly that your "work or life experience" has generated novel work of academic value comparable to that of a doctoral thesis. Depending on subject, this might mean publications in academic journals, or non-academic publication of research you've done in industry. If you're in an artsy subject, then sometimes you can get a PhD by publication of literature, fine art, architecture, and so on, that meets the institution's criteria of making a substantial contribution to the field.
It may additionally require substantial new work to review and tie together your existing published work, or at least to put it in the correct context.
This doesn't seem to be so much of a thing in the USA. That might be because the USA doesn't take the same view as the UK that the sole qualification for a PhD is a satisfactory thesis. US universities typically have other requirements in their doctoral programs, passing certain courses and whatnot, that are considered part of the qualifying criteria. They might be disinclined to let you skip that part. Or it might just be that US institutions don't consider it a worthwhile use of their time...
So, your options depend primarily on what country you're interested in, you'll have to check out the situation wherever you are in the world. If you have done work of the right kind and sufficient value, and can work with a university in the UK, then just search "PhD by publication" to find examples of institutions that offer them. Many but not all reputable institutions do.
Unless you count on the one hand honorary doctorates, or on the other hand worthless qualifications from unaccredited diploma mills, nowhere can you get a PhD for "life experience". PhDs are for *doing research*, they aren't an assessment of your educational background, and certainly are not for having interesting or educational things happen to you ;-)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I do know one chap who, being interested in a certain piece of technology that he uses at work, approached an academic at a reputable university and asked whether he could do research on it. The academic agreed and the last time I spoke to the chap he had been working on his PhD for three years, whilst carrying on his job, and it was going well. That is a case where work experience and original research were very close but the PhD, if granted, will still have been earned with original research.
A PhD is not like a master's degree - that is just a statement that the person in question has mastered a subject and could, in principle, be awarded simply by examination. In my opinion mastering a subject is undervalued in the academic community but that is another matter. A PhD should be awarded for original research only, but how and where you do that research should be open to flexibility, as in the case of my acquaintance.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: A Ph.D. is not awarded for just knowing a certain body of knowledge or taking a specific number of courses. You must perform and document original research and defend it. Also, a Ph.D. is not lost if one does not continue doing research (although one's reputation as a scholar might be lost). Because of ethical conduct (plagiarism, falsification of data), a very small number of Ph.D.s have been revoked. I believe this can be done only by the University that originally awarded it. Anyone else can just fire or shame the miscreant.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/28
| 786
| 3,074
|
<issue_start>username_0: Especially in the the more experimental subfields of computer science like systems, how often are results faked? If there is no verification process for any code used, do researchers sometimes fake results to save time?<issue_comment>username_1: Nobody knows. Unless someone tries to reproduce the results and cannot, there's not ever even going to be a challenge to the results. Direct reproduction in CS and similar fields is generally done in papers that extend older results or propose a new method. To my knowledge, we do not see a lot of retractions based on these kinds of studies, so I'd say the rate of faking is low.
Retraction Watch's [CS section](http://retractionwatch.com/category/computer-science/) has about 15 articles in it, but most of them appear to be about retractions for plagiarism not for faking results.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Let me split my answer into two sub-areas: reputable venues and crap venues.
In reputable venues, it is just as possible for somebody to commit fraud (or [any of the other deadly sins of science](http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2010/11/24/the-9-circles-of-scientific-hell/)) in experimental computer science as in any other experimental science. It also appears to be quite rare, because there is usually pretty clear observability and a pretty clear relationship between theory and practice in computer science (unlike, say, certain subfields of biology) and so fraud would often be relatively easy to detect. More to the point, however, the risk/reward tradeoff is terrible: one detected incident will likely destroy a career.
In crap venues, there might well be constant fraud---but who cares? If they'll accept [machine-generated papers](http://www.nature.com/news/publishers-withdraw-more-than-120-gibberish-papers-1.14763), they might accept anything, and I'm probably not going to cite it or even look at it in any case.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: [There are quite a few interesting articles on the topic of fraud rates](https://www.google.com/search?q=academic+fraud+rate&oq=academic+fraud+rate&aqs=chrome..69i57.4743j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=scientific+misconduct+rates). I didn't see anything specific to computer science, but the general sense is that it's very difficult to determine.
It's very tough to actually detect fraud. Most cases (that I'm familiar with, at least) involve someone falsifying data in a highly active field and publishing earth-shattering results that turn out to be false. As was said in other answers, detecting the fraud requires attempting to reproduce the results, failing, and then determining that the problem is on the other end.
With that said, there aren't many good proxy measures of fraud. Retractions are a start, but they're far and few between. We can almost be certain that not all fraud is retracted. Surveys can be used but they're also notoriously inaccurate. There really aren't many other ways to measure that would actually provide a useful metric.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/04/28
| 410
| 1,879
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a psychology undergrad student. I am currently working on a project that will be submitted for publication later this year. However, the project I am working on is in the sub-field of psychology that is not of my interest (environmental psychology). I am planning to apply for PhD programs in social/personality psych. (Sadly I didn't get a chance to conduct a research project in that field.)
Although my publication could be a strong evidence for my research potential, my concern is that this publication is irrelevant to my research of interest. Thus, how can I convince the grad school that I am a good candidate for the social/personality field?<issue_comment>username_1: Even if your publication were in physics or economics or any other field, it would still be a positive component of your application. When I look at graduate applications, a publication record--while not essential--is valuable because it signals the following:
* Interest in doing research
* Initiative to get into a lab and work on a project
* Familiarity with what primary research is actually like
* A close enough relationship to a faculty mentor for me to pay particular attention to that mentor's letter of recommendation
All of these hold in your case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Publications in completely different fields have certainly helped me throughout my career, starting with a totally irrelevant one I did as an undergrad. All decent research utilizes the scientific method. All data analysis utilizes standard approaches. And people judging you always are concerned about you willingness and ability to complete the task; i.e. to publish your results. If you box yourself into one small area, you will not progress as much. Everything changes, and you need to be able to change with it and expand your interests and abilities.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/28
| 551
| 2,360
|
<issue_start>username_0: When applying to grad school, is it a good idea to mention professors you want to work with? For example, "I am applying to this program because University X has leading experts in the field Y, such as Professor Z. I studied some of Professor Z's papers and would like to learn more about this particular topic in field Y."
EDIT: In addition, what if I were to email Professor Z to ask if he is taking students (in order to avoid an awkward situation where the Prof is leaving/not taking students)? For example, "Dear Prof. Z, I am applying to University X for grad school and I am interested in field Y. I am wondering if you are taking any students at this time, or if there are other researchers in field Y that are taking students?"
