date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2015/09/04
| 1,826
| 7,852
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am new to the world of academia and pursuing a Masters degree in HCI (Human Computer Interaction). One of the goals I have set for myself is getting my first publication(s) before I graduate.
Now, obviously, I'd like to work my way up to potentially being a first author but that seems a bit beyond me since I have never published before. Therefore, I figure it might be easier to work with someone else and establish myself as a co-author.
Now, how do I go about even finding someone who is working on a paper and approaching them asking if I can help them out to potentially being a co-author? It seems like a very taboo subject and might be insulting to ask? How do I go about doing this? Any suggestions or advice is greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: You don't first co-author a paper, you first collaborate on a research effort. Then, if said research effort leads to interesting results, you co-author a paper. So you need to look for someone doing interesting research that you think you can contribute to. Talk to professors in your department and ask about the research they and their students are doing.
Of course, since co-authoring a paper is important to you, when you find the opportunity to be part of a research project you should ask the professor: "Do you think this is likely to lead to a paper before I graduate?" Nobody can promise you a paper (even if you do everything right, the nature of research is that we don't know everything in advance). But he/she will probably have some intuition about it. You should also ask what *you* specifically need to do to merit co-authorship credit on the paper that comes out of the research.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This depends on the specifics of your institution, of course, but at my university, there would be two options:
* **A very good student project**: Start a student project, and put twice the time and energy into it. The important thing to do here, is to tell the project supervisor that your aim is to turn it into a publication, and you're willing to put the extra work in. It may seem a little emberrasing to be so forward about your ambitions, but it's a very good ambition to have, and your supervisor should respond positively. The point is, if you don't tell them, there's no guarantee that they'll decide to turn it into a publication, no matter how good it is. It simply may never occur to them. They may also suggest ways of lowering the bar a little, like making it a conference paper, and sending it to a national conference rather than an international one.
* **Join an existing research effort**: This is trickier to do, but once you get accepted, the chances of success are higher. First, you have to make sure you have a good reputation with your teachers, and you have to be lucky enough to get a part-time job assisting in the research. Whether such jobs exists depends on your institution again. I can't think of anyone who would unload a substantial part of his own research work on an unpaid student. Again, whatever opportunity you find, make sure to communicate your ambitions (without demanding anything), so people can help you fulfill them, or tell you that it's unlikely to happen.
There's no surefire way to achieve this, unfortunately. Just make sure that you tell people that you're trying to get a publication, and whenever you think a project might yield publishable results, put in the extra hours. Even if you fail, your efforts will be good exercise for the next attempt. Also remember to pick your battles: if you try to make every student project into a paper you will probably spread yourself too thin.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Generally speaking, masters students write their first publications with their supervisor(s). The key is to do good publication-quality research. What is the gold standard for that? Well, it's to do work that other people will care about because it addresses an interesting problem in a way that other can learn from.
While the traditions vary a bit by discipline, it is common for student authors to come before faculty authors (i.e. first for a two-person paper) unless the faculty member did a lot of the hands-on critical work themselves, the supervisor contributed a particular seminal idea, the student was not able to participate fully, or the supervisor is fairly new and very hungry for visibility. There are numerous exceptions though, including some domains where alphabetical listing is the norm (in which case "<NAME>" is a winning name).
It is also important to note that not all publications are of equal value and impact, and that goes for publication venues too (journals and conferences). The same is true for degree-granting bodies. There exist conferences and even journals where almost anything can be published for a price, and the chance of anybody reading the publication is small. Thus, it is very important to select the correct venue well-matched to the work. This sometimes requires an experienced advisor of some kind.
A paper in Nature and a paper in Defcon will have very different standards, audiences and levels of impact (although both deserve a godo measure of respect).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: There's usually two way you can get your first publication:
1. Become an independent researcher and publish your findings as result
2. Collaborate with another established researcher on his/her current
research project and publish the finding as result
Let's first discuss the Pros and Cons of these two methods separately as follows.
**Method 1 Pros (not exhaustive):**
* You don't have to worry about a co-author and can continue to publish
**Method 1 Cons (not exhaustive):**
* It will be very difficult to get your work/findings published in a
journal or a conference proceedings (accredited/reputed) because what
you think is quality research might not be as per
journal's/conference's standard
**Method 2 Pros (not exhaustive):**
* Your established collaborator (researcher) is already pursuing a
world leading research or approved research projects, and is certainly
aware of the publication standards and rigorous research
methodologies. Therefore, publishing the article becomes more smooth.
* Your collaborator might have some funds available for conference
attendance, etc.
* Your collaborator can be a valuable asset to land connection in
industry or academia. Good for networking.
**Method 2 Cons (not exhaustive):**
* You might find yourself wasting a lot of time just to find a suitable
collaborator, who's project and working culture fits yours. This
might take months and years (not trying to scare you but trying to
portray the truth). If you are lucky you might be able to find one
within weeks. Since you are pursuing your MSc, finding a collaborator
can be easy because you can directly approach your MSc supervisor for
this.
So if we break the road to publication into a two step process, which being:
1. Pursuing a research project in Computer Science
2. Publishing the result/findings of the research
Let me share the 5 Step Process, which I found out, to pursue Computer Science.
You can follow this 5 Step Process to Computer Science research and publication, which I have found based on my experiences and other researchers with whom I collaborated:
1. **Select a subject area that you like**
2. **Search databases and relevant search engines**
3. **Sort scholarly articles and research papers**
4. **Reading articles/papers in an elaborative way**
5. **Brainstorm and innovate**
You can find the full publication of this 5 Step Process in the article, "A Beginner’s Guide to Computer Science Research", published in ACM Crossroads (XRDS) Magazine. Link: <https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2634549.2627954>
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/04
| 868
| 3,565
|
<issue_start>username_0: I obtained my M. Sc. in mathematics from a decent European university about a year ago (when I was 27). Due to various reasons of personal nature, my marks were the equivalent of a 3.0 GPA, or something like that, and it took me quite a while to finish. I wanted to drop out at some point, also because of the same issues, which led to a change in my thesis' topic, arguments and a not-so-good relationship with my advisor, who agreed to keep me until graduation anyway.
Right after obtaining the degree, my problems gradually subsided and I got a reasonably good job in the consulting industry, which of course I am not interested in, but I accepted because I had to. However, my interest for math and physics recently rekindled, to the point that in the little time I can spare from my job I find myself picking up my old books, and reading new ones and it's getting harder and harder to do something I dislike on a daily basis.
I realized I wasted a good chance and now I wish to apply to a Phd program (anywhere, really, with the condition that it be a reasonably good one) as I feel I am a bit too young to accept how things have played out, but all I have right now is a mediocre GPA and no way to obtain strong recommendation letters to compensate. Therefore I think my chances to get into a good program are very slim (feel free to correct me though, if you think otherwise).
I feel my only chance would be to get into another (1 or 2 years long) M. Sc., perhaps in applied math this time and enter an environment where I can:
1. improve my record
2. get in contact with people who could help me with recommendation letters in the future.
Here come my questions: is this plan sensible? Does a candidate with 2 M. Sc. in similar subjects raise eyebrows?
Feel free to offer further advice on what my options are if you have any.<issue_comment>username_1: I wouldn't if I were you. Of course grades and reference letters matter but to spend another year or two putting yourself in debt just for reference letters seems like a lot. You will also be two years older, and with no guarantee to get the position you want. I would try to apply for PhD's anyways, or if needed, try to find a project for a few months in the group/area you are interested for the PhD. In Europe there is funding for exchange students/projects. I spent a year in Sweden after finishing my MSc. back in the Netherlands. This was paid for by a stipend from my supervisor in Sweden.
Doing a project will allow you to see if this is the topic you want to do a PhD in, and also if this is the right group. If you do a good job and the supervisor has money for a PhD student, you can apply. If not, you can apply elsewhere using this supervisor as a reference.
Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Enroll as a non-degree-seeking student in one course per semester either at an institution in your area, or at an institution that offers online study. Use these courses to satisfy your intellectual itch and to build up an excellent new GPA. Use the remaining time in your job to build up savings to ensure financial independence, and to perfect the art of being a good employee, even when you might not find every task you are assigned deeply fulfilling.
-- Edit -- (If there are no suitable courses offered in your area) Online education is really taking off now. Here is a randomly selected example of online offerings:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/QJHsk.png)
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/04
| 1,632
| 6,969
|
<issue_start>username_0: For a PhD candidate that has done a fine job in their PhD, what are the common mistakes to avoid in a defense session?<issue_comment>username_1: IMO, the most common is being defensive (perhaps encouraged by the name of the ritual). For instance if a member asks "Why did you use Smith's procedure...", and the candidate starts backtracking and apologizing, saying "I suppose I could have used Jones' procedure, that would have been better", when the question simply asks you to explain why you used Smith's procedure.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: How the dissertation defense works varies enormously between fields, countries, universities, and departments. Any guidance has to take into account what the expectations are.
For example, in the defenses I'm familiar with, there are no common mistakes at all. In fact, I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone do anything worth calling a mistake. Here, the defense is basically a formality: you don't reach that point unless your advisor and readers are happy with your dissertation and confident you will easily pass, and in practice nobody fails unless something goes dreadfully wrong. That can happen (I know of one case in which a serious mistake was uncovered at the last minute, which was certainly embarrassing to both the candidate and the committee), but I've never actually been present when someone failed. So if someone from my department asked me about common mistakes they should avoid, I'd tell them not to worry about it: making it to the defense is the hard part, and then passing it is really straightforward. It's more of a celebratory ritual than an actual test.
But of course this depends on how the defense is handled in your department.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me turn the question around and answer what I want a PhD candidate to demonstrate during a defense. There are in reality only 3 things:
* Demonstrate mastery of the subject, i.e., understand where the problem you researched comes from, why it is relevant, what others have already done, and why their approaches are insufficient.
* That you have made a *creative* contribution to resolving the question you worked on. The creative contribution may really have been only a single idea or insight, grounded in an understanding of the field. In reality, you will have likely developed it jointly with your adviser.
* That you have followed up this idea with diligent, comprehensive work that explored the potential and consequences of the idea.
If you cover these three topics, you will be on the good side.
Now for the common mistakes: Among the bad or difficult PhD defenses I have sat through -- of which unfortunately there were a number -- the candidate typically covered only one or two of the areas above. I can think of defenses where a candidate demonstrated good, diligent work, but was almost entirely unaware of the scientific background of the work. I can also think of defenses where the candidate understood the field well, but all of the work was essentially applying existing methods to problems to which it had previously been applied. And I can think of defenses where the candidate had had an idea, but whether the idea was worthwhile pursuing or not had not been explored in any kind of detail through follow-up work. In other words, I've seen PhD candidates make *all* kinds of mistakes. In reality, I think that the problem was in all of these cases not with the defense, but with the candidate, as usually becomes apparent during the Q&A session at the end.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been to multiple defenses, some common/general mistakes:
* Not knowing why they use certain methods as opposed to others. Meaning that you can answer what you are doing and how the formula works, but you can't answer why not use X method instead.
* Not knowing the specifics of certain methods/formulas and their reasons. Ex: we take X from Y, and you can't answer why you can/should take X from Z. more realistically: we take a measurement from the center, why not the top or bottom?
* Charts with too little information, and trying to make connections that "are there" in most datasets, but doesn't imply they will be in yours. Don't create curved lines if you are missing dots.
* Not knowing what is the importance of whatever it is that you are doing. Can you answer the question: "How is this useful for someone else?"
* Answers in the following form: why are you using "matlab?", you: because my advisor said so. Expected response: because my advisor has plenty of experience with it and we know it can solve the problem better than other software.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In the end, the person in the room who probably knows most about the work done is the candidate.
* Don't get nervous
* Make sure your slides cover what you did, in sufficient detail. Don't overdo it, your time is limited. Make sure (e.g. by rehearsing) you fit in the allotted time. Might have to only show a slice for this, select it carefully.
* When asked about stuff outside your direct work, it can be better to say you don't know than to try to come up with an explanation on the spot.
* Check possible questions (within reason!) and have answers ready
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The worst mistake you can make is to insist on defending on a certain date, over your advisor's objections. (I have seen this happen.)
---
If I may be forgiven a small anecdote: My aunt was asked a question in her defense (physics) that she didn't know how to answer. She said to the questioner, "Perhaps a sketch will help make this clear," and attempted to draw some coordinate axes... which didn't come out straight... and after several erasures and retries, the questioner got fed up and said, "It's okay, I know you know it, let's move on."
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: A common mistake to avoid is getting too nervous or defensive, and trying to cover up the limits of your knowledge. The committee will try to explore the limits of your knowledge and keep pressing for answers to increasingly difficult questions until you say "I don't know." Be expecting this. It's OK to not know the answer, especially when the question is not core to your thesis. If you can identify why a question is not core to your thesis, and articulate that clearly, you get bonus points for that (as long as you do it tactfully and don't imply that it's a bad question). Also, depending on the committee, they may be looking for a better answer like "I don't know, but for X reason(s) I suspect the answer might be Y and I would go about finding the answer by Z." If the question is core to your thesis, offer to find out the answer and get back to them (especially if they're on your committee).
The better your presentation, the more questions you're likely to get that try to expand outward into territory you haven't prepared for. Take that as a good sign!
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/05
| 809
| 3,520
|
<issue_start>username_0: I had submitted a manuscript in last year (December, 2014) while working in Institute-A. After one month of submission I left Institute-A and joined in Institute-B from January, 2015. Now that paper got accepted, just yesterday.
```
So what should be my affiliation and address of the paper?
```
I would like to mention that my current Institution (Institute-B) has no contribution for this paper. Though the paper was revised during my stay in Institute-B, but I did those revisions through the co-authors still working in Institute-A.<issue_comment>username_1: I think you should include both. Institute A should get the recognition that you produced the work while there and you should also add "current address Institute B" if readers want to contact you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This comes up a lot when professors visit other universities, actually. In mathematics it is common to use footnotes on the front page to cover grants and visits. So in the author list you might have
>
> <NAME>
>
> University of Wheresistan
>
>
>
with a footnote saying
>
> 1This author was partially supported by NSF grant 12345. Research was conducted while visiting the University of Whatsitville.
>
>
>
The exact formatting and content is something that will ultimately be determined by the journal in question, and your particular circumstances. The note may also include a thank you to the hosting university, or it may be split up (one footnote for the funding, another for the hosting/thanks). You can probably find several examples like this just by surveying (the first page of) current research articles.
So I'd suggest using an author footnote on the first page that includes the pertinent information. Use your current contact information and use the footnote to briefly mention the role played by other institutions and grants. You can consult the journal's style guide--and if you're still unsure, ask an editor--to see if they have any specific requests or instructions for this sort of entry. I believe most journals are fairly generous in what they allow here, and leave it up to you to make sure the proper thanks are given.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The most appropriate thing to do would be to add your current institution as your affiliation and include the institution that supported you before when the paper was submitted with the relevant details in the Acknowledgment section.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Give the affiliation(s) where the research was conducted (universities and departments get credit in Scopus/ISI/Google Scholar for publications too and it affects their ranking) and put a footnote as to your current address if needed - just make sure it is clear which university supported you during the time when the work was done. I would make the case that your revisions at University B deserves a mention (even if through co-authors, revision is work after all, sometimes more than the original paper), maybe by giving both affiliations.
This is probably only really important for the corresponding author, but make sure to follow the rules of the journal you submit to and follow the standard practice in your field. But from my experience, they usually don't specify or care. It is common (I am actually dealing with this now on a paper I am preparing for submission) to use old affiliations when students are authors on papers and who have graduated since the work was done.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/05
| 3,522
| 14,648
|
<issue_start>username_0: In my university, graduate students under scholarship have to perform certain tasks like tutoring and grading. I have no problem with that since it is part of the contract.
There are also some miscellaneous tasks like offering to help out for a departmental party (takes 10 hours over a few days), or volunteer to bring some visitors around the school, etc. These are theoretically on a voluntary basis, but when no one volunteers the admin staff starts to get very pushy and "hard sell" people to volunteer. To get a sense of how pushy the admin can get, I recently had to reject the same task thrice (via email), with the admin getting increasingly curt and rude in their email. (The administrators are not professors, they are in charge of departmental duties including paying our stipend.)
I plan to reject around 90% (edit: maybe 50-60% selectively, as there are some events that I am genuinely glad to help out) of such "voluntary tasks", and have already rejected a few, and accepted one. (I am a new graduate student) Will there be any negative repercussions if I do that (reject majority of the tasks)?
Most of the tasks require at most 10-20% of the students to help out (around 10 helpers out of 60 students). Some tasks just need a single or one or two volunteers.
(Edit: my personal background is that I used to be a "yes" person to the extent of burning out (previous experience not in school), hence I need to learn how to say no firmly to certain things. I have also discovered through the hard way that "yes" people get asked to volunteer more and more, few actually takes into account that I am already volunteering for another event and may need a rest. )
Also are there any tips on how to say no, with respect to Academia? I may try a new strategy of ignoring such emails, the emails do "require" us to respond whether we can make it or not, not sure if ignoring such emails may be a better policy since I think that is what some students do.
Edit: I have found a personal solution is to read up on more self help books on assertiveness. Thanks for all the help (including sarcastic comments, which confirms my new belief that I should not care about what others think). Especially thanks to Professor Romik for restoring my faith in humanity. Hope this thread can help students facing similar predicaments.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Will there be any negative repercussions if I do that (reject majority of the tasks)?
>
>
>
Of course there is no way to say for sure whether there will be any negative repercussions if you keep rejecting those requests. However, frankly, it seems likely to me that:
* You will come across as kind of an ass to the administrative staff, and that's not great at all. If your university is at all like mine, there will be a number of times when you need their support in, well, administrative matters, and you will be very low on their priorities list if you make it a point to never or rarely help them out.
* You will come across as kind of an ass to the other students, who will surely notice that you never help out and they need to take on more of those duties as a consequence. You will invariably need their help at some point during your studies, and it's not unlikely that they will not be thrilled to help you out then either.
* You *may* come across as kind of an ass to the faculty, which tends to notice if certain students are never volunteering for anything. The extent to which they *care* is another question, but it seems unlikely that they will consider this a positive attitude. In the worst case, somebody may remember this when the time for letters of recommendation comes up after graduation.
>
> Also are there any tips on how to say no, with respect to Academia? I may try a new strategy of ignoring such emails, the emails do "require" us to respond whether we can make it or not, not sure if ignoring such emails may be a better policy since I think that is what some students do.
>
>
>
If you really think you should keep on saying "no" to those things, it seems fair to tell the administrators directly that you are not available for volunteer work. They will likely be annoyed, but they will also be annoyed if you keep turning them down. I don't think there is a way to turn them down without annoying them in any way.
(and *please* don't start stringing together increasingly less plausible excuses - that's just childish)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd like you to look at the matter from another perspective.
The majority of these small requests are about communicating with people. If you are planning on a career in academia, that may come useful. You never know.
During my masters I helped organising a conference. One of the tasks for students was to meet foreign guests at the airport or the railway station.
I was asked to meet a really brilliant researcher, and we had plenty of time to communicate. Half a year later, he wrote a recommendation letter for me that helped me to enter a PhD track. So, you never really know what you are going to miss. And you'll definitely miss something if you keep rejecting these small requests.
Moreover, these tasks are usually small, they rarely take more than an hour or two. If you compare the time spent with the possible negative consequences, may be you'll find it better to participate, at least from time to time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: yoyostein, let me start by reminding you (just in case you forgot - some of the other comments and answers certainly seem to be ignoring these facts) that you are a professional, serious person who came to graduate school to further your education and become a better person. Getting your PhD is a nontrivial task that requires a level of focus and dedication that most people are not capable of. It is a difficult and risky endeavor, and for some graduate students even a small misstep like misplacing one's priorities slightly by doing too much volunteer work, or too much of anything unrelated to their studies, can mean the difference between success and failure.
You are also an employee of the department. On top of all that you are a human being, and therefore deserving of being treated justly and respectfully.
It follows that, from an ethical point of view, the administrators at your department have **no right** -- I repeat, **NO RIGHT; ZERO; NADA** -- to require you to volunteer even a minute of your time, or to treat you disrespectfully (and certainly not to retaliate against you in any way) if you decline to do so. Conversely, you are **100% within your rights** -- morally and ethically -- to refuse to volunteer. At the same time, refusing does carry some risks which you would be wise to evaluate and consider carefully before taking any action. I believe however, that if you resist the administrators' pressure in a respectful and classy manner, and if you are in the U.S. or a place with similar culture, then those risks would be largely mitigated, and you may even stand to gain newfound respect from your administrators and possibly the faculty and your fellow graduate students by asserting your rights.
In terms of what is the best way to respond to the pressure to volunteer, I can think of several possibilities which may be appropriate, depending on the nature of the situation, your personality and the personality of the administrators and other people in the department.
One suggestion is to respond to your administrator's recent request, in writing or in person if you feel more comfortable, with something like the following:
>
> "Dear [name of administrator],
>
>
> You recently contacted me for a third time with a request to volunteer
> to [insert activity] after I had already declined the same request twice.
> While I'm sure your request is well-intentioned, and sympathize
> with your frustration at the difficulty of finding graduate students who
> can help with
> this, I found the tone of your request somewhat disagreeable and
> disrespectful. I would like to remind you that I am a serious and
> professional person who came to the program to work on my studies,
> gain experience in teaching, and get a PhD. These are difficult tasks
> and I feel that I must focus my energies on them while in graduate
> school. Furthermore, the task of [insert volunteer activity] that you
> asked me to do is not within my core interests or competency. That
> being the case, you should know that although I love to help when I
> can, in the future I may decline some of your and the other department
> staff's requests for volunteers. Please feel free to ask me to
> volunteer anytime, but I ask that you respect my wishes and not ask
> more than once if I decline.
>
>
> Finally, I would like to raise a philosophical point. I assume that
> you are paid for your services and the department does not ask you to
> volunteer your time without compensation. However, myself and the
> other graduate students are often asked to volunteer our time. May I
> suggest that the department reconsider its approach on this matter? If
> you find a way to make the volunteer activities somehow profitable for
> us, whether it be by paying us directly or by other means (a small
> budget for pizza or for buying textbooks, etc.), I think you may find
> that you have a much easier time getting things done, and the culture
> and atmosphere of the department may improve. I'd be happy to meet with
> Chair [name of department chair] to raise these points with him if you
> think that would be appropriate, or you can mention it to [him/her].
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> [your name]"
>
>
>
Contacting the administrator in this way is the least aggressive, and as such, probably the preferable way of raising your concerns. I think you may find that despite being rude to you, the administrator may turn out to be a sensible person who, if approached in such a thoughtful manner, will see your point and back off, and may even end up liking you more for your honesty.
If you are reluctant to speak with the administrator, another possibility is to ask a faculty member whom you trust to speak to the administrator on your behalf and raise your concerns with them.
In the event that these options didn't work or you think they are not even worth trying since the administrator is a *really* seriously incompetent or inconsiderate person, the other possibility would be to go to the department chair with your concerns. The chair is in charge of the administrative staff, and if he/she is a sensible person he/she will absolutely not tolerate his staff treating graduate students disrespectfully, and will instruct them not to pressure students into doing volunteer activities. A really good chair might go even further and put some serious thought how to correct these systemic problems with his department by addressing the philosophical issues I raised in the draft email message above. (Note: I am currently a department chair myself. Fortunately I am not aware of such problems in my own department...)
Keep in mind that contacting the chair is a fairly drastic measure so I would try other options first. The staff members do not like being criticised by the chair and may develop a grudge against you for bringing a complaint against them. Of course, that does not mean you shouldn't do it when there is no alternative.
If the chair is him/herself incompetent or a jerk, you may be out of luck. While there may still be creative ways to fight the unjust expectations of your department (contacting the dean or the graduate student union, organizing a mass protest, etc.), it seems to me that at this point the chances of success are very low and the risks start seriously outweighing the possible rewards, and that in that case you are better off simply accepting that you will occasionally have to volunteer for uninteresting duties, and swearing that someday when you are in a professional environment and in a position of authority you will treat people better than that.
**UPDATE:** I see based on the votes that my advice is turning out to be extremely unpopular. Thank you all for the feedback. I concede that my suggestions are based on my fundamental belief that most people have a reasonably well-developed sense of fairness, and while this belief (and the general approach to dealing with conflicts that guided my answer) has worked very well for me personally, it may not necessarily be applicable to this situation, and carries some risks that the OP should consider carefully.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: What you must consider is not just the total time the extra tasks take but also if your regular Ph.D. work is not interrupted too often. As a rule, it should be possible in general to start work and not have to do anything else for several hours. If this is not the case, then that's a problem. You have to consider how to organize the tasks that you are supposed to be doing in such a way that both the time and the quality of the time you are working on your Ph.D work is sufficient. If no reasonable planning can accommodate for some extra tasks, then you need to raise that with your advisor.
In this case, you may actually find that the irregular activities like organizing a party are not really a big deal. The more routine tasks like tutoring (that you must of course do) are actually more of a burden. You may not experience it that way, but that's exactly part of the problem. We tend to not notice that we didn't start rigorous time consuming work to explore something that had a small chance of yielding an interesting result. If you have to teach in 90 minutes and it takes a few hours of work to get started on something then you tend to take the decision to do something else instead. And, of course, you won't miss the results you never found.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I would like to add a pragmatic note that applies to most international students in the US, and probably in some other countries in a similar fashion. If you are under F1 visa, and get paid through RA or TA (most common sources of income), they likely eat up your 20hrs/week on-campus employment quota, and subsequently [you are not allow to work for anything other than your research/coursework](https://expatriates.stackexchange.com/q/2994/164). Organizing parties and working as a tour guide may not be viewed as part of your research/coursework by some immigration officers. So you can simply recall your F1 status, should you wish to decline such tasks.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/05
| 452
| 1,984
|
<issue_start>username_0: I published an article few months ago in a journal. I sent another article to the same journal, in which I improved the design idea and enhanced the computation.
I was told that my second article was sent to Prof. X (name was provided) as a topic editor.
After about 70 days, I got an editorial rejection due to the article not being within the scope of the journal. In the online submission site, it said that my article was under review for the last 70 days.
In the end, my article was not even sent to referees... is that normal?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is normal that articles get rejected as not in the scope of the journal. Yes, it can take a long time for the people in charge (often doing this pro bono) to get around to take a look at an article.
So you published something related before in the same journal. OK, maybe they just want "new results", not the elaboration/extra details on previous ones. Or they don't want "enhanced computation" (presumably more detailed results), and prefer description of methods. Without an awful lot of additional information, we can't tell. Besides, whatever the case may be, the powers that be at that particular journal have the last say. If we consider it normal or not, is totally irrelevant.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's absolutely normal to experience some degree of inconsistency in how a journal judges its scope. From what you have described, it seems likely that both of your papers were somewhat borderline, and the first editor made the judgement call one way while the second made it the other way. That's entirely normal and reasonable, because judgements differ between editors, no matter how consistent one might attempt to be.