Also, is it normal/not awkward for a math phd applicant to email a professor?<issue_comment>username_1: This practice is likely, on average, to help more than it hurts. It does mark you as somewhat more knowledgeable than the typical applicant, and somewhat more focused. It also ties your name to Professor Z's. Should Professor Z want you as a student, and should he or she be able to exert influence, that will give your application a huge likelihood of admission.
However, if Professor Z is politically unpopular or hated in the department (or by the admissions committee), this may actually hurt your application. Further, if Professor Z is unimpressed with your file, then you might be rejected even if otherwise you would be accepted.
---
Mentioning a research area can only help, provided that the department is actually strong in that area.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It might help, but should be worded very carefully. You would not want to exclude other opportunities in the program that you may not be aware of. I recommend that you first be very familiar with the program before stating any target that might appear to be exclusive. Professor Z may not have any openings for graduate students, whereas Professor Y might be looking for one. But if Professor Y thinks you would not be happy in his group, he will pass over you and choose someone who appears to be a better fit. And that would deprive you of both a spot in a prestigious department, and a chance to collaborate with Professor Z. If I were going to name-drop, I would drop more than one name.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/28
| 885
| 3,944
|
<issue_start>username_0: A few months ago, I submitted a paper to a journal, and received a "can be published if such-and-such issues are addressed properly". I know who one of the reviewers (the one that wrote the most helpful review, in fact) is, largely because he decided to reveal his name in the review. In a couple of weeks, I'll happen to be in the vicinity of his university (this is serendipitous; I had already planned this trip before I knew he would be one of the reviewers).
Is it acceptable to contact him, tell him I'm the author of that paper he reviewed, and ask him if he has time for a meeting to discuss how I am addressing his comments? I have no shame in admitting that I am considering doing this to ensure that he is happy with my amendments to the paper, which in turn should make the second round of reviewing go more smoothly.<issue_comment>username_1: This should depend on the journal policy. Both you as an author and the reviewer are bound by the rules the journal has in place with respect to the publication process. While it sounds like you are meeting with the reviewer solely for the purpose of improving the paper but it may come across as going out of one's way to others. To be on the safe side, I would suggest you contact the journal editor before organizing such a meeting. With a sign-off from the editor, you can be sure that you are playing a fair game. I would also keep co-authors in the loop if any.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think there is nothing inherently wrong with contacting the reviewer given that he has volunteered his name (and uncommon but commendable step). That said, you need to remain aware that that doesn't make her your friend and collaborator. Her duty is still to critically evaluate your paper. So, contacting or meeting her to discuss specific points of the critique seems fair game to me. But, asking how best to improve the paper, running ideas by her, asking for suggestions on how to address points best, etc, makes for an awkward conversation since you are putting the other person into a conflict of interest: helping you vs remaining impartial.
In other words, if you do end up having a longer conversation it would certainly be useful to have a frank conversation up front in which you lay out what you want to ask, and to offer right away that you don't think that she has any obligation to answer or help you with it.
If I was the reviewer, I would probably decline to meet, precisely because I'd like to avoid the conflict. But it takes a bit of experience to see a conflict of interest coming before you get yourself into it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think communications should go through the handling editor, for two reasons:
1. Since you plan to resubmit the manuscript, the same reviewer will probably be used to evaluate the manuscript again, and the editor will then rely on the reviewer as an independent agent without any conflict of interest. Therefore, communications should go through the editor, so that he/she is aware of how you have discussed the manuscript.
2. It "shields" the reviewer at the initial stage. The reviewer's responsibilities lie with the journal/editor at the moment, and the reviewer shouldn't have to deal with author requests if he/she doesn't want to. If the reviewer chooses to contact you after initial request throught the editor, that is another thing.
Because of point 1, I think meeting in person is bad idea, even after initial contact through the editor. I also honestly do not see the point of meeting in person, considering the conflict-of-interest this can introduce - if the reviewer's comments are unclear, so that you are uncertain on how to proceed, you can request a clarification from the editor.
The journal probably has a policy on how authors and reviewers can/should interact, so you should contact the editor either way, before approaching the reviewer.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/29
| 982
| 4,296
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in computer science: is it worth spending time organizing a contest for a conference (e.g. a shared task for a conference in natural language processing)? I think that would be a great experience to have, and fits very well my research interests, but I am afraid it might slow down my research and therefore delay my graduation date.<issue_comment>username_1: Often in graduate school there are an abundance of neat opportunities and experiences; it can be difficult to decide which tasks to pursue. You'll need to consider the short and long-term career benefits of organizing the conference, as well as how it will be viewed within your program. In regards to short term career development, this may be an opportunity to provide an academic service activity for the conference, though there are often less labor-intensive ways to add that type of experience to your CV. However, if you're interested in a career in management or administration and want to gain experience in developing or implementing organizational activities, this might be a valuable long-term experience. Also, if the group task will result in data that you can later use for publications or products, it may be worth the investment; it may even serve as a unique research opportunity.
Whether you pursue this activity will likely also depend on whether your mentor is supportive. If you are concerned that this might delay your research and your graduation date, you will need to decide not only if you can live with pushing back graduation, but if your mentor or program will support that as well. If you are able to pitch this opportunity in terms of career development benefits, products, or even positive publicity your mentor or program may be supportive. They may even provide you with some undergraduate assistance to reduce the burden of coordinating the event. Before you have that discussion, make sure you have a clear picture of the pros and cons, as well as what (minimal) supports would allow you to take advantage of the opportunity at the lowest possible economic, time, and labor costs.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to the other answers here, you will frequently be encouraged to "contribute back" during your graduate training. The idea here is that you are giving back to the institution, and you can potentially list these activities on your CV.
The issue with this is that you're already giving to the institution. You're producing research and/or teaching, and you're much cheaper labour than anybody else (postdocs, professors), and require much less training and supervision for how much you do contribute. So, you really don't owe the university or department your time.
As for adding other activities to your CV, there is some benefit to this, but it is incredibly minimal and short-lived. No amount of other activity is going to replace a single paper, irregardless of where you are in the authorship list. A paper where you are author #19 out of 20 is still better than organising a dozen things. Once you move on beyond graduate school, the other activities that are expected of you change, and you'll find that your grad school volunteering isn't so impressive. You'll be expected to review papers or serve on committees, and not so much organising contests.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: User30295's answer covers most of the "hard" considerations. I'll add some "soft" ones here.