What's *not* normal is being forced to wait 70 days for a desk rejection. In my experience, editorial rejection is typically very fast, within a couple of weeks at most. More than two months time is enough for a full peer review.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/05
| 371
| 1,602
|
<issue_start>username_0: When one applies for an academic position (especially for a permanent one) or for a significant funding, (s)he is often asked to show his/her professional maturity in research in the motivation letter/research proposal (or sometimes one is asked to indicate how (s)he would reach this maturity).
The questions is: what are the signs of professional maturity in research that might be mentioned?
My background is theoretical mathematics but the question has little to do with a particular field as usually the positions and funding in question are for researchers from a broad range of scientific areas.<issue_comment>username_1: Independent research done. I.e., not as part of a guided thesis, not as a junior member in a research group or postdoc. Number of publications as sole author, or at least publications with a variety of coauthors (not just a flurry of papers with the advisor).
More broadly, all research is relevant, the more the merrier; but I'd stress the above points when evaluating proposals (or a colleague for promotion).
I'd say just go for it. Show all you have. If they reject your proposal, you can certainly use it to build the next one. If you don't apply, I'll guarantee you won't get it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Signs of professional maturity in a researcher:
* Having written and administered a grant proposal
* Having been invited to sit on a review panel
* Having been an invited speaker
* Having guided or mentored students
* Having organized a conference session
* Having published a review paper
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/05
| 224
| 1,036
|
<issue_start>username_0: If editor of Journal A finds that the speciality of the editor of journal B is very close to the subject of a paper submitted to Journal A. Would the editor of journal A ask the editor of journal B to review the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Probably not in their capacity as editor of journal B, but certainly probable in their capacity as known expert in the field (and if the fields are near, they'll probably have professional connections anyway).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Absolutely. I am a journal editor, and I am also frequently asked to act as a reviewer for other journals on related manuscripts (and also often accept these requests).
At the journal where I am an editor, however, it is considered inappropriate to ask for reviews from *other editors of the same journal*. This is because they are assumed to already be working hard enough for that particular community by acting as editors, and the journal leadership wants to make sure the work gets spread more widely.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/05
| 426
| 1,698
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working on my bachelors thesis for 10-11 months now and am about to hand it in. Without bragging, my topic was by far harder and more work than most bachelor theses.
Now I am wondering whether I should add an inscription to my parents in it. I really want to show that I am grateful for giving me the opportunity to study. Now I have read up on some advice on the internet saying that I probably shouldn't do it because bachelor theses are generally only meant for a small amount of people.
With my thesis this is different as I am planning on releasing at as a documentation of my work (my bachelor thesis was to write an improved version of an existing API).
What do you think?
EDIT:
I am talking about a short "To my parents." on a separate page in the beginning.
EDIT2:
Please remember, a Bachelor thesis is different to a dissertation.<issue_comment>username_1: If you want to dedicate your bachelor thesis to somebody, or acknowledge people: by all means, just do it!
It is your thesis, after all.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A title page dedication may come across as a little pretentious.
I would recommend an acknowledgements section at the back. This is a more traditional way of thanking anybody who helped out, and it's a perfectly normal thing to have in any kind of thesis. You can also use that to thank your supervisor, your friends who helped to proofread, and anybody else you like. This also allows you to state *why* you want to thank your parents, which may make it a bit more meaningful.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Our thesis format explicitly reserves space for dedication after the title page.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/06
| 1,066
| 4,587
|
<issue_start>username_0: I heard from several sources that European recommendation letters for postdoc positions tend to be minimalist and understated, while the American ones are way more enthusiastic. I have two questions about this phenomenon:
1. Is this cultural difference taken into account by members of postdoctoral search committees in high-ranked American universities?
The second question is more personal:
2. I'm a European grad student aiming at a postdoc position in an American university. I'm currently gathering my recommendation letters, and I'm supposed to get one from one of the leading figures in my field. He knows my work well, and I believe he has a good opinion of me. On the other hand, being familiar with his style of expression, he will never write one of those "omg he is the best researcher ever" letters that top American universities expect to see (he won't write it even for someone who is actually the best researcher ever). So the question is: Should I use his letter in my application or am I risking that the search committee will translate the adjective "good" (which is a very significant compliment considering the letter writer) to "horrible"?
ps. For whatever it's worth, I work in pure mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to (1) is certainly yes. Although a "European-style letter" could conceivably hurt you, I recommend getting the letter anyway. People reading your application will be aware (at least somewhat) of the cultural differences. Indeed, see RoboKaren's [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27043/) to a related question here.
Although I have never participated in a postdoc hire myself, my understanding is that what matters most is persuading one or two people that they really want you. If they already know you and your work, they might not read your application all that carefully, and if these people are extremely enthusiastic, the rest of the hiring committee might simply go along with it.
Another potential obstacle to keep in mind is that since you are further away, American researchers might know you less well than competing American candidates. For example, American candidates might have met these researchers at multiple conferences, and/or have close relationships with their advisors.
One way of mitigating it (which is not always possible, but it's worth investigating) is by travelling to appropriate conferences where you can meet American (or other) researchers with whom you might want to work. It is especially good if you travel with your advisor, because then he/she can introduce you and get you invited to lunch/dinner with the "bigwigs".
Good luck to you!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Is this cultural difference taken into account by members of postdoctoral search committees in high-ranked American universities?
>
>
>
Yes, certainly. If your letter writers are sufficiently well known, then there's no issue, since the letters they have written in the past will serve as calibration. (If someone shows poor judgment in their letters, then committees will start discounting the letters, but committees can and do adapt to good judgment expressed in unconventional ways.) If the committee members haven't seen many previous letters from someone, then there's more of an issue, but everyone will be aware of the phenomenon of European-style letters and will try to take that into account.
As a general rule, letters still need to offer concrete details and say something substantive. A very short letter along the lines of "This young mathematician does solid work and would make a reasonable postdoc at University X" won't help, because it offers nothing but a vague sense of approval. However, a substantive letter will be useful even if it's more understated than the U.S. norm.
>
> I'm currently gathering my recommendation letters, and I'm supposed to get one from one of the leading figures in my field. He knows my work well, and I believe he has a good opinion of me. On the other hand, being familiar with his style of expression, he will never write one of those "omg he is the best researcher ever" letters that top American universities expect to see (he won't write it even for someone who is actually the best researcher ever).
>
>
>
This doesn't sound like a problematic situation to me. If you're worried, you could look into whether he has ever had a student or postdoc who subsequently got a job in the U.S. (Presumably the answer is yes, in which case his letter must not have ruined the application.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/06
| 5,337
| 22,775
|
<issue_start>username_0: **A bit of background:** I am a graduate student working towards my Masters in physics. During this summer I signed up for some classes that are somewhat outside my main focus of study. For instance, biophysics; evolutionary physics and so on. The topics were very interestingly handled and I learned a lot. They were, however, not so big on the credit hour scale - just 2 CH each.
**Fast forward to last week**; I was discussing about my progress in the course with my advisor and I mentioned these classes that I took. I pointed out my interest in the subject and asked him if it would be a good idea to switch to those topics for my PhD research in the future. The conversation took an odd turn as he started to exhibit some strange aversion towards my suggestion. He got upset and all of a sudden started to talk to me about evolution. He didn't let me talk at all. To summarize what he said "I don't believe in evolution (he said this with air quotes), and I believe that God made us all. You should've consulted me before you registered for those classes. I have to ask you Renae, do you believe in evolution (air quotes again)?" He paused for a while. "Yes sir, I am afraid I do." I replied. "Well, that's that," he said, and soon the meeting came to a halt.
**Now, the reason behind this question is this**: On Friday morning, I got an email from him stating that he won't be able to add me to his research team this semester because all the positions were already filled. The email was brief and did not give any further (useful) information.
**D'oh!** I immediately gave him a call and asked about this, and he gave me the same answer as he did in his email. I haven't registered for any other classes this semester, and now it's probably too late to do so. I don't know if I could report this. His reasoning might be valid. May be his team is filled up at the moment, nevertheless I am stuck for this semester. If I report him, my chances for getting a reasonable letter of recommendation will be zero. I can't contact anybody else about this either. All my other professors are close friends with him and will surely rat me out. However, it also makes me worried that my advisor holds a completely different scientific view than I do.
1. Is it reasonable to be concerned about my advisor holding a completely different scientific view?
2. Should I report this to the authorities?
3. Will this affect my future studies?
4. Is it ok to continue in his research team, if he gives me another chance?
---
UPDATE -- (8th of September, Tuesday)
-------------------------------------
Sorry about the late update. I was in a bit of panic mode after this incident, and I hope you would understand. Let me answer some of the new questions and concerns that were raised in the comments. I am originally from Australia, but I am in a US university (south). I did not have any sort of argument or dispute with my advisor regarding this issue on that day, I assure you. Neither am I keeping anything out of the light here, as someone has suggested (why would I?).
Anyway, I did not go to the other professor. Instead, I talked to a friend of mine in the department who has a friend working in his team. According to her, the team only has 3 students at the moment, and it is not the usual maximum. Most other professors have more than 5 students at a time including post-doc, masters, honors and a few undergrads. I am still not sure if there's a correlation between the incidents, but I am considering alternatives. Meanwhile, I haven't told this to anyone else, not even to my friend. The minimum credit hour requirement (9CH) is the main issue now. I have to be registered for at least 9 CH per semester. By the looks of things, it seems like I'll be buying tickets back to Australia quite soon.
UPDATE -- (13th of November, Friday)
------------------------------------
I quit grad school, and I am back in Australia. I can't believe two months have passed already.<issue_comment>username_1: Well, this is clearly not a match made in heaven. (Sorry, I really didn't intend this as a pun.) What a shame, you had really bad luck.
There is no need to keep this a secret from the other professors. It is very unlikely that they are clones of this guy, even if they do have a friendship with him.
Yes, you do need to talk to the dean of graduate studies in your department and let him or her know what happened.
I don't think that particular research team would be a healthy place for you. The guy behaved badly. You need an advisor you can trust to act like a mensch.
In terms of the effect on your future studies -- I can't say. If you can find another advisor you want to work with at your current institution, great; otherwise, you might want to go elsewhere.
By the way, do you mind my asking, why aren't you in a PhD program? In physics it seems a bit unusual to be in a Master's only program.
(Just so you know, what he did was illegal in the U.S. I'm sure the dean of graduate studies in your department will know that, and I'm not going to suggest you mention it; but I wanted you to know, so you will see this clearly as THE PROFESSOR'S problem, not yours.)
-- Edited to add: for some info about the illegality of this sort of thing, in the U.S., see the U.S. Department of Justice's intro page: <http://www.justice.gov/crt/combating-religious-discrimination-and-protecting-religious-freedom-20>
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: I really sympathize with your situation. This is the kind of case that gives academia a bad name and highlights the inherent power imbalance between professors and students. Academia has devised all kinds of tricks and checks and balances to mitigate this imbalance and the conflicts it leads to, but unfortunately the system still leaves plenty of room for these types of abuses, and no one has a magic bullet to prevent them or necessarily even to address them when they occur.
About your questions, I'll answer the easy ones first:
1) The bigger reason to be concerned is that your professor is a bigot who abuses his authority, not so much that he has a different scientific view than yours. If he were a devout creationist but did not act vindictively against people not sharing his views, and could work with you in a professional manner on a topic that was unrelated to the conflict in your worldviews, I would say there would be no cause for concern and you could be perfectly happy working with him. Alas, that is not the case.
4) I agree with @username_1's answer that given what happened, you should make every effort to find a different advisor to work with. You should accept an option to work with this person only as a last resort. The way he behaved is unacceptable and would be a big warning sign that even if you tried to work with him, something is very likely to go wrong and lead to further disappointment and heartache.
2) and 3) These are really tough questions. **If** you can substantiate that the conversation you had with the professor took place in the way you described it, and **if** you can show a connection between that conversation and the email you received, then the professor has indeed behaved unethically and illegally (in the U.S.) and you have every cause to report him. Those are big *if*'s however; he may very well deny that he acted the way you say he did, or admit to the conversation but find a plausible explanation for not offering you a place on his group unrelated to the conversation. (Indeed, to be fair I must leave him the benefit of the doubt and assume that he might even be telling the truth. I wasn't there and don't know what happened.) You may end up being dragged into a costly and time-consuming dispute that could have a seriously negative effect on your career, mental health and finances. The possibility that this battle will hurt your future studies and/or career is very real unfortunately. Or you may end up winning, and gain - what? Agreement from the professor to work with you, when we already kind of see that's not a good idea? An apology? Financial compensation? You need to ask yourself what you hope to achieve by filing a complaint, and how likely you are to achieve it, and what cost you are willing to pay as a result. Only you can answer those questions I'm afraid. Note that I am not a lawyer; you may want to consult a lawyer regarding your legal case for a religious discrimination lawsuit or complaint.
The one thing I'll add is that it may be worth telling about what happened to the department chair or graduate program chair, without filing a complaint. Stick to a purely factual description of what happened and leave them to draw their own conclusions. It may help them deal with the person if a similar situation arises in the future, or perhaps you will discover that you are not the first person he did this to and this will bolster your case. However, even this step carries some risks so please consider very carefully whether you want to have this discussion. If you have reasonable financial means, consider even seeing a lawyer just to have a short consultation and know about your rights and options available to you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: IMHO, you should feel lucky about knowing that the rapport with you and this person is incompatible at such an early stage. Occurrence of such an event at a much later time may have caused devastating results.
Is seems like @username_1's procedure seems appropriate. Also take notice to @Dan's advice; reacting too vigorously may spoil you career within the campus (unless you have plans for a different institution). But all solutions suggest you to move to another advisor -- one who might be more in sync with your ideals, or at least one who won't enforce his ideals.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a startling story. Bottom line: any physics department in which the chair makes a point of "not believing in 'evolution'" and takes a student's "belief in evolution" as relevant to her studies is almost certainly a physics department that any student is better off away from.
Scientists are not in the position of "believing" or "disbelieving" scientific theories. That has nothing to do with the scientific method whatsoever, and anyone who thinks that personal beliefs are relevant to scientific work doesn't really know what science is. When the chair of the physics department doesn't know what science is and thinks there are "bad classes" within his own department or university: the rot lies too close to the core. Try a different apple.
I think the real question is how to prepare a graceful exit strategy. Unless this is the physics department of <NAME>'s dreams, there are going to be a lot of other faculty who will be absolutely horrified to learn that the chair feels this way. (In fact, their problems are probably worse than yours...) You should contact faculty that you have a good relationship with and tell them this. I think there is little doubt that some of them will talk to the chair about it, and if his views are as extreme and sincere as you've suggested, I suspect he will have trouble denying it with the convincing vigor that any other scientist would muster. Whoever taught you evolutionary physics is a good place to start. If other faculty members can corroborate your story, then they will be impressively sympathetic, and should help you land safely somewhere else.
But is it possible that your advisor the department chair will be able to convincingly deny that the conversation ever took place? Unforunately, yes: he could be the evil genius of physics department chairs. (I suppose it's even possible that the whole "I hate evolution" story was just a front for him to mess with you. If so: yikes. Just get out.) In my opinion trying to seek restitution through formal university proceedings is not worth your time or effort: sometimes you just have to know you're in the right and move on to dealings with better people. If you leave without being believed, make sure that you make it safely to the next stage of your life and career, and as soon as that happens, keep telling your story. See if you can interest the university press in a physics chair who dropped you for believing in evolution. Send an anonymous email to all the faculty and the students. Or whatever you come up with. The point of doing this is that something happened to you that should never have happened, and even some weird rumor that the department chair is anti-evolution will go a long way to ensuring that he will keep his anti-evolution talk to himself in the future.
Good luck. For the love of Darwin, good luck.
---
**Added**: A few people seem to be taking issue with the first few sentences of the second paragraph of my answer. The question was not about the philosophy and practice of science, so my answer did not dilate on that either. So I said some things about science which are true (in the sense that they are very largely agreed upon, not necessarily in some grand epistemological sense) and didn't pause to explain or defend them. But perhaps it will help to say a little bit more:
* I did not mean that scientists have true knowledge rather than religious belief. This is doubly wrong: on the one hand probably the majority of scientists do have religious belief, and on the other hand very few grownups who are knowledgeable about science think it is "true knowledge" in any platonic sense. True knowledge is probably one of the idealized goals of science, but what science actually is a highly codified (even gamelike in the sharpness of its rules) *method* which has a proud history of being the best practical substitute for the absence of true knowledge or certainty.
* Science is also a profession and a social group, with clearly defined rules. Of course what is valuable and good is highly determined by subjective, contingent realities within the group. But the group operates vigilantly under a better-than-all-the-alternatives set of rules which result in a continual updating, refinement and improvement of its collective paradigms and views. *Individual beliefs* are not part of the game of science. I don't mean that individual scientists don't have their own beliefs (about science, about reality, all kinds of beliefs...) but rather that *the profession of science* places no premium whatsoever on these individual beliefs. If I am working on perfecting the prevalent, widely believed **aether theory** and you tell me about the Michelson-Morley experiment, I don't have to like it but as a scientist I am compelled to respond to it, and if it falsifies my theory then sooner or later I have to admit that. I can't say "Your experiment is fine for you, but as for me I don't believe it. What *I* believe is..." That is precisely what science is not: there is no professional currency in individual belief (on the contrary, such expressions will be viewed very negatively if they are taken seriously).
* Beliefs of various kinds probably do play a role in motivating individual scientists; they certainly play a role in what scientists choose to work on. But that's the way humans do everything. A working scientist will all too often grow to believe something *because of the favorable consequences for her professional life* if she can be the one to show that belief is correct. Pascal gave an argument why we should believe in God which was remarkable in that it did not argue that God exists but only that it is beneficial to us to believe it! (I think this argument is very psychologically insightful.) But again, the key part of being a scientist is that you can be a roiling bundle of hopes, dreams and self-serving beliefs -- just like everyone else -- but you can't play these cards in the game of science. To think that you can -- i.e., to think that the scientific community is going to let you play one of those cards without pushing back with extreme negativity -- is indeed very strange. You either don't know what science is, or you don't want the science department of which you are the chair to be players in the scientific game.
* Also part of being a scientist by the way is realizing that in order to make an expert contribution you have to be rather specialized in what you truly know and care about. Most scientists -- and in fact academics of all kinds -- have studied a small number of things deeply enough to come to respect the effort and know what true expertise means. Amazingly enough, we can have opinions and beliefs on things that we know virtually nothing about. But most academics that I know learn to discount their opinions and beliefs when they fall far enough outside of their expertise. So I find it really weird to watch TV pundits declaim passionately about global warming. My feeling is that this is a very complicated issue with a literature which is vast, recent, and almost wholly unread by me. The scientists who are studying it are in quite good agreement, but maybe next year they'll find something really different and tell a different story. I am going to let them handle it. Why would I, a non-scientist, want to share my *personal opinion* on global warming with the world? What value does that opinion have?
* Evolution is at the other extreme. Yes, it's "just a theory" (a maddening phrase, to be sure, but not wrong: what else could it be?). But as scientific theories go, it is about as old, venerable and confirmed as it gets. What kind of scientific experiment could we even conceive that could call this theory into major question? So a scientist speaking out against evolution is, as I said, startling. Have some respect for the game you've chosen to play.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: Console yourself that you are in good company - the best in fact. Darwin himself had to put up with this sort of nonsense from the moment of publishing his greatest work until the day he died. Secondly thank your lucky stars you don't appear to be studying in a society where your ideas would be so unacceptable that you would be martyred for them.
You have had a lucky escape from someone who is so convinced of their own rightness that it surely spreads to all aspects of their life. Any new ideas that you might have had that were not already part of this person's orthodoxy would be quickly stamped on. People who live in the past are often motivated by fear. Fear of losing face or fear of having their precious beliefs shattered. Fear exerts a stronger force than any other emotion in all but the greatest of heroes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: It's quite amazing how quick people are to jump on the "sounds illegal" bandwagon. It's not, for reasons which I will explain, and the other experienced users here are fully familiar with.
There's a huge difference between "I'm focused on the research we discussed when you became my advisor -- and by the way I have an opinion about evolution vs creation" and "I spent my summer classes on evolutionary physics, which I didn't tell you about and are outside the focus area we discussed, and I'm now choosing to make that my topic". Absolutely HUGE.
The critical point here is that the PhD advisor-advisee relationship is quite unlike any other employment relationship. You have proposed to make this topic your research direction for a PhD, a career in which you and your advisor are expected to publish together. A faculty member is entirely within his rights to refuse to attach his name to an argument which he doesn't find convincing, and your advisor is being upfront with you that he will not pursue topics in your new direction. Very few people have any influence over the research area a tenured professor chooses to pursue, let alone the ability to command him to change/expand it, and you are not his funding agency.
It would be a completely different matter if you have found a professor who is willing to be your PhD supervisor in evolutionary physics, and the department chair was interfering with that arrangement on the basis of your beliefs. But nothing you have said suggests this is happening here.
Now, it seems that you think that employment in his research group, doing work unrelated to the topic of dispute, should be unaffected. But step back and consider what you've expressed to him: You've chosen a research field which has zero overlap with his interests, and probably got defensive about it during your conversation, which he perceives as an indication that you are no longer considering other topics. So the chance you will end up as his advisee for a doctorate is indistinguishable from zero, and any training you receive in his lab is a complete waste. He's much better off spending that slot on someone who is considering collaborating with him for a longer period of time... and lo and behold, that's exactly what he tells you he has done.
Let him do research in the area of physics that interests him, and fill his lab with students who are pursuing the same area long-term. Wish him the best with that, promise to send him a copy of your completed PhD dissertation someday, express confidence that he will read it with an open mind and better understand your interest in evolutionary physics.
Then **find yourself a research group that provides you with the background you need for your future studies**. If he really is just asserting his right to direct his own research, as it sounds like, he may even help you find one. Especially if you thank him for all he's taught you about (other area of physics) and mention that you know he isn't interested in your new area, but you're unsure how to find a position better aligned with your new direction and could really use a little help from him in that regard.
Or, if you would be interested in using the time you'd set aside for research for a heavier course load, but the add deadline has officially passed a few days ago, that's almost certainly something within his power as department chair to instantly solve.
Be respectful of his focus on one of the many areas of physics that doesn't overlap heavily with biology, and I suspect you'll find him both reasonable and helpful in getting you placed.
Bottom-line: **You've announced a change in your research topic; it should not be surprising to anyone that that necessitates finding a new advisor and a new lab.** The timing is unfortunate, but you've suspected you were interested in this new area for an entire term -- things would probably have gone much more smoothly if you'd mentioned that you wanted to take those classes to explore a new direction, and had a conversation about what your options would be when the fall came and you had to choose between the two.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/06
| 961
| 4,379
|
<issue_start>username_0: I've started a research, and after replicating methods of other researchers (running experiments on my data), I've realised that I cannot add anything new to the field. The work contains no improvement of the methodology, I just used the established methods to analyse my data and I ended up in having some results. Consequently, I cannot publish a paper out of it (which I am almost done writing).
Nevertheless, the obtained results are new (applied to a specific problem), so they could be of interest. Furthermore, I don't want that my time and the possibly valuable results end up in the trash bin.
What can I do with it? Is arXiv suited for this?<issue_comment>username_1: If the method you used to obtain the results -- albeit established -- are not traditional, then by all means you may publish them. Make sure you include relevant literature review to prove you've done the necessary ground work in the manuscript.
Any fact that you believe might benefit the community of your research may well be deserved to be submitted for publication. To what extent it deserves to be published depends on the reviewers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: What to do with results that ended up primarily or entirely as *replication studies* depends a bit on the culture of the field.
* A preprint server such as [arXiv](http://arxiv.org) or [PeerJ](http://peerj.com/) should always be a suitable place to report on replication studies. Of course, for CV and visibility reasons, a reviewed publication would be preferable in most cases.
* Some journals, specifically PeerJ and [PLOS ONE](http://www.plosone.org), have a reviewing policy of judging papers solely on technical correctness, but not on novelty. That is, a paper that is sound but "only" replicates results that were previously already known is perfectly acceptable in these journals. The reasoning is that replication studies actually often provide significant value to the community, as independent replications can increase the trustworthiness of results.
* Some more traditional journals are also (more or less) happy to accept replication studies, but the extent and conditions vary by journal, and, more importantly, by field. In medicine, for instance, replication studies are extremely common, and practically all journals accept them as far as I know. In applied computer science, replications are (unfortunately) almost impossible to publish outside of PeerJ Computer Science.
* Even journals that *per se* do not allow for replication studies sometimes have special issues dedicated to them. Of course you need to get lucky to find a suitable special issue with a topic and timeline that suits you.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You say that your work on methods is uninteresting, but that you believe the results to be valuable. That's great! You should write a paper about the results!
Sometimes people feel like the amount of manuscript text they produce for each aspect of their work should be proportional to the time and energy put into that aspect, e.g., if you spent 3/4 of your time working on the methods, then your text should be approximately 3/4 about the methods. That is incorrect. The amount of space something takes up in the text should be proportional to how interesting it is to the reader. Sometimes you have to put in a lot of work on something that is very simple to explain, and that's OK. Focus on the bits that will be interesting to the reader, and instead tell your friends the stories of how long and hard you worked on the "uninteresting" bits to get there.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Publish the results of the experiments in a conference or journal. If it won't get accepted to your original target because of the lack of methodological innovation, look around for another.
From the outside (and with very little actual detail), it sounds like a somewhat interesting observation that you tried all of the typical methodologies in your area and found now (current) way to improve them. I think you would have to structure your evaluation of those methods (i.e. what were the criteria that helped you judge that they did everything you needed?), but you could contribute to your community by identifying that. If it's wrong, the peer review you will receive will guide where to target future work.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/06
| 475
| 1,972
|
<issue_start>username_0: **TL;DR**
Is it okay to list a university and an expected degree in my CV (under the education section), if the semester starts a month from now?
**Longer verion:**
I have finished bachelor studies and got accepted in a master program which starts in a month. I feel that if I leave out the master program because the semester and the classes have not actually started yet, the CV might look a bit empty.
Is it appropriate to list the imminent master studies as well?
Should I avoid having a specific starting month and simply put the year I enrolled, even if the semester is very close and it is highly unlikely that I will not attend?
Would the answer differ in industry?
If the semester was further away, more than a month, but I got the acceptance letter, is it still okay to list it?<issue_comment>username_1: Under Education, presumably you have a line for your Bachelor's. You may also put a line for your Masters study -- perhaps something like this:
Start date: October, 2015 (tab) (name of degree, name of institution)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would advise *against* putting anything in your CV that you have not earned experience towards. Getting accepted into an MS program is nice Kudos, but you don't have the experience yet.
Were I a prospective employer and saw the MS line and then the "expected *start*". I would immediately be soured for two reasons
1. It signals to me that the candidate does not distinguish experience from title, which further signals a reliance on status as opposed to capability.
2. It signals to me that the candidate is looking to climb without contributing. For example, were I to hire a candidate with a CV line that said this, what's to stop them from using the just accepted position as a further selling point before they've done a day of work?
So no, just wait the month and then list your current appointment without the need for qualifiers.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/06
| 438
| 1,902
|
<issue_start>username_0: For a math assignment that I am giving my students, I have included a problem from Spivak Calculus. I have the following two issues and I do not know what I should do:
1. If I do not acknowledge the source, it seems that I have committed plagiarism.
2. And if I acknowledge the source, then the students will go and perhaps find the solution manual and give the same solution as in the solution manual.