First of all, organizing such a meeting will put you in contact with lots of people "who are somebody" in your research area. It is a stellar opportunity to get known. Such contacts will be invaluable if you later get stuck and need the right hint to overcome a thorny patch in your thesis (and later work!). You will also presumably meet (and work with) lots of other students. You will have first-hand access to some cutting-edge research.
But keep in mind that organizing such a meeting will also mean that just for the talks you are most interested in, you *will* be called away to solve some dumb foulup (yes, Murphy's law is unrelentless). And to be remembered as "the brilliant organizer of that contest that ran like silk in 2016, and who solved my domestic problems promptly" is more important than a talk or three.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/29
| 1,612
| 6,796
|
<issue_start>username_0: In terms of judging a doctoral program--and possibly also relevant for postdoc-ships(?)--which is the more important consideration, who your advisor is or the institution at which you study?
Obviously both are important, but when it comes down to it, which should weigh more heavily?
For example:
Professor Alpha is a premiere name in the field, but he's set up at Southern State University, an otherwise middling school. Perhaps he's there because he's a big fish in a small pond and gets carte blanche and limitless resources to do what he wants. His graduate students are thus treated similarly.
On the other hand, Professor Beta is a new, unproven professor at Top University, a world-renowned, leading institution. He personally may not have the resources and freedom as Professor Alpha, but he's at an institution whose name carries weight. Therefore the school certainly has the capacity for the same, if not more, resources, but access for Professor Beta's grad students will be more limited as they must be shared with other professors' groups.
Assuming all else is equally appealing (funding, location, research topics, etc), which offer do you choose, or which program would you hold in higher regard?
(The situation doesn't have to be so stark as like Harvard vs. Middle-Of-Nowhere University, but it makes the point clearer.)<issue_comment>username_1: Obviously one needs a competent advisor with whom one is compatible. But assuming that both professors qualify, **I think what matters most is the quality of the students who will be your peers**. You need to surround yourself with students who, from day 1, expect nothing less of themselves than to produce novel scientific research of the highest caliber, present it at top meetings, publish it in top journals, and forth. Ultimately you will learn more from your peers than from your advisor. A sufficiently talented and ambitious cohort will hold the bar high for you and push you to excel whereas a sufficiently talentless and unambitious cohort will help you make excuses for your own failures to reach your potential.
In my experience, top schools with top graduate programs have the sorts of students you want to surround yourself with. Second tier regional programs may, but I have yet to see it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I personally think that your rapport with your supervisor is of primary importance, and I personally didn't care to choose my PhD by university when I got the opportunity. (Assuming that both your options are offering what you want from a PhD in terms of subject and skill sets.)
As a final year student in biomedical sciences, what I have mostly found is the following:
**Money**
Your supervisor should be able to fund you, and your experiments fully. You should not come to a situation where you are choosing the second best option (especially in biology) because of the lack of funds. This will ruin the quality of your thesis.
**Go-to guy**
You should have a supervisor or a post doc in the lab who will be able to help you when you initially start out to answer your stupid questions. There will be many, and you'll need to find some one in the lab who is friendly enough, and patient enough to answer them. You'll know them when you see them. And of course, the other members of the lab do make a difference. See what they are like.
**Higher up or lower down?**
You should need to ask yourself, how high up the totem pole you want your supervisor. Remember, the higher up they are (especially professors) the lesser you are likely to meet them on a regular basis, and most probably have lost touch with bench experience. On the other hand, profs have better connections and their recommendation carry weight.
The argument for university preference goes like this:
If your prof doesn't have his own lab, and relies on community equipment, then you must go to a university which has the money to spend. Otherwise the choice of university is mostly trivial.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The most important thing is your adviser. Obviously you're not looking for a label, you want to do some valuable stuff in your PhD period.
The professor in middle-of-nowhere university has the vision that's needed and can make you the researcher you need to be.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Here are some additions to the other answers.
First, since I don't know how you've made your assessments of A & B, a couple of things you should look into if you haven't already:
1. Look up what kinds of jobs the former students of Professor Alpha got. If almost all of them got truly great jobs, then working with him seems like a safe (though not necessarily the better) choice. If not, maybe you should reconsider his pull in the field. (But if not, one factor is that his students may not be as strong on average as those at a better university--still this is bad for you as in username_1's answer.)
2. Check to see if Professor Beta was hired as an assistant professor or associate professor. At many top departments, it's really hard to get tenure, but they hire more established people they are sure of at the associate leve. So if Beta was highered as an associate professor, then it's safe to say Beta is "proven."
3. If you have professors in this field, ask them for their opinion.
In addition, the other answers don't seem to address your **job prospects** after getting your degree at one of these universities. For your question, "which university would you hold in higher regard?", if I were reviewing an application for a job application without specific knowledge of the professors, I would hold the higher ranked university in higher regard. If you're looking for a research job, and you have a positive answer to point 1 above, then it shouldn't be a problem as enough people in your area will know how good Professor Alpha and his students are. But if you're applying for more teaching-oriented positions, or positions in industry, then graduating from Better Name University can help you. (It's not just the name, but other factors as well: more contact with more talented people, etc. See [this related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/90/19607).)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: A very small answer, in addition to other good observations: I do claim that a particular analogy is relevant. Namely, would you want to have good parents but live in an unpleasant town, or bad parents but live in a nice town (if one imagines that "nice town" can truly make sense if one has bad parents).
Yes, if your penchant is for complete commodification of the whole process, then the parental/familial thing can be scoffed-at. But I'd recommend against going too far in that attitude.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/04/29
| 1,294
| 5,481
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a first-year PhD program at a certain top-10 graduate school in my field on the East Coast. I wish to transfer to a certain top-10 graduate school in my field on the West Coast.
I have been dealing with health issues that have made living a normal life in addition to carrying out my academic duties quite difficult. While I haven't allowed it to affect my performance at all, my life has become a living hell. I wish to transfer to the West Coast school because it is about 10 minutes away from home and I will be able to live at home with my parents which will be a huge support to me and my health and make it easier for me to perform my duties. In addition my doctors actually suspect that the "harsher" weather may be worsening my condition (and anecdotally I always do seem better when on the West Coast). I have no qualms about getting the required recommendations.
Complicating matters: The West Coast school was my first choice all along, but I was rejected. I accepted a position at the East Coast school hoping my health problems (started in undergrad) would be resolved, but they have not gone away. I do not want to disclose these health problems for fear that they may hurt my application. However, I don't have a really good reason to transfer without that, unless I make up something about departmental fit which is really not true since my current department is honestly a pretty good fit too.