Can anyone please discuss what is the best thing to do in my case?<issue_comment>username_1: I often assign "challenge" problems for my Calculus class that are drawn from Apostol (similar in difficulty, etc., to Spivak). For the reasons you describe above, I prefer not to reveal the source of the problem. My solution has been to label the problem as a challenge problem, and say that it comes from a classic (read: hard) textbook on Calculus when I assign the problem. However, I don't specify which textbook that is on the assignment. After the problem set is due, I give the students the full reference. Of course, my hope is that some of them found the problem interesting and will go look up more problems to challenge themselves.
I think this compromise works since you are not taking credit for creation of the problem, and do give acknowledgement. Of course, with all of these students can find the answers through diligent searching, but I think raising the barrier even a little is a good idea.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Plagiarism is the act of claiming a another's written work as your own. You need not to feel of guilt as there is no actual 'plagiarism' involved in your problem. You did not disclose the mathematical problem for personal credit (as @Rori explained) neither you claimed it as your own.
If your sample is defined as plagiarism, then more than half the world's exam paper compilers should be committing it everyday.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/06
| 1,168
| 4,996
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am in my third year of funding of an F32 NRSA postdoc fellowship (one month into my final year). My project is nearly complete and ready for publication, however, my sponsor/PI wanted another postdoc in the lab to conduct a few biochem assays for the project.
Over time, I have been cut out of my own project. My PI now feels that the paper is not near submission, and would like my project to be a "co-project" with this favored postdoc. My relationship with this mentor has started to deteriorate since that point. Favorite postdoc complains constantly about me to the PI, even though I remain positive and productive.
Recently at a meeting with PI and favorite postdoc, I was accused by the other postdoc of not properly analyzing a certain data set. In my defense I explained how I analyzed the data and why I employed the method I did. My mentor then cut me off and fired me from my position, citing that I had a bad attitude. I felt set up.
She asked me in a follow up email to give over all stocks, reagents, notebooks, and data files so the other postdoc can finish the project. I am to look for work, and I do not need to report to lab anymore.
What I don't understand is that this project is funded by an NIH fellowship in which I am the PI listed on the grant, can she give this project to someone else and take my three years of data away from me? Also, I had a year of salary/work coming to me, I was going to use this year to publish my work and apply for jobs but now I'm screwed. I was a free employee to the PI since my salary was covered, so I don't understand her actions. Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, it is VERY difficult to fire anyone in academia. Speaking as a professor with a postdoc of my own, there are generally negotiated contracts between the university and the postdoc. Faculty and the university can get in trouble if they violate the terms of that. I highly suggest you talk to your HR person to see if they was all above board. They will be able to tell you if any of the terms were violated.
Futher, NIH funding, like other pots of government funding, is a contract between the government organization and the institution, not the individual. That being said, that is frequently overlooked for things like professors leaving one university to go to another and then taking their funding with them. I would strongly suggest you get a copy of the exact contract between NIH and your institution. There might be some language in there that can help you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I do not know about the work arrangements in the U.S. and speak purely from my experience in the UK.
In the UK postdocs (often called Research Fellows or Research Associates) are employed by the University. Their salary can come from "their" grant (i.e. the postdoc is also P.I. on this grant), from their Prof's grants (Prof is P.I.), or directly from the University. The postdoc "reports to" their Line Manager, which can be their Prof or Head of Department. However, their employer is the University, and the only the University can fire them.
Needless to say, that the terms of employment should be fully described in your contract, including the right to access the workplace, and conduct the activities related to your work. They also describe the conditions when your employment can be terminated.
My suggestion is to arrange a few meetings: with your Head of Department, with a member of your trade union, and with the University HR. Try to clarify the situation and determine the status of your Prof's words. You may find out that they are "just words" and do not have any legitimate power. This will not solve your problem completely, but probably will allow you to negotiate a more independent role in the project and the publications which come out of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is the issue, while your fellowship does have your name on it, it was principally awarded for several reasons 1) your CV suggested that you were competent to complete 2) Your PI had a track record both in the topic of the proposed research and they have committed to supplying the supplies, equipment and
other needed support to do the project. Yes, your fellowship pays for your salary, but that covers only a fraction of what it will cost to complete and publish the work. Also, it is likely that the professor had data which laid the foundation for your project, which preceded you. The NIH therefore technically considers the project as belonging to the professor. I dont know why the professor now wants to add another person to the project, but I suspect it is because the project is not moving fast enough. Maybe there is competition out there that might publish first, or maybe they need a paper NOW so that they can
get a grant which will keep the lab open. I suggest you discuss your concerns with the professor, but keep in mind the project belongs to them and not you.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/06
| 825
| 3,754
|
<issue_start>username_0: A reviewer pointed out that I should do an additional experiment to further validate my analysis. I agree this would be a good idea and would further strengthen the manuscript. However, I think it belongs to the category "a paper can always be better" and I don't think the additional experiment is essential to my argument.
The main reason I am not doing the additional experiment is that it would require additional funding that I don't have, and cannot acquire in the time the journal wants me to submit a revised version of the article (and even if they were more flexible, it would not be a good idea to wait two years to submit a revised version).
What is my best strategy when replying to the reviewer's comments? Should I
* point out that adding the additional experiment would require additional funding and that this would not be possible within a reasonable time frame?
* point out that the results are meaningful even without it?
I am a bit worried that saying "yes, that's a good idea, but I don't have the means to do it right now" would trigger the reply "Well, that's too bad for you, then the article is not suitable for publication". What's the best strategy here?<issue_comment>username_1: What else can you do? Perhaps do a part of the experiments, add a section to the paper explaining that this would be a worthwhile extension to the reported work and why it hasn't been done.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: When I have been faced with a situation like this in the past, the course of action that my co-authors and I found best was to get in touch with the handling editor to negotiate.
Editors are the ones who will generally make the call, and if doing the experiments will pose an high burden in the time-frame available, it's worth having a discussion before starting them. Sometimes a reviewer has pointed out a real flaw and more experiments really are required in order to deal with it. Other times, a reviewer is just giving "wouldn't it be nice if..." homework. It sounds like you think it's more the latter, but the editor may disagree. I would recommend starting with an explanation of why you think your current experiments are sufficient for a significant publication and why the new experiments should be pushed into future work instead. The discussion with the editor is likely to end up in one of three places:
* The editor agrees that the experiments aren't necessary, and you can talk about them as a direction for future work.
* The editor decides your paper will be rejected, since you can't do the experiments.
* The editor agrees to a "middle ground" where certain critical studies are done (it may surprise you which ones), perhaps with an extension on time to allow you time to do them, and the paper moves forward.
Talking with an editor *is* taking an additional risk, since your paper might get rejected quickly, but I would recommend a "fail-fast" strategy over putting in lots of time and effort that turns out to be futile because you were working on something that wouldn't be enough to satisfy the editor in any case.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's perfectly acceptable and very common to not have the resources to carry out certain suggestions.
In the paper, list his suggestion as an item for future work, list his criticism of your results (lack of validation etc) as a limitation of your work.
Do not mention in the paper that a lack of resources kept you from following certain avenues. You can mention this to the reviewer if you want, however it is not necessary - just state that you think its a good idea, and one of the current limitations of the presented work, and you have included it in the manuscript.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/09/06
| 1,215
| 5,305
|
<issue_start>username_0: So, in addition to my PhD and bachelors degrees I have another advanced degree that is ultimately irrelevant (and entirely unrelated) to my research efforts and current academic discipline. Should I include this on my CV under education or not? Will it make me look less focused or simply more educated? Is it standard practice to include everything, regardless of relevance?
My understanding of the CV is that it should be specific to relevant research experience and pursuits, not necessarily complete.
Edit:
This post received WAYYYY more attention than I anticipated. Some background. I completed bachelor's degrees in physics and mathematics. I then went and completed a Juris Doctor, but, found myself a bit unchallenged working with softer logic and went back to Physics. In Physics, I've mostly done mathematical physics which borders on pure mathematics and computer science. My main concern was seeming flaky and unfocused.<issue_comment>username_1: While there are some circumstances in which is it appropriate to use a "shortened" C.V. that does not include everything that you have done, I have never heard of a circumstance under which it is appropriate to omit a degree. An irrelevant degree will not hurt how your C.V. is perceived, and if it is later discovered that you omitted a degree from your C.V., it may be considered suspicious or dishonest. Furthermore, it may under some circumstances be considered a plus---you never know what kind of interesting cross-disciplinary connections somebody reading your C.V. might make in their head. I would thus advise you to include all of your degrees, even if some seem irrelevant to you.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending on the context, you should include what is required. "CV" is often shorthand for the shortened biographical sketches required by funding agencies when applying for grants. You should scrupulously include every required item that the agency requires in its preparation instructions and nothing more or less. Typically, this would include all of your educational preparation. For an academic position, post doc, etc, include it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I will answer with an anecdote. In my discipline (mathematics), several times while reading recommendation letters of job candidates I have seen them extol some skill or education that the candidate had in an area unrelated to mathematics. For example, on at least a couple of occasions the letter mentioned as a side remark that the candidate was an extremely gifted classically trained musician. One such candidate actually got a tenure-track offer from my department; obviously not for her music abilities, rather because she was also an excellent mathematician. However, the remarks about music abilities still left me (and probably others in my department) with a terrific impression. I think you'd be amazed how big the psychological effect (both conscious and subconscious) can be of learning that someone you are considering for a job/grad school application has impressive skills or knowledge, even about an area that is completely unrelated to your discipline. I have seen the same effect at work many times in other (more informal) situations.
To put things differently, you have **another** advanced degree on top of your PhD and bachelor's! How awesome is that?! Most people would kill just to have the "extra" advanced degree, let alone all the other ones. It is hard to imagine why you would want to hide this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It won't hurt you at all. It shows couple things about you:
1. You can clearly commit to a long-term task and focus on the goal (graduation)
2. You care about educating yourself
3. You are well-round, not just focused on one narrow field
And of course, if you get to a personal interview, you can always find and pinpoint some [*transferrable* skills](http://www.ceswoodstock.org/job_search/resumeskillstransf.shtml) you picked along the way and make it a really strong advantage.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I have wondered this myself at times. However I have only ever received positive feedback from having degrees in unrelated areas. I have a Bachelor of Science with honours in maths and PhD in maths (from a maths department but actually in statistical genetics). I applied for a job in a project in air traffic control in an engineering department; they seemed impressed that I also have a Bachelor of Economics and a Master of Arts (linguistics). People seem to love that I also have those degrees and I got the job in air traffic control (with a bunch of software engineers). The point is whether you have the capability in the job you're applying for; the extra law degree just adds to how generally awesome you appear.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: When I was hired at my position in an academic science research lab, both the director and assistant director had J.D.s. In an academic environment, dealing with bureaucracy is a necessary evil, and someone with that kind of training can be a huge asset.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Having a JD is relevant to every field. As a JD you have the opportunity to do IP work (i.e. patents) for yourself or your organization/company.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/06
| 1,561
| 6,924
|
<issue_start>username_0: Since I haven't do much TA duty (only 1 semester so far, starting 2nd one), I have struggled to come up with a good way to grade homework. My last grading rubric ended up creating strange incentive pattern wherein people will do all the optional questions, while completely ignore the required questions (or just write some random nonsense to get some extra pity points); and since I posted my rubric publicly, I couldn't change it. Since I am about to grade the first assignment of this semester, I need to come up with a new grading rubric, so I need help with the following optimization problem.
The situation is as follow. Every assignment will contains around 5 required questions, and 1-3 optional questions. Required questions would be very simple and can be solved by understanding the material, while optional questions would usually require new ideas. I have freedom in choosing any 3 required questions to grade (and they have to be the same questions for all students), and anyone optional question to grade (could be different question for each student). I might award completion points questions I do not grade, but since I am not supposed to grade them, I cannot discern whether the problem is actually solved (and given the amount of grading I have to do, I can't really afford to look into more than 4 questions per student).
I want to have a grading rubric that create the incentive such that students are most likely to do all the required questions and at least 1 optional question, subject to the following constraints:
* Doing something extra never hurt the grade (even if "something extra" is a drawing of an goat).
* Solving harder questions get higher score than solving easier question (note: I get to pick the maximum score for each question).
* Maximum possible score can be obtained from solving all required questions only.
* When it comes to required questions, partial credits must be awarded for answers that get certain part of a correct answer.
* For questions with explicitly multiple parts, every part must get the same maximum score, and any solved part must be awarded scores (note that in a multiple parts question, it is very common for part (a) to be much easier than part (f)).
* Anyone who attempted all questions (both required and optional) get at least 50% of the maximum.
Anyone can help me with a good grading rubric?
EDIT: since I can't make comments, I will clarify some of the answers/comments below.
First, about grading randomly comment. That was exactly what I did last semester. Grade random required questions, grade all optional questions (since you know, they are not required, so it would be unfair if some get points and some don't for the same work), and give optional questions much higher maximum points (since they are much tougher). Result: people only do optional questions, since these are the only one with guaranteed points, and give a lot more points.
Second, point #3 makes perfect sense, and I don't see how it is restrictive. After all, other questions are known as optional for a reason: people don't need to do it to get full score. And #6 is what the professor requires of me: the class is supposedly a hard class that is optional for the major and is also regularly attended by people who are not in the major that are simply interested, so he doesn't want to fail anyone who put in "honest effort" (that's the word he used, so I guess 6 goats and 1 turtle won't count, but a bunch of gibberish equations would).