Advice?<issue_comment>username_1: In virtually every case, trying to transfer out of PhD program A to join PhD program B because you were unhappy in A is a bad idea, and unlikely to [be easy](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2498/is-transferring-to-another-university-an-option-for-an-unhappy-phd-student). The linked, old question discusses several scenarios in its answers.
There are legitimate reasons, some of them [obvious](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/43705/10220). While I understand why one would want to, changing for location, as per your title, is not one. Changing to improve a serious health condition, on the other hand, is one.
So I don't see how you can reasonably hope to transfer without disclosing your health condition. Add the compounding factor that you were declined in the past by program B. Given that you are very early in your career at A, I cannot see how, minus health conditions that could qualify you for spots set aside specifically to aid in like cases, their decision would be different so soon after.
If transferring really matters that much, you should consider opening up about whatever issue(s) you are dealing with - to your current faculty first, but also to the receiving faculty. Your current faculty will appreciate to hear a non-academic reason for your desire to leave, and if you're lucky, one or some of them will fully support you as they buy into your explanation. Given the earlier refusal, you'll need strong letters from A, and even then this still strikes me as a long shot. But you can always try if your life at A is making you that miserable as your health is failing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To the OP: I feel for you and wish you the best of luck.
I know several people that have transferred to a different Ph.D. program after beginning one. In some cases this involved them substantially exceeding expectations at the program from which they transferred. In other cases, such as when they moved for geographic or personal reasons, or because they were not happy with their first Ph.D. program, usually this involved transferring to a department that they would have likely been admitted to in the first place.
Are there any schools which are not quite as prestigious, but still strong and a good fit for you both research-wise and geographically? If so, applying to them might be a good idea. (In addition to your chosen West Coast school -- I doubt your odds are good but they're probably not zero).
Finally --- a word of caution --- you don't say whether you'll eventually be seeking academic employment or not, but the academic job market is quite difficult for everyone, even for graduates of top ten schools. In particular it requires a lot of geographic flexibility and many people end up in locations other than where they would like to live.
I hate to discourage anyone from getting a Ph.D., but you might think ahead and make sure that you plan for a career which will allow you geographic flexibility, if you believe that your health will require it.
Best wishes to you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the other answers. Transferring would be very difficult unless you: 1) made such a name for yourself in your first year that you are now a superstar in your field; or 2) are stepping down in level considerably from university A to B. In either case, you would need a strong letter of recommendation from your current faculty.
There are some other options to consider:
1. Taking a medical leave of absence to recuperate
2. In some fields (and even then, depending on the whims of your advisor), you are only required to be in residence during your coursework. Once you've done that, you can do your dissertation fieldwork and write-up in another location.
That being said, you should know that you will have very little choice in which geographical locale you will be able to find entry-level academic jobs and include this in your calculations about what you want to do with your life.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/29
| 1,106
| 4,674
|
<issue_start>username_0: If a graduate student or postdoc develops or plays a large role in developing an idea (this could be anything from a new experimental method or new code for running simulations), what's supposed to happen when they move to a new institution?
Can they use these ideas on their own after the move, share them with their new PI/colleagues, use them to get their own funding? I assume the answer is generally yes, but
1. what if the idea is unpublished with the original group?
2. does it depend on the idea, code/scripts vs. less tangible ideas?
Just not sure what's the normal protocol or if I'm assuming incorrectly.<issue_comment>username_1: In virtually every case, trying to transfer out of PhD program A to join PhD program B because you were unhappy in A is a bad idea, and unlikely to [be easy](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2498/is-transferring-to-another-university-an-option-for-an-unhappy-phd-student). The linked, old question discusses several scenarios in its answers.
There are legitimate reasons, some of them [obvious](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/43705/10220). While I understand why one would want to, changing for location, as per your title, is not one. Changing to improve a serious health condition, on the other hand, is one.
So I don't see how you can reasonably hope to transfer without disclosing your health condition. Add the compounding factor that you were declined in the past by program B. Given that you are very early in your career at A, I cannot see how, minus health conditions that could qualify you for spots set aside specifically to aid in like cases, their decision would be different so soon after.
If transferring really matters that much, you should consider opening up about whatever issue(s) you are dealing with - to your current faculty first, but also to the receiving faculty. Your current faculty will appreciate to hear a non-academic reason for your desire to leave, and if you're lucky, one or some of them will fully support you as they buy into your explanation. Given the earlier refusal, you'll need strong letters from A, and even then this still strikes me as a long shot. But you can always try if your life at A is making you that miserable as your health is failing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To the OP: I feel for you and wish you the best of luck.
I know several people that have transferred to a different Ph.D. program after beginning one. In some cases this involved them substantially exceeding expectations at the program from which they transferred. In other cases, such as when they moved for geographic or personal reasons, or because they were not happy with their first Ph.D. program, usually this involved transferring to a department that they would have likely been admitted to in the first place.
Are there any schools which are not quite as prestigious, but still strong and a good fit for you both research-wise and geographically? If so, applying to them might be a good idea. (In addition to your chosen West Coast school -- I doubt your odds are good but they're probably not zero).
Finally --- a word of caution --- you don't say whether you'll eventually be seeking academic employment or not, but the academic job market is quite difficult for everyone, even for graduates of top ten schools. In particular it requires a lot of geographic flexibility and many people end up in locations other than where they would like to live.
I hate to discourage anyone from getting a Ph.D., but you might think ahead and make sure that you plan for a career which will allow you geographic flexibility, if you believe that your health will require it.
Best wishes to you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I agree with the other answers. Transferring would be very difficult unless you: 1) made such a name for yourself in your first year that you are now a superstar in your field; or 2) are stepping down in level considerably from university A to B. In either case, you would need a strong letter of recommendation from your current faculty.
There are some other options to consider:
1. Taking a medical leave of absence to recuperate
2. In some fields (and even then, depending on the whims of your advisor), you are only required to be in residence during your coursework. Once you've done that, you can do your dissertation fieldwork and write-up in another location.
That being said, you should know that you will have very little choice in which geographical locale you will be able to find entry-level academic jobs and include this in your calculations about what you want to do with your life.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/29
| 835
| 3,223
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a paper, there is an Acknowledgements section, in which I can thank everyone that helped me along the way. But what do I do in a 15-minute presentation (e.g. in a non-archival conference)? I do want to thank the people that helped me, both for my and for their benefit (in case they may be sitting in the audience, or viewing the talk later in video).
How can I thank/acknowledge people during a short presentation?<issue_comment>username_1: You can put such acknowledgements on the very last slide, which will stay up while you field questions after your presentation (unless you need to flip back to a specific slide to answer a question).
Don't recite every single name in a presentation. Just end your talk like this:
>
> Finally, I'd like to thank everyone who has helped me in this project.
>
>
>
Then look expectantly at the session chair, who should lead the applause and ask for questions, while everyone who is interested can read your acknowledgements on the slide.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: It's common practise to have an Acknowledgements slide, at the very end, before you take any questions.
I disagree with Stephan about the certainty with which he recommends clumping up everyone. While it is rather cumbersome and time-consuming to list everyone, you could single out a couple of people, especially if you have done collaborative work, where some people ran samples, did analysis etc **for** you.
I mean something along the lines of (the stuff in parentheses are spoken, not written out):
>
> ### Acknowledgements
>
>
> **Your supervisors group**
>
>
> <NAME> (for his work on 2D gels)
>
>
> <NAME> (for her help in data analysis)
>
>
> Colleagues at the group
>
>
> **Other group**
>
>
> <NAME> (for ...)
>
>
> Muckerberg's boss (for the possibility to collaborate)
>
>
> Other collaborators
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As Stephan and username_2 already wrote, a (short or long) acknowledgement page at the end of the talk is the standard you see on conferences/talks.
However I saw a few, who had a short acknowledgement as one of the first slides or at the start of the chapters of their hour long talk.
This was quite interesting, since you directly saw, who was responsible for the work and the presenter (in this case the group leader/professor) didn't sound like he did all the work.
Also, you can end on your summary page. The end of the talk is often times the most interesting and memorable part, which is why the summary in the end is quite an intriguing point. And the summary will stay to start the discussion and give the hearer again an overview of your talk.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: In addition to the other answers: don't forget to put your funders on your acknowledgements slides!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Something I see very frequently is an acknowledgements slide that consists of, for instance, a group photo (if the people you want to acknowledge are in your research group). Then particular faces may be circled/labeled. Decent way of showing "hey, these people!" without necessarily having just a list.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/29
| 970
| 4,042
|
<issue_start>username_0: In Europe it is somewhat common to apply directly to professors for a PhD project at any time of the year. Specially in chemical engineering, bioprocessing, process engineering, material science and similar areas.
Assuming you are currently writing your master thesis (usually takes 1 semester), how early should you start applying for PhD's?
I found this related question [Apply for PhD before finishing my Master's degree](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/22032/apply-for-phd-before-finishing-my-masters-degree) , however it deals with applying to US PhDs while doing a EU Master.
My doubt is about applying to EU PhDs while finishing a EU master.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> In Europe it is somewhat common to apply directly to professors for a PhD project
>
>
>
I cannot speak for the whole of Europe (and I think you'd get better answers if you'd narrow down your question) but at least in Austria it is usually required that you apply directly to professors; you can only enroll at the university for the PhD program if a professor is willing to advise you (there are other ways, e.g., if you enroll in a graduate school type program; but they aren't all that common).
I know that in several (central) European countries, at least in Computer Science, it is very common to approach the potential future advisor before applying formally. A formal application is nonetheless necessary, since you will usually be employed by the university. In some cases, open positions are only announced once the professor has found a suitable candidate - so there might be (and there usually are) opportunities even if there are no listed open positions. If the professor already knows you (from courses or a thesis project) it shouldn't be a problem to talk about PhD opportunities. If the professor doesn't know you, it shouldn't be a problem either; but you should be able to show real interest in the subject.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't really know the procedure for all countries but in France, the universities give priority to their own graduate students, especially concerning the scholarship. So, it is always better to do a MSc degree to be safe.
Also, as username_1 said, it is mainly the professor who decide to enroll you in PhD. If a professor accepts your PhD project, it would be fine I think.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There's nothing wrong with planning ahead, noone would blame you for not finishing your degree before applying.
However if you want them to take you seriously, and consider you for a position they might have, you kinda need to be not too far away from a speculative starting day. For that reason I'd say more than 6 months before graduation might be not optimal.
Also consider that in some countries, Sweden being one, PhD positions are full-time employment positions and they are announced publicly (even if a candidate is already present). From an employer's (or PI's) point-of-view, they need to show that they have the resources for the full-time employment, and that it's much difficult to "get rid of" someone, if the working dynamics aren't optimal, once a candidate is recruited.
What that means is that there are usually short-term, project assistant/worker positions that are meant to be "testing the water" for both parties (mine was about 8-9 months). It could also be so that the PI is waiting to hear from a funding agency for funds, and doesn't have the liberty to recruit immediately.
Such a "test period" is useful for the PI to check whether or not a candidate has what the job/project demands (academically and personally), and for the candidate it's a great chance to see the group dynamics, have a feel for how it is to work with that PI and his/her group, to work on that particular project.
So if the PI you contact does not immediately "accept" you for a position but instead offers a short-term position with the possibility of a full-term commitment, don't get dismayed :)
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/29
| 1,325
| 5,754
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a 3rd year PhD student of Computer Science in the UK and I was considering joining the IEEE-CIS and/or ACM as a student member. As much as the annual memberships in both are very reasonably priced, I was wondering if there was any point subscribing to both and whether if anybody who signed up for both would recommend one over the other and suggest me some key factors to consider before becoming a member in these (or in general, other such societies).<issue_comment>username_1: This is not a complete answer as I never cared for any of the services related to membership in either of the listed societies and never read their (in some cases, many and frequent) e-mails.
My only reason for signing up in the first place, and in fact a response to your question
>
> I was wondering if there was any point subscribing to both
>
>
>
is that members get discounts on the registration fees of conferences organized by the respective society. Thus, if you attend several IEEE conferences and several ACM conferences in one year, you can save some of the money from whichever source your conference travels are paid by becoming a member of both societies.
In such a case, at least if the initial registration + the discounted conference fee is at most as high as the normal conference fee, you may also have the option to get your registration fee for the respective society reimbursed, as you are actively saving money for the funding organization.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm a fairly continuous member of the IEEE and an off and on member of the ACM. Both of them tend to bundle membership with conference fees, such that most conferences have a "registration + membership" cost that is lower than "non-member registration." As such there is rarely a point in *not* being a member, if you're going to a conference sponsored by the organization. I happen to go to an IEEE conference quite regularly, but not so much ACM conferences, and thus my membership trends.
Beyond that, both have nice magazines they send you (IEEE Spectrum vs. CACM), and various member services that I'm sure some people take advantage of.