As for the answer below. I won't make the mistake of making the rubric public anymore, the students would have to ask for that in which case I can explain to them. Grading the best looking optional problem will violate constraint #1 here. This is because it is really hard to see which answer are better without and detailed look, since optional problems have lots of intricacies, are long, and tend to have fewer parts. And if I judge wrong, it means someone who attempt 2 problems might end up with a low score because I picked the bad one, compared to someone who only do 1.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, I would recommend keeping your grading rubric simple -- complicated rubrics have a way of causing confusion and sometimes resentment when they're misunderstood.
In the situation you describe, I would choose to compute the score as the average of that on the three required problems, weighted equally. If the student solved any of the optional problems, choose whichever looks the best and substitute this score for the lowest of the three required scores, but only if it improves the student's grade.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Do you not have some inconsistency between 'Maximum possible score can be obtained from solving all required questions only.' and that you don't have enough time to actually look at all their answers to required questions?
It seems to me the simplest way to meet most of your points without introducing weird incentives is a two phase approach:
1/ Equal points between the required questions (so 20 points each if 5 questions and going for a total of 100). For these, you actually check 3 each week and give completion points (ie assume correct) the remainder.
This means that someone who answer the three questions you look at correctly and provides something sensible looking for any others can achieve the max points only from required questions.
2/ Optional questions are to recover points lost through a poor answer to a required question and each optional question can recover enough lost points from two required answers. Students give what they think is their best answer first and then the others. You always mark the first optional answer if provided (whichever question it happens to be for that student). If the student has not yet got to full marks, you go through the other optional answers for that student.
Note that (2) runs the risk of answering more than 4 questions per student, but it is likely that some students won't answer any optional and/or the student's pick of best answer will be good enough.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: One suggestion is to do what is common practice at my school (I am a student):
* There is a sheet of required questions, worth (for example) 100 marks, and a sheet of optional questions, worth 50 marks (there are only a few optional questions, but they have high marks for each question
* If the student performed better in the required questions than in the optional questions (eg. 80/100 in required and 30/50 in optional), then the final score is the score for the required questions only (in this case, 80%)
* If the student performed better in the optional questions than in the required questions, then the 2 scores are added together (for example, 60/100 on the required questions and 40/50 on the optional questions, then the final score is 100/150 or 67%).
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/06
| 719
| 3,187
|
<issue_start>username_0: As new researcher and having started my PhD studies less than one month, I would like someone experienced to give me some advice. As researcher, which are your habits concerning research papers you read.
How you choose the literature you read ? Do you 'follow' journals/ research groups/conferences/topic?
Are there tools for this reason?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, I would recommend keeping your grading rubric simple -- complicated rubrics have a way of causing confusion and sometimes resentment when they're misunderstood.
In the situation you describe, I would choose to compute the score as the average of that on the three required problems, weighted equally. If the student solved any of the optional problems, choose whichever looks the best and substitute this score for the lowest of the three required scores, but only if it improves the student's grade.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Do you not have some inconsistency between 'Maximum possible score can be obtained from solving all required questions only.' and that you don't have enough time to actually look at all their answers to required questions?
It seems to me the simplest way to meet most of your points without introducing weird incentives is a two phase approach:
1/ Equal points between the required questions (so 20 points each if 5 questions and going for a total of 100). For these, you actually check 3 each week and give completion points (ie assume correct) the remainder.
This means that someone who answer the three questions you look at correctly and provides something sensible looking for any others can achieve the max points only from required questions.
2/ Optional questions are to recover points lost through a poor answer to a required question and each optional question can recover enough lost points from two required answers. Students give what they think is their best answer first and then the others. You always mark the first optional answer if provided (whichever question it happens to be for that student). If the student has not yet got to full marks, you go through the other optional answers for that student.
Note that (2) runs the risk of answering more than 4 questions per student, but it is likely that some students won't answer any optional and/or the student's pick of best answer will be good enough.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: One suggestion is to do what is common practice at my school (I am a student):
* There is a sheet of required questions, worth (for example) 100 marks, and a sheet of optional questions, worth 50 marks (there are only a few optional questions, but they have high marks for each question
* If the student performed better in the required questions than in the optional questions (eg. 80/100 in required and 30/50 in optional), then the final score is the score for the required questions only (in this case, 80%)
* If the student performed better in the optional questions than in the required questions, then the 2 scores are added together (for example, 60/100 on the required questions and 40/50 on the optional questions, then the final score is 100/150 or 67%).
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/06
| 583
| 2,399
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have 4 years' work experience as a software developer (industrial); then I moved to academia and completed one year of PhD study, with one publication. I want to quit my PhD and go back again to Industries because of lack of interest in the present topic. It is quite different to my previous research and work experience. I made a big mistake entering into this area. I am bit confused how to mention this (one year of PhD) gap in CV. Do you think is it good to put in CV or Just leave it as gap?
It would be great help and appreciate your valuable suggestions<issue_comment>username_1: You can just mention that you quit PhD. You already has research result and people in industry will not care much, especially when you already had 4 years experience.
You can also list your PhD experience as **Research Assistant**. A PhD student is definitely a Research Assistant, but a Research Assistant may not pursue a PhD degree.
In many universities, including Imperial College London, Research Assistants are people in the research group, who do not hold a PhD degree, and do not pursue a PhD in the university either. However, they often have significantly higher salary than PhD students (and significantly lower than postdoc/Research Associate).
However, [are you sure you really want to quit](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2219/how-should-i-deal-with-discouragement-as-a-graduate-student)?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Women who take some time off for family matters deal with gaps in the CV all the time -- it's not a big deal. In those cases, I recommend acknowledging the gap in the cover letter. I don't think that's necessary in your case.
In your CV, report the academic year under Education (two semesters of graduate study in [field] at [institution]). If the reader chooses to interpret this as meaning that you planned all along to spend exactly two semesters to get some theoretical underpinnings, what harm is done?
If an interviewer asks you why you didn't continue and get a Masters or PhD, you may tell a small white lie:
>
> The computer science courses were interesting, but I'm really looking forward to getting back into industrial software development, because that's what I like best. For example, (and then talk enthusiastically about some work project that was rewarding and that came out great.)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/07
| 2,041
| 8,542
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently making my CV for undergraduate research internships in Pure Mathematics. I have read many graduate level books on the field out of my own interest. Whenever I was stuck on a difficult concept, I have sought the help of my professors and they can vouch for my understanding of these topics. Adding a section titled "Books Mastered" seems a bit narcissistic but I believe mentioning these books would add weight to my application.How can I leverage this experience and incorporate it into my CV?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How can I leverage this experience and incorporate it into my CV?
>
>
>
I'm not convinced there's any good way to incorporate this experience into your CV. The basic problem is that it's unclear what it means to have studied a book: there's a huge range of levels of mastery that could all legitimately fall into this category. Furthermore, many undergraduates have trouble accurately assessing their own knowledge and accomplishments, so a self-assessment of mastery is not convincing even if it's completely honest. And of course honesty and bias are important issues.
The net effect is that these claims are vague, subjective, and unverifiable, which is exactly the opposite of what belongs in your CV.
You could always try to say something more precise. For example, "I wrote out solutions to every problem in Hartshorne's algebraic geometry textbook" is much more compelling than "I studied Hartshorne" or "I mastered Hartshorne". It's still not ideal; for example, it leaves open the question of whether your solutions were actually correct. However, it at least gives a much clearer idea of how much you might have learned, and it allows the possibility of verification by requesting to see the solutions. (Don't say this if you lost them!)
I wouldn't recommend trying to make precise claims like this for all your independent reading, since it would still come across as eccentric. However, that would at least be a better option than just listing some books.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This question brought to my mind two anecdotes:
1. The back cover of <NAME>'s epic book *The Art of Computer Programming* famously carries an endorsement quote from <NAME> [saying](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Computer_Programming#Critical_response) "If you think you're a really good programmer... read (Knuth's) Art of Computer Programming... You should definitely send me a résumé if you can read the whole thing."
2. True story: some years ago I was invited to join some colleagues at a conference at lunch, and found myself sitting next to a famous scientist whose classic textbook is a discipline-shaping, notoriously difficult to read work, which has greatly informed and inspired my own research. After some introductions and random smalltalk I turned to him and said something like "Professor, I thought you should know I really love your book. It has really influenced my research and my thinking." He smiled, clearly amused, and after a short pause replied "Hmm. So what's in chapter 9?" Of course I was rather taken by surprise, but I did know the book very well and after a few seconds managed to get my wits together and said "oh, chapter 9 is about [X]." He was quite pleased and impressed. (I think he did not expect me to know the answer to his question; the joke was that chapter 9 is the most difficult chapter in the book, understood at a high level perhaps by 5-10 people on earth, and certainly not by me. But I did at least know what it was about...)
Going back to the OP's question, I would say that listing books you have mastered in a CV is certainly very unconventional (I have never seen it done), but as my anecdotes illustrate, this information can certainly be valuable to a prospective employer/mentor, so I see no reason why it should be taboo to mention it, subject to the following caveats:
a. Only include the list if you truly believe your private studying of hard topics in mathematics is so extensive compared to that of your peers that it would make you a more attractive internship candidate. Everybody reads books, so your list needs to be able to convincingly demonstrate that you have a read a lot more and understood a lot more than most other internship candidates.
b. Be precise about the level of mastery you have achieved of the books in question. For example, you can include your list under the heading "Books mastered" and add a footnote saying "I have invested at least 40 hours of study in each of the books on the list, and in each one I have solved a large proportion of exercises. My solutions are recorded in a notebook that I keep for future reference."
c. Most importantly, be completely honest. **Do not** inflate or exaggerate your claims (and if your list doesn't seem impressive enough without such exaggerations, obviously that means you should not add it to your CV). If I were calling you up for an interview after being impressed by your list -- which I can quite possibly see myself doing -- I would make very sure to ask you (as the famous scientist did to me) some questions about tricky topics in a random sample of the books to test your understanding. Needless to say, if I found out you were exaggerating the interview would be over immediately.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: If I read your question right, the answer is: **there's no reason to put this in your CV**. If your professors truly have a good assessment of what you've done, then this will be in their letters of recommendation (which you will almost certainly need), where they can give it the appropriate weight and you don't need to worry about doing something non-standard in your CV. (If you actually took reading courses, even informally, then this is natural to put in your CV.) As mentioned in a comment, it would be appropriate to bring up some of your readings in a cover letter and/or personal statement.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: While the other answers, and the comments, make good points, I think it is quite possible to make reasonable (esp. *modest*) remarks about books (or PDFS of lecture nots) one "has looked at", especially if one's curiosity is strong! Sure, do *not* say "mastered" (even if you believe it, or even if it's true), because you'll simply discredit yourself, so readers won't believe much else in your file.
Since, apparently, self-motivated, undocumentable reading-of-books is not so common in mathematics, there seems to be no accepted tradition of how to report it or even mention it. While it is certainly true that good advice from experienced mathematics faculty can be helpful both in choice of sources and in how to benefit from them, there's simply not enough time in the day for a very-inquisitive person to ask about every thing they see, probably.
There is also a confusing pervasive mythology about "how" one should read a source: supposedly ultra-carefully, line-by-line, doing all the exercises, and so on. I do not buy into this, for various reasons. In any case, this at least indirectly would seem to completely invalidate any other notion of "looking at things", which I think is a very bad thing. That is, I think "casual" (or whatever word we can agree on) reading/skimming/perusal of mathematics books can be very helpful, productive, informative, etc. E.g., getting an idea where all the little details are *going*, and maybe *why* we'd care.
E.g., the notion that one would *ONLY* look at the textbooks for the few math courses one enrolls for each year strikes me as bizarre, comparable to the notion that one would play sports only when signed up for "gym class", and then only for "assignments". Or only listen to music for "music appreciation" class.
In particular, as anyone reading this answer can surmise, when I read an application file that includes self-driven reading outside of the official coursework game, it is a big positive. True, self-appraisal is a difficult thing... but/and that difficulty should not be a reason to disregard the thing that is difficult to assess! After all, the convenience of "grades" is substantially self-referential, and often reflects as much obedience as understanding.
So, yes, you might list some books you've "looked at", in a form somewhat parallel to listing advanced coursework (which should include textbook authors' names, also!). Be modest. And in mathematics, the authors' names are more explanatory than titles, so it's important to include them.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/07
| 2,472
| 10,466
|
<issue_start>username_0: I work at a small for profit company. We won a Fed grant based on some of our previous work, and included in it a university researcher as a subawardee.
The university researcher has done next to nothing. He has been very busy with other engagements and essentially handed off the entire work to a grad student, who has no background in this area and is unable to produce.
For several months, I've tried to right the situation. First I raised the problem. I got a mediocre response, basically telling me that the work is fine, that he doesn't have time to be more involved, that it's taking him away from other responsibilities and lucrative consulting, and that the funding agency is too clueless to know or care anyway, and that my expectations are too high... At one point, he suggested he just cancel his award and refund the money, but that was said in jest. In short, I got no results or even expression of concern.
I then tried to remedy the situation by setting concrete milestones, a project plan, and written goals. The researcher received this well but continued to do next to nothing. The grad student has tried but not been able to do the work. He delivered something which is incomplete, unintelligible, and downright flimsy, certainly nothing we could use in the work or for publication. At this point, I really have nothing to show from their involvement, and am giving up hope that they'll produce anything.
My questions is: **How do I handle this?** If the contract was with a small business, I'd simply not pay them, and state "You haven't done the job." We'd probably reach some type of agreement and move on. But I imagine that, with a university, its a lot more complicated. The professor can't exactly tell his university "yes, I ended up not having the time to do the work, please cancel it" - I imagine that would get him in a lot of trouble. The university likewise is unlikely to accept my claim and instead, I imagine, would always back their own people. I don't want to make an enemy of the researcher, or to cause him problems at his university, or to get into a protracted lawsuit with the university. But I can't justify handing over the cash to the university when I know they've done nothing. Not to mention that, legally and ethically, I'm responsible to be a good custodian of the funding agency's money.