Bottom line: join whoever you go to conferences with, and whether that's neither, one, or both, it's fine.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes, there is a reason to be a member of both. Aside from the conference discounts mentioned by the other answers, student members get access to the digital libraries with membership in each organization. This has been the only reason that I've been a member of either for the last few years. If you're doing active research in Computer Science, you will very likely be needing access to a lot of articles from both the IEEEXplore digital library and the ACM Digital Library.
Student members of ACM get full access to the ACM Digital Library. Student members of the IEEE Computer Society get limited access to the IEEEXplore digital library and discounted access to other IEEE publications. Note that in the case of IEEE, as far as I know, this only applies to the Computer Society, not IEEE as a whole.
As O.R.Mapper mentioned in a comment, many universities provide access to the ACM Digital Library and IEEEXplore through their libraries. In my experience, however, these were more annoying/less reliable to use, at least from off-campus, though I'm sure this will vary from one university to the next. More importantly, however, at least in my case, the subset of IEEEXplore material available through the university library's subscription was not the same as the subset available through the IEEE Computer Society's student membership. The library had a journals-only subscription, while the student membership material was mostly from conferences. As such, they were actually mostly complementary.
Additionally, student members of ACM can get free downloads of much of Microsoft's software (via [DreamSpark](https://www.dreamspark.com/), formerly known as MSDN Academic Alliance.) This is obviously a huge benefit that pays for the ACM membership several times over with just one download. I'm not sure what's currently offered there, but I've gotten professional versions of Visual Studio and Windows 7 as well as Enterprise versions of SQL Server and Windows Server there in the past. Note that, being free, this software comes with the caveat that it can only be used for personal or academic purposes, not commercial purposes, however, the licenses don't expire when you graduate.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: If your academic career has taken you through any of the better universities, you may have an alumni membership that offers free lifetime access to the respective on-line libraries, even if your current institution has no agreement in place.
It's been a few years, but the ACM did offer a fairly broad selection of CBT courses, but the content of the few I looked at was fairly basic, and as full of typos as wot something I'd tapped wud contain.
Neither are UK based, so won't offer the: networking / talk / seminar options student BCS membership grants. So essentially it's a choice as to whether you'd prefer an @acm.org or @ieee.org email forwarding address and the complementry branded coffee mug, if they still offer them, you'll get for the money.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I was a full member of both IEEE and ACM in the past year (2014). I tend to like ACM. The CACM seems to have better quality articles and they are more CS-ish compared to IEEE which I felt are more CompEng-ish. I also prefer ACM because they send more meaningful mails and less spam compared to IEEE. For instance, ACM will send you a customized list of articles based on your interests.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/04/29
| 212
| 893
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it convenient to include in your CV papers that have not been cited at all along several years?<issue_comment>username_1: Convenient? No. Appropriate? Yes.
Unless you are at a point in your career where you can release an impressive "selected publications" CV, your CV is expected to contain everything that you have ever published. That includes publications that nobody has cited and even ones that you are embarrassed by in retrospect. I've certainly got some of those in my CV (we were all grad students once), and I simply trust that they will be drowned out by all of the good work that has been done since.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is. Your cv is about you, not about the people who cite you. It will give the reader an opportunity to see how you write, how you think. And what you have done over the years.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/29
| 885
| 3,632
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently using Google Scholar to receive alerts (emails) for new publications in my field. However, *to my understanding* (I might be wrong) Google Scholar doesn't allow to:
* Use regular expression
+ might very useful for looking at variants (noun, adjective, adverb) of the word of interest
* Indicate the field where the matching pattern should be found
+ *author name*: if you write the name of an author, you just get all the paper that (s)he publish and all the papers that cite him/her. Also, if the author has a short and common name such as `Do` then, Google Scholar will basically send tons of articles.
+ *title*: If I am looking for a concept that is used in a whole lot of different papers but only few papers really work on it such as the word `evolution` for example, then it would be useful to be able to ask for publications that contain the word `evolution` in the title only.
+ *Journal*: Well... because we all have our favourite journals.
* Use AND and OR statements
+ Such as for example: Give me all new publications which author is `<NAME>` AND where the word `action potential` is present in the title OR the article has `neurophysiology` as a keyword. Something like `author: <NAME> AND (title: action potential OR keyword: neurophysiology)`
There are probably various algorithms that can be found online that would allow one to receive alerts for new publications. Can you give me recommendations of what (and why) is best to use for receiving alerts?
---
FYI: My field is evolutionary biology and more precisely theoretical population genetics. I am particularly bothered by the fact that I am working on the concept of robustness in evolutionary developmental biology but the word robustness has meaning in so many different sciences and I just receive tons of alerts that are no relevant to my work.<issue_comment>username_1: The two large commercial bibliographic services come pretty close:
[Web of Science](http://webofscience.com) can handle alerts with boolean searching - it couldn't exactly replicate this as it can't search keywords only, however. (It has a generalised "topic" which searches title/abstract/keywords). Leaving off the author element, there's about 1050 results for 2014.
[Scopus](http://www.scopus.com/) can run this exact search. It has a somewhat broader scope than Web of Science - so 1930 hits for 2014.
Both are, unfortunately, (expensive) subscription services. But your institution may well pay for them ...
---
**edit** - UBC does indeed pay for Web of Science, so give it a shot and see if you like it! You probably want, in advanced search, something like `TI=(action potential) OR TS=(neurophysiology)`
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There are a few things Google Scholar can handle, for example here is a query that can be made into an alert and is similar to what you gave as an example:
`author:"<NAME>" (intitle:"action potential" OR neurophysiology)`
To get all the results from a particular author (with or without articles that cite their work) you can search the author, click on his/her name in one of the results and there will be a "Follow" button on the profile page to get email alerts.
If you click the drop-down in the search box you can fill out the advanced search form to make complicated queries and at the bottom of the search results there is a "create an alert" link, but this option seems to disappear if you specify a journal.
As for using regular expressions, hopefully most of your queries can be solved by using OR, e.g. `(color OR colour)`
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/04/29
| 776
| 3,416
|
<issue_start>username_0: Say a PhD student has a salary paid through a RA/TA or a fellowships but said student has no money for conferences, lab experiments, or to visit another lab for a few months to develop an important part of the thesis.
Should the student pay for these expenses out of his personal money? Is this acceptable, or should the student cut down on the project or change project to accommodate with the budget restrictions?
EDIT: Think of students from small departments and from countries where research money is little to non existent<issue_comment>username_1: Does the student *want* to pay for the expenses out of his own funds?
It is a fact of life that resources are tight, but dissemination of research and networking are important components of a PhD program, and any supervisor worth his/her salt will build some travel into the budget. (I would expect that there should be at least two regional conferences and one major international conference over the course of the project.) Beyond that, you'd have to be pretty sure that the expense will be worth it, before you incur it. There usually is money to be found, internally, externally, even through a visiting position at the off-site lab you mentioned. Be creative, negotiate, but be selective also.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: "Should" is a hard word here. I certainly never paid for these things, but my supervisor was well funded, and so I didn't have to worry about it. At the other end, I think a student certainly "can" pay for these things out of their own pocket. My recommendation for travel would be to avoid this by pursuing departmental, university, and conference-specific travel funds.
I can't imagine it being reasonable for a student to purchase lab equipment. It's often expected that you'll have your own laptop, but workstations, servers, and compute clusters should be provided by someone else. Same for microscopes, reagents, glassware, and everything in between.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Remember that some people fund their entire PhD out of their own pocket so there is no 'should' answer. If someone is in this situation, they should first discuss this with their supervisor who will have the best advice on whether there is any available money.
There are no rules against students funding this themselves but many simply wouldn't apply for programs without that kind of support or would not be able to afford that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are plenty of grants available to grad students, especially for conference travel. Have a look at the societies in your field. If they offer grants for travel or research expenses then join them. I'd say my ROI for the money I've paid to join societies as a grad student is > 2000%. These are rarely competitive from my experience. Often the society running the conference will offer funding for students to attend the conference. Sometimes funding is only available to those from low GDP countries, so being from a low GDP country can actually help.
Then there are plenty of other organisations that offer grants without having to join or pay to join. Some offer money for research expenses and short trips to visit other institutions. You should be able to find most of these by searching online.
It also looks good on your CV when you have a long list of (small) grants as a grad student.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/04/29
| 1,434
| 6,235
|
<issue_start>username_0: Paper submissions always put weight on our resume, specifically for students who are applying for a Ph.D. Conference papers are different from journal papers, at least in few cases. Which one puts more weight on our resume? For example, if two students have same level of qualifications except one student has a journal paper and the other one has a conference paper, which one gets higher priority?
I'm a computer science graduate, very much interested in publishing a paper. I just wanted to know the pros and cons of paper submission, and more specifically the advantages of journal paper vs. conference paper.<issue_comment>username_1: The only downside to submitting papers is submitting too many. Not only does it require time to write them, if they are of bad quality you will ultimately gain the reputation of a crank or troll.
In terms of journal versus conference, the trade-off is not clear-cut. You want exposure, so you want your paper to be seen, read and cited by as many people as possible.
A good journal (recognizable by a high "impact factor" --- however subjective and error-prone that measure might be) gives you the most exposure. Papers published there also tend to be of higher quality than conference papers because the review process is more thorough.
Conference papers, on the other hand, usually let you present your ideas to an audience that self-selected for interest. Networking opportunities at conferences also increase your exposure and that of your paper.
Bad journals, finally, (and unfortunately there seem to be more and more of those) can actually damage your reputation. The reviewing is shoddy, nobody reads them, your paper won't get cited, and it will be tainted by association.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Computer science is a bit of a special case, in that high-profile conferences can be even better than high-profile journals.
[Here's an in-depth discussion.](https://homes.cs.washington.edu/~mernst/advice/conferences-vs-journals.html)
But it's still important to get journal publications because the rest of the scientific community (including perhaps the chair of your department) tends to believe they're better.
Now this distinction is only important once you have a few publications already.
Also, one of the advantages of conferences is that they have set deadlines and processing times, constrained by the conference dates, whereas journal submissions can take months and months to be processed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: My understanding is that, similar to username_2's answer, CS is a different animal than other areas. But even within CS it may differ. In some of the newer, more applied areas--particularly those in the AI-related fields--conferences are generally better, if only because those fields are evolving so rapidly. In more theoretical work, especially theoretical fields that have been well studied for decades (complexity theory comes to mind here), journals may be a better bet.
Part of the usefulness of conferences is that they generally accept fewer submissions and they allow you to present your work to your colleagues. This is like a PR campaign. In a fast innovating area, even the best ideas can be overshadowed by mediocre ones if they are not picked up on by the community at large (a la [VHS and Betamax](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Videotape_format_war)). In a journal, you may end up on page 945 and nobody will know unless they are looking for your specific topic.
The way I view it is: if your work is novel in a rapidly growing/changing area, conferences are your best bet to get your ideas out there and known now. If that's not the case, then there is nothing wrong with publishing in a prestigious journal. It really just comes down to the circumstances of the topic at hand.
All that being said, it's still important to make sure the conferences you are publishing in are good ones. Otherwise, no matter the field, a top journal should probably take precedence.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: There is no such thing as a *generic* comparison of conference vs. journal in computer science. Both conferences and journals range across a wide spectrum of quality, and so the individual conference and individual journal is what will make all the difference. Moreover, the judgement in some cases is likely to be quite subjective by field as well, based on the opinions that particular PIs have of other sub-disciplines. Bottom line: you can get conferences and journals that are both of very high quality and high respect in a great many parts of computer science.
So, how should you decide? My main criteria is the nature of the work. When I have a relatively terse work, it is suitable for a conference, which typically have strict page limits. When a work is much more lengthy, it should go to a journal instead.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: In CS neither is by itself better or worth more than the other. And I think it's sad, if that is the case in other fields (because it implies judgement of content by superficial criteria). What matters is this:
1. Does the conference/journal fit your topic
2. How esteemed is the conference in its field (or the field you want to work in long-term, if your paper is cross-field work)
3. Can you make your paper good enough to get accepted
4. How well do the journal/conference's technical requirements (number of pages, code to provide, ...) fit for your work
5. When is the dead-line, can you make a good enough version till then
6. Can you obtain funding to get to the conference location (journals may win this)
7. (Are you happy with the publishing rules of the journal/conference?)
Most of those are also taken into account when people assess you and your scientific qualifications. For instance, if you publish a paper in the totally wrong journal for your topic, this may raise some eyebrows, more likely in a negative than positive way: It could potentially be interpreted as trying to dodge the tougher competition in your field; or as indication that you had no clue what you were doing; or that some other contribution from a co-author of that other field was way more important than yours etc.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/04/29
| 900
| 3,980
|
<issue_start>username_0: My husband received an acceptance letter in February to get his Ph.D. in History. We are in the US. When he e-mailed to the funding department asking what else he needed, the funding department said they had everything.