Given that I've essentially despaired of getting anything from the university researcher, how can I bring this to a controlled landing? Ideally, I'd like to find a way to reach a settlement, giving him a path to back out of the subaward without causing him problems with the university, and avoiding a fight between myself and the university, or myself and the researcher, while reaching a settlement where I don't hand over (most of) the funding.
Handing over the funding would be a real shame, not only because they're not producing anything with it, but, being that their end has not been done, the project will remain incomplete.
(The situation is complicated because the university has already paid him extra summer salary, and I doubt there's a mechanism for him to return it, and, even if there were, I doubt he'd be willing to admit any wrongdoing. In short, I think the conflict and the admission of guilt are greater concerns than the funding itself.)
---
**UPDATES:**
1. Several hundred hours were budgeted for the professor
2. The professor provided next to no deliverables; except for a few emails, all deliverables were provided by the student only
3. The work provided by the student was clearly flimsy and not suitable; any person qualified in the field would reach that conclusion
4. The researcher has done good work in other things; he made no real attempt to hide that, in this case, he basically just handed things off to the student. I've seen his work in other cases, and, if he would even do 25% of his budgeted hours, he could get the job done.
5. The student seems to be aware of all of the above; he seems to realize that he's unable to do it by himself, and that the researcher really isn't too involved; he's made gentle statements of such
6. I've made many attempts over the course of the work to bring this to the researcher's attention or to help correct the problems; none have brought results. I think he simply doesn't have the time and doesn't want to take time away from more important activities (he's practically said as much)
Thank you for the great answers. Some recommended just paying. My question on that is: doesn't that subject me to liability vis-a-vis the funding agency?
Some recommended trying to have gentle conversations, emphathize, etc. I've done that several times now with nothing to show.
Some recommend reporting it to the ethics agency. I certainly don't want a war. I don't want to harm the researcher. I'm not even sure that not doing work you are supposed to do is unethical. I am sure that the university would not want to make their own faculty look bad (it looks bad on them) and would fight any ethics charges tooth and nail.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I'd like to find a way to reach a settlement, giving him a path to back out of the subaward without causing him problems with the university, and avoiding a fight between myself and the university, or myself and the researcher, while reaching a settlement where I don't hand over (most of) the funding.
>
>
>
This is a noble, but likely unrealistic goal. Your two subgoals **"don't give them most of the money"** and **"avoiding a fight"** are very much in conflict by now. Based on what you explain, most (all?) of the money has already been spent by the university (on summer salary, on grad student stipends, etc.). Hence, there is no graceful way out for the researcher anymore, as every potential way out will lead to substantial losses for the university. Further, I would expect having to fight the university the legal way for the not-paid-out money, as it seems highly unlikely that they will agree to your viewpoint that they did not deliver except in the utmost extreme cases (basically, the only case I can imagine is when the team of the researcher delivered absolutely **nothing**, no code, no papers, no study, verifiably did not attend the meetings or teleconferences ...). This does not seem to be the case - shoddy work is a very distinctly different beast than no work, especially to an outside observer who is likely not an expert in your field.
To me, as an outsider, there remains a bit of doubt based on your description whether the work they delivered was indeed bad, or whether you just had a misconception of what you can expect from a university as a partner. Even in this case the researcher may easily be at fault, as (my impression) universities often unreasonably upsell the quality of the work they will be able to produce with the resources they have before entering industrial collaborations. However, funding agencies will typically not agree to withholding money for a reasonable job done by the researcher, even if you expected much more and even if more was (usually somewhat hedgily) promised in the grant proposal.
>
> My questions is: How do I handle this? If the contract was with a small business, I'd simply not pay them, and state "You haven't done the job."
>
>
>
Firstly, think about this not as a contract with a small business, but as a contract with a division of a large enterprise. In this case you would also not "simply not pay them", at least not without reasonable expectation of not having to fight over a law suite.
Secondly, how I have seen underperforming partners being handled is usually in a **proactive** way. For instance, in a 3-year EU project, we had a partner who delivered very bad work in the first reporting period (i.e., the first year). After a stern discussion with the coordinator, the agreement was reached that this partner's resources (and tasks) for the second and third year were substantially reduced, and a new partner was taken on board to take them over. **The money for the first year was paid out in full.** As this money was already spent (even if it was spent badly), there was simply no graceful way to take it back again.
I understand that your project is already at its completion, so this isn't an option for you anymore. I am afraid, in this case you can really only choose between fighting over the money (and, honestly, this is a fight you could easily lose) or hand over the money in full and learn from the experience. One thing to learn is that (even, or especially) university projects need management and proactive progress monitoring. A second thing to take away *may* be that the input that is to be expected from the university needs to be defined orally and in writing in much clearer terms. For instance, it should not have come to you as a surprise that the researcher delegated most of the actual work to a grad student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Additionally to the perfectly fine answer by @username_1, I would like to suggest to try to arrange that the grad student physically is located in your office (preferably full-time, but if that is not possible, then at least three days per week) for the remainder of the project. Then have regular progress meetings (once per day, or at least a few times per week).
That will make the communication much easier, and allows you to give much more direct feedback. Unrealistic or unintelligible plans can be identified straight away, and not only after spending days or weeks on them.
Do not expect a lot from the professor. It is clear that your project is at the bottom of his priority list. I doubt that there is much that you can do to change this.
Lessons for next time (with a different institute/professor, I would assume):
* When negotiating the collaboration: make it explicit who will be doing the hundreds of hours of work: a grad student? a post-doc? somebody else?
* Especially when the work is of great importance to you: try to be part of the interviewing committee in case the student still has to be contracted.
* Also make the guidance explicit: how many hours, and by whom (post-doc, overworked professor?).
* make the deliverables as tangible as possible. In case of code, think also of unit tests, code reviews, etc.
* Before starting the project: agree on regular progress meetings (which frequency?), and in which form (face-to-face, telephone, ...)
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/07
| 1,344
| 5,942
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently, I got a **reject and resubmit** decision from a reputed mathematics journal. I received two referee reports: the first referee suggested improving the presentation, with no recommendation of accepting or rejecting my paper. The second referee also suggested improving the presentation, and pointed out some mistakes to correct and gave a recommendation to fix the errors and resubmit.
The editor's comment was:
>
> The paper is poorly written. Therefore, I suggest to rewrite the paper according to the suggestions of the referees and then to resubmit.
>
>
>
Could anybody explain me why the decision was **reject and resubmit** rather than **major revision**? Under what circumstances might editors make such a decision?<issue_comment>username_1: A "major revision" decision generally implies that, if the reviewers' concerns are addressed, the paper will probably be published. (See this related question, [What does a "major revision" mean?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3531/what-does-a-major-revision-mean))
Sometimes when a paper is poorly written, it's hard for reviewers to judge its technical merits. (Because the presentation is so poor as to make it difficult to understand.) In these cases, a "revise and resubmit" decision often makes a lot of sense. It wasn't possible for the reviewers to properly evaluate the paper, so it's hard to say with any confidence one way or the other whether the paper will be publishable if the presentation is improved. The obvious course of action is for the authors to improve the presentation and resubmit the paper for a proper review.
Based on your description, it sounds like that may be what happened in your case, as one reviewer wasn't able to comment on anything besides presentation.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One key difference is that for a **major revision**, the authors are given a deadline and the editor in charge of the paper may need to chase the authors when the deadline expires.
For a **revise and resubmit**, the editor is absolved of responsibility and resubmission of the paper is completely in the authors' hands.
That said, the eased workload would hardly be the reason for an editor to suggest one over the other.
**Major revision** implies a kind of commitment from the editor to help get the paper into a publishable shape.
**Revise and resubmit** lacks such a commitment, and requires first that the authors fix the paper first.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Some journals use the 'reject and resubmit' decision in order to improve their metrics. Two things start looking better this way:
1) The rate of rejections goes up, making it look like the journal is particularly picky about the quality of papers it publishes.
2) The submission-to-acceptance time decreases, making it look more appealing for people who don't want to wait ages for their reviews to come in. This is if the journal contacts the same reviewers once again. In the two experiences I've had with this type of decision (once on each side of the reviewing process, two different journals), this was indeed the case.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There exists a submission flow that editors try to manage. Since you talk about "a reputed mathematics journal", I exclude from the answer journals with a poor reputation, which often accept most of their submissions.
For a reputed journal, the publication of high quality content is important, and they rely on editors and reviewers, who generally perform the reviewing task in their free time. One frequent belief, among editors and reviewers, is the following: if an author submits a paper in some language and to some journal, he should follow the journal's guidelines, often including correctness in the expression, typographic rules. This is to ensure that the author has made some efforts to read the guidelines, and to "fit in the landscape" of already published papers. The look somehow precedes the content. Indeed, unless you have a sharp eye, you see the shape before the proof.
This assumes the author has chosen "this journal" among other journals. If the editor, or reviewers, feel that this prior shaping work has not been performed, they feel entitled to reject, or to revise and resubmit. The latter case might indicate that they have found some potential in the paper for that journal.
There might be exceptions: if one detects a ground breaking result, or a paper that would very nicely fit a journal, or a special issue, one might bypass the shaping, and prefer ask for a major revision, to "keep the paper around".
Briefly, to understand such a decision, one should put oneself in the editor's or reviewer's shoes.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I can speak for myself, having often been a referee: when I give such an opinion, my intention is that the authors make an overall effort to review the entire paper taking my remarks into account. If the issues are minor, then I can make a list of problems the authors should address. The ``reject and resubmit'' I use when I find this to be impossible. Reading the referee reports, I actually wonder if the referees understood what you were trying to do. If not, this is not their problem, but rather something you definitely should address.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: In case of a major revision, the author would be required to make the revisions within a particular date. This can often put pressure on the author, and the author might not completely revamp the paper due to time constraints. I think the editor felt that your paper needed to be rewritten almost completely. From the reviewers' comments, it seems that the content is good, but the presentation needs a complete change. Possibly, the editor felt that if you have no time constraints, you would be able to devote more time and revise the paper more extensively.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/07
| 1,225
| 5,363
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted my first paper to a reputed journal and it came back with major revisions. One review is positive while other suggests to reject the paper. Though the reviewer who rejected the paper was under a wrong impression that a smaller version of the paper had earlier been published somewhere else (I provided a preprint on arXiv and declared so in the cover letter).
I have made significant changes to some sections of my paper and now writing the review text. So my questions are:
1. What is the etiquette for replying to the reviewers. "Thanks for such comments" etc after each comment seem very repetitive to me and seems they sound just as formality. Are there any established etiquette to reply to reviewer comment (specifically for very negative comments)
2. Is it OK for the review text to have 5-8 lines in response to comments which are not there verbatim in the revised manuscript. (Since I want to connect to the revision as compared to the previous version)
3. Should I include the changes (such as tables for new results etc.) in the review text or rather point to relevant sections in the manuscript ?<issue_comment>username_1: The more you write the more people need to read before they get to the stuff they need to know, so I would keep the formalities short. I typically start my response letter with a general thanks to all reviewers. If one has been especially useful I will mention that there.
If there was a comment that happend in all (or many) of the reviews I will discuss that at the begining as well.
After that the letter becomes very "tabular", For each reviewer I just discuss point for point how I dealt with that comment. Usually it is just a sentence and the page (and line) of where that change happened in the text. Occationally it may make sense to write a bit more, and I do so whenever required.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Different people follow a different 'style' when replying to reviewers. I have seen several different ones while reviewing papers and also while writing my own replies. Based on these, I can say the following:
1. I generally thank the reviewers and editor for taking time to go through my paper - it is voluntary work so the least they deserve is this! I do not thank them after every comment but if I am making specific changes based on their recommendations I make sure I make them aware of that. For example, "this figure has been changed following your suggestion" or something like that. Because the reviewer may not remember that was their suggestion in the first place (rare, but it does happen). This works specifically for negative comments as you don't have to thank them but if you are changing something partially based on a negative comment then they are somewhat being "acknowledged". Do reviewers care about these? I don't think so but its just good practice. If you are vehemently defending something and not making any change (i.e. sticking to your guns) then you can still explain that politely.
2. Yes, nothing wrong in that. You can even have a page of comment if you need to especially in major revisions.
3. That depends on you. I generally don't include it in review text and just point out the figure/table number.
Good luck with your revision and you may find this post of mine interesting about [how to tackle a major revision](http://username_2.com/?p=89).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There are many ways to write a response to reviewers, but this is generally how I approach it:
An introductory paragraph, mainly directed at the editor, discussing the broad-strokes themes of the changes. "Reflecting the comments by the reviewers, we have included additional information on the simulation approach used, as well as expanded the discussion of the work's implications in practice. We believe you will find the enclosed manuscript to be significantly improved..."
A point by point addressing of the reviewer comments, formatted something like this:
**Reviewer 1:**
*I think this paper is excellent, timely, methodologically interesting, innovative, and in every way an exemplar of it's kind.*
Thank you.
*Figure 2. When printed in black and white, it's impossible to distinguish the results of Scenario 1 vs. Scenario 2*
We have altered the lines in Figure 2 to have different symbols as well as different colors to distinguish between Scenario 1 vs. Scenario 2, which should improve readability when printed.
**Reviewer 2:**
*I don't trust the results of this paper. The authors used X, when they should have used Y. This is a curious decision that cases doubt on the rest of their analysis*
We considered using Y when approaching this analysis, however because of A, B, and C properties of the data, Y would be inappropriate, and yield a biased result. The method we used for X is detailed in Science, P. *Methods for using X in Circumstances Exactly Like This*. 2013. Society Journal (7)11.