Now in April he e-mailed to the Department where he supposedly is going to do his Ph.D. to ask about registration, start day, etc., and the president of the department answered saying he is not hopeful about securing his fellowship line at the moment, and the funding they have now will cover the currently enrolled students and if he has something left, he will not know until august. But classes start in August and we have to move 700 miles away!
Is there something we can do after my husband has been accepted but with no funding?<issue_comment>username_1: If they did not say they had funding at the time of the offer, then it is quite likely they do not have funding now. This is especially true in the humanities. Cases where the offer include a statement about funding generally mean the department has funding, but it is not unheard of for things to happen. Generally statements about funding include lots of conditional clauses protecting the department in case things fall through. In the humanities funding for a PhD is much harder to get. It is worth asking about the possibility of teaching.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You note that this involves a humanities department at an American university, so my answer is that this kind of bare-bones offer is unfortunately all too common -- especially at state universities.
At these places, your letter of admission is just that -- admission into the graduate program. Your admission letter has to explicitly offer a financial package which might include:
* a waiver for tuition and fees
* a graduate stipend (independent of teaching, or tied to teaching)
* offer of teaching or research fellowships (either guaranteed or ad hoc)
* internal fellowships
If this isn't the case, you would be liable for not only your own living expenses, but for any tuition and fees that are charged. At some places, this might be quite a lot of money given that you might be treated as an out-of-state student and charged tuition and fees accordingly.
At this stage, it's difficult for any of us to recommend what to do. It seems you have several options:
1. Accept the situation and prepare for the financial difficulty of doing graduate work while working at the same time or taking out loans.
2. Withdrawing from the program (and perhaps reapplying to the same or other programs next year in the hope of a better offer).
3. Waiting for the other offers and either accepting an offer with a better package or trying to leverage them against your original school for more money
4. Writing to the graduate director or your prospective advisor and plead your case.
All of these carry very real risks, so proceed with caution.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Just a clarification for some of the above answers, from an American faculty member in the humanities.
Funding in the humanities (like everywhere else in the academy) is a contractual matter. In my experience, all funding offers are processed by a graduate school or other university-level office, not the individual department. Letters are sent early in the admissions process, signed by a representative of the university. Once the student signs and returns the contract, it will not be withdrawn (assuming you are dealing with a respectable university).
Department admissions committees make decisions about who to offer funding to. It is frequently true that there is less funding available in humanities and social science departments than other graduate programs in many state universities. But we *do not make funding offers without actually having the funding lines available*. Obviously, that would be highly unethical because there is so much at stake for the student, as the OP notes.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/04/29
| 1,326
| 5,817
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was reading a conference paper relevant to my area of study, and I found it interesting - they did what I was planning to do anyways, and had some extremely promising results.
Now, I don't really believe their claims, as the success seems a bit extreme (300-400x speed up for an algorithm by switching from CPU to GPU). It feels like they compared optimized GPU code to an unoptimized CPU algorithm. Nevertheless, I am in general a reasonable person, so I wanted to see what they did and how they did it.
Unfortunately, the paper is very vague on the implementation used. There is a snippet of pseudocode that doesn't really share anything new (it is obvious). I emailed the authors and asked them for source code, if at all possible. The first author replied to me, and provided a GitHub link. The code in the repository is undocumented, and isn't exactly for the implementation I asked about anyways. It is for another implementation they did (also distributed computing).
I tried contacting the author with some questions, but he has never responded to me again... So that link has not been successful.
The paper doesn't have many citations, and all of them but one are self-references. I haven't found evidence that anyone built on these findings so far.
So: I figured I would just move ahead with my idea and not rely on their implementation. **However, do I need to address this paper somehow in my thesis?** I assume so - the committee could ask me about it, and how my work is different. But how can I compare my work to something else that I have no source code for? Do I take their word for it and compare my results to their published results? Am I allowed to criticize work that provides no supporting code? Probably not...
Should I pester the authors some more? They are probably sick of me by now.<issue_comment>username_1: In your thesis, I think it should be safe to say something along the lines of
>
> "<NAME> et. al. claim in [22] that the algorithm would run 400X faster with their implementation, however, the details are unclear."
>
>
>
and leave it there. If you are asked more about it in your defense, you may politely state that you tried to approach the authors for more information but could not get it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First off, let me give you some context and help you set expectations. It's very common in computer science that authors are not willing to share their code (for any number of reasons). I'm not saying this is a good thing; I'm just saying this is how it is.
If they gave you a pointer to a Github repository containing their code, that is far above average. You should consider yourself lucky to have their code. Undocumented? Par for the course -- it's research code, you're lucky that they're giving you their code at all. Now if the code they sent is you is not the code they used for this paper, but code for something entirely different, that's a different matter -- then the code may not be useful. However, the question is not entirely clear on this point, so I'm not in a position to judge how relevant what they sent you was.
If they sent you their code for this paper, and if it's highly relevant to your thesis, you should study it carefully. It's your job to be an expert in this area. You need to study their paper and their code to understand the basis for those results, and see if you can replicate them. You need to make every effort to try to understand what's going on with that paper. If someone asks you about it and you respond that you asked for their code but the code they gave you had no documentation so you didn't look at it, that's not going to look good.
Second, regardless of whether they sent you the code, you probably should be trying to reproduce their results, if there is enough detail in the paper to understand what they did, and if it's highly relevant to your thesis.
Now if they didn't send you the code for the paper, and if the paper doesn't include enough information to reproduce their results, then the best you can do is mention in your thesis that "Smith et al claim to achieve a 400x speedup using a GPU [1], however some details of their approach do not seem to be publicly available." and leave it at that.
Finally: You should be talking to your research advisor about this. This is what your advisor is for. Talk to him/her. He/she will likely have useful advice for you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Attempt to replicate
--------------------
If the topic is within the area that you're deeply studying, then it could be reasonable to attempt to replicate the results of their paper, even if (or especially because) the source is not available. The approach is described in the paper, as are the expected performance results. Where the details are vague, fill them in reasonably - after all, you're claiming to be an expert of the area as well. If they don't document relevant details (e.g. the hardware used), document these details for *your* replication as they might explain any notable differences.
If the replication results are significantly different than their claims, then this result may be publishable separately; if the results are comparable with theirs then it goes against your current expectations and fixes a potential flaw in your thesis. So either way the replication results would contribute to your goals.
In general, for a thesis direction "approach Y to achieve X" it's quite reasonable to [re]implement or review + re-test + verify multiple other approaches for achieving X, not just your 'in-house' approach. Having good quality open source implementations of other approaches makes this job easier, but *not* having such implementations doesn't mean that this job can be skipped.
Upvotes: 2
|