And so on, and so on...
When addressing reviewer comments where your response is "Yeah...no.", I find being firm but polite, and giving a justification, to be your best bet. I *don't* tend to include the exact changes to things like "This has been reworded to be substantially more clear", but then several major journals in my field require manuscripts with Track Changes enabled to do exactly that.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/07
| 1,459
| 6,091
|
<issue_start>username_0: I m a current master coursework student in engineering major and I’m planning to do a PhD after graduating from this course. I want to know how to become a qualified researcher. There are several shortcomings that I think may stop me making it:
1. I understand things very slowly. When I read or listen to others, I can’t get the idea very quickly. Sometimes there is even an unexpected blank or distraction in my mind when I’m getting some information and I have to get it again.
2. I like delving in solving a certain question I’m interested in, but I often get stuck there for a long time until I solve it, which really have a severe negative effect on exams. In addition, this kind of obsession is a short-term effect, rather than perminant one. That’s to say it’s hard for me to stick to one thing for a long period of time as I’m easy to get obsessed in another thing once it appeals to me.
3. I’m not good at explaining or illustrating my idea to others. They often don’t understand what's my point and I need to explain it several times. The situation is worse in speaking. I often get a blank mind and forget the next point to connect to my current point when I express my idea orally. It’s very hard to organize my idea well when speaking.
Since I have no experience of being a researcher, I want to know if those problems are likely to be a barrier to becoming a qualified researcher? How can I overcome these problems?<issue_comment>username_1: As @ff524 mentioned in comments, it's hard to give advice to you after only these few lines, for no reason more than that what you describe as holding you back might equally well be a sign that you share certain characteristics very common among academic researchers.
As to 2), you essentially say that you like digging into a problem until you have a solution that pleases you, while forgetting the world (exam) around you. That ability, or obsession, must be one of the most important for a researcher, whatever the source (it could point to some excessive OCDness). It currently probably leads to you having crack answer to a few exam questions, while none or marginal ones to others, and so might prevent you from ever *being* a researcher. All it seems to take though is to keep reminding yourself to not obsess: write an answer outline to all questions, and then allow yourself to drill deeper. It's essentially an inability to multi-task, and there is lots of advice online how to address that.
The difficulty to orally communicate you mention in 3) is extremely common among professors. Your ability to speak can be improved in rhetoric classes, but being a poor speaker is often linked to issues such as anxiety too, and so is tricky. Communicating clearly in writing though can be easily improved in self-study. Get yourself a copy of [Strunck&White](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Style), skip the 4th chapter, and ignore those telling you it's outdated. Zinsser's [On Writing Well](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0060891548) is even more helpful. It was a real life-changer for me.
Your issue 1) is unclear for someone not knowing you in person as well. You understand slowly. Says who? By comparison to who? Does the person explaining things to you suffer from your issue 3) as well? You might just be too hard on yourself. I had few teachers who truly helped me understand what I had to learn better, so few that all these years later they and what they said stick out in my memory. In terms of comprehending from reading, you seem to say that to truly learn, you need to re-read your books. That isn't too uncommon either. Additionally, from what you say in 2) which might allude to some OCDness or similar, you might be too harsh on yourself in judging when you have "learned" something. To this day, when I read a math book I have to fight feeling that I didn't read it carefully enough if there is *any* proof in it I couldn't provide on the spot. That's counter-productive.
I hope some of what i wrote actually fits your situation, or at least helps you maybe view it in a different light.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I did laugh a bit reading your post. I did really feel that you were talking about me.
I got a Phd in electrical engineering as a foreign student in Japan last March.
I don't think what you describe can hinder you seriously. Being a researcher is mainly a matter of self-discipline. You can already solve problems on your own. You just have to keep "physically" away from distractions. (Just the time to get the requirements for PhD graduation).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: FMI, The research is not as objective-based as commercial corporations, it focuses more on the process, about how a idea is came up and get solved. You can have enough time to find and fix your problem that stop you from becoming a qualified researcher. As far as I know, your first two problems will not likely to become a big trouble to your future research career, while the last problem matters differently depending on which level you want to reach.
Firstly, with regard to slow comprehension, you can take your time to understand things you want to understand. And you don't need to do it in hurry. Secondly, if you get obsessed on any idea, then delve in it and don't worry about anything others until you get there. Lastly, as to poor communication skills, I think that the higher level you want to reach in academic world, the more important it's to have a good communication skill. You need to improve the ability to express your idea well if you want to reach the top level in the academic world, but you can still handle it without being so good at communication as a normal-level researcher as doing researches also focuses on going deep inside a idea, which, as I think, is not closely relevant to communication skills.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: You should consider professional counselling. At American universities, this is typically free. The counsellors are experts in these types of problems.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/07
| 826
| 3,324
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am looking for an archive where anyone can deposit both data and research papers, which does not require creators or users to pay, does not require registration for users to access materials (hence not academia.edu), and which is not restricted to specific fields such as math or computer science (though the content could be limited to academic stuff as opposed to recipes). If that's not enough, the web site should provide "adequate amounts of space", which I know is field dependent, but let's start with 250 GB per user as a baseline. I presume that creators of content to be posted on such a site would have to register. As far as I can tell there is no such archive, but I may have missed something.<issue_comment>username_1: [Figshare](http://figshare.com/) sounds like what you're looking for.
You can upload papers, data, figures, code, and/or other stuff. Another nice feature is that you can get a DOI for your uploaded stuff.
A free account (for content creators; consumers don't need an account) includes unlimited public storage.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I *believe* Figshare may now do what you need - it will take papers as well as datasets (and other outputs).
[Regarding space](https://figshare.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/203979443-What-are-the-file-size-limits-):
>
> For now there is a file size limit of 250MB with our standard figshare accounts alongside 1GB private storage and unlimited public storage.
>
>
>
...so let's call that 'maybe', depending on your exact definitions.
A caveat - if you mean depositing *already* published material when you say "deposit research papers", you may have problems whatever service you use. This is primarily governed by your existing agreements with the original journals, which in most cases are quite restrictive. Caveat emptor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the already mentioned `figshare` service, I would recommend you to take a close look at [Zenodo](http://zenodo.org) service. While Zenodo also offers a set of features, similar to `figshare`, including an automatic DOI generation and assignment, there are at least three significant differences (and Zenodo's advantages, that is, for the appropriate cases) that ought to be considered, as follows:
* Zenodo offers `git` and `GitHub` integration, so, if you plan to publish your research source code, I would go with Zenodo (and I actually did with my dissertation research source code - it's a bit tricky, but nothing that cannot be solved);
* Zenodo is backed by world-famous CERN and its solid IT cloud infrastructure, so your data is IMHO more safe than with `figshare` in the long term.
* Additionally, from an organizational perspective, a related argument is that Zenodo backed by a stable organization and European Union's multi-year projects (and, thus, funding), whereas `figshare`, while an independent organization, is backed by two not very well-known private (and, thus, not so stable) companies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Ask your institution's library whether you have an "institutional repository" available to you. 250 GB per user is a lot (the IR I ran had about 300 GB storage available, total!), but if your library can get over that hurdle, an IR should do just what you need.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/07
| 828
| 3,339
|
<issue_start>username_0: As it is very competitive to have tenure, I wonder if there is any case that someone holds a non-tenure position (e.g. associate professor) until the end of his/her career, i.e. until the retirement. If there is, is it a normal practice?<issue_comment>username_1: In the US system, it is generally not possible for a person to hold a tenure track but non-tenured position, such as being a tenure-track assistant professor, for longer than a few years (I think the typical tenure clock is 6 years plus extensions for life events like new babies). After that, the person will either get tenure or else they will have to leave or switch to a different class of position, such as "research scientist."
Research scientists or non-tenure-track professors, however, can easily have a full and comfortable career with nothing even vaguely like tenure involved, all the way up until they retire, go emeritus, or succumb to old age. This can happen both in traditional academia (see, for example, [Dave Clark](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_D._Clark), or non-tenure professors at medical schools) or in alternate academic settings such as national labs and research companies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is certainly possible.
It not not necessarily the most "iconic" track, as most people assume a "Tenure Track" -> "Tenure" progression, but it's certainly far from abnormal. Here are a couple ways this could happen:
* Medical schools. I've applied for a number of jobs in medical schools, and seen others, where the position is *not* tenure-track for PhDs. Basically, this is because while they could make MDs make up their salary with clinic duty, the PhDs are utterly dependent on grant money, and in nearly/entirely soft money positions, the department wants to be able to fire them if they stop being able to support themselves.
* State institutions. There are some institutions where tenure implies an obligation *by the state*, and when the state isn't going to support a position, the institution may list it as non-tenured position that may still be permanent.
* Soft-money research institutes. Where I work now, which is somewhere you could absolutely have an entire career, doesn't have the ability to give tenure, and as such, unless you've got a joint appointment with a tenure granting department, tenure simply isn't a thing.
* It's entirely possible to have built a career out of adjunct positions, lectureships, etc., none of which had the prospect of being tenured.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Another way this can happen is via "professor of practice" positions. Some departments/schools, usually explicitly professional in orientation (e.g. business, information studies, some health fields, social work, sometimes even law), recruit full-time instructors from the ranks of practitioners as well as from Ph.D-holders. These positions are never (that I've ever seen) tenure-track/tenured, but they certainly can be long-term, covering the rest of the instructor's career.
(At most US institutions, since most professional schools issue graduate-level degrees as well as teaching undergraduates, the requirement is that an instructor without a Ph.D hold the "terminal degree" for the field, so, an ML(I)S for an information school, or a JD for a lawyer.)
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/07
| 940
| 4,112
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been browsing through a few IEEE journal articles and couldn't find an example where there was a figure on the first page of the article. So I tried to find the rule that explicitly forbids the authors from including a figure on the first page, but I couldn't find such a rule either. Here's one of the links where I looked: [Preparation of Papers for IEEE Transactions and Journals](http://www.ieee.org/documents/trans_jour.docx)
I am specifically seeking a clarification of such a rule (if it exists) for the IEEE journal article and not for conference publications (or even letters or tech notes).<issue_comment>username_1: To the best of my knowledge, there is no such rule. It would be problematic to put a figure in the first column (which is tightly compressed between abstract and copyright blurb), but a figure at the top of the second column is fine. However, due to the way that document preparation is done for IEEE publications, it is highly unlikely that an author will end up with a figure on the first page unless they specifically choose to do so.
The reason is that in the IEEE format (both conference and journal), one rarely gets much beyond the introduction in the first page, and certainly never in the first column. IEEE papers are mostly prepared with LaTeX, and as such, if you use the normal figure placement, your figure will tend to end up at the top of the column *after* the column in which it is set and referenced in the source. Since it's quite rare to have a figure at the beginning of a paper's introduction, then it will be correspondingly rare to have a figure on the first page. Complementarily, an author who chooses to have a figure on the first page will typically need to move the figure significantly forward of its reference in the text in order for LaTeX to choose to place it at the top of the 2nd column. Most IEEE journals work directly from the author-submitted document rather than doing significant layout work by the journal, so if the author didn't put it on page 1, nobody else is likely to either.
Thus, we have the emergent phenomenon you've noticed: because the defaults and tendencies in article production for IEEE make it unlikely that a figure will appear on the first page without author intervention, most papers have no figure on the first page.
Personally, I like to intervene, because a figure on the first page really helps an article pop out to a reader and be more memorable and intelligible. I suggest that unless you have good reason to do otherwise, you do the same.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: While I agree with username_1's answer, there is actually a reference about not putting any floats on the first page in
<NAME>, "How to use the IEEEtran LaTeX class," *LaTeX class files, Journal of*, vol. 8, no. 1, Nov. 2012
Note that, as far as I'm aware, the "Journal of LaTeX class files" is not a real journal but was just the default header of the IEEE LaTeX templates at the time this article was released. On page 8, under section X. Floating Structures, is the following quote:
>
> Furthermore, IEEE journals never place floats in the first column of the first page and rarely (if ever) do they do so in the second column of the first page.
>
>
>
Unfortunately no further qualification is given as to why this is the case. Depending on how you interpret this it's either a hard and fast rule, a strongly recommended style guideline, or just a statement of the way things are in IEEE journals.
Either way it's highly likely that this paper, which most people download and read when they download the IEEE LaTeX template, has caused some authors not to put a figure on the first page. Combine that with the way the IEEEtran LaTeX class works and the fact that the first page is usually a literature review with no figure references, has meant that figures on the first page are quite rare nowadays.
Given all this the best thing to do is to contact the editor of the journal you are submitting to, to see what their preference is and just go with that.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/07
| 2,601
| 10,765
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a research proposal and I can not choose the right very first sentence to start the introduction. My research is purely theoretical.
Let's assume I want to study a mathematical model of dynamics of wolfpacks distribution in last 100 years in country C.
There is a separate section for objectives so I would not start from aims.
What would you write to start?
I have several ideas but neither of them looks totally convincing for me.
1. Wolves are very important
2. Wolfpacks distribution is very important
3. Wolfpacks distribution dynamics is very important
4. Analysis of ecological data is important
5. In recent years study of wolves/wolfspack distribution/wolfpacks distribution dynamics has received much attention
6. Many problems of *something* are related to wolfpacks distribution dynamics
7. Mathematical modelling of ecological processes has been proved to be useful in analysis of many things over years.
If I were writing a paper I would not care much about it but here people say, that the first words are of particular important and I don't want loose points.
EDIT: As question got popular and everybody wants to correct my orthographic error in "wolfs", I correct it myself.<issue_comment>username_1: If I were you, I would start with
>
> I want to study a mathematical model of dynamics of wolfpacks distribution in last 100 years in country C.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not an ecologist, but I would start with something along the following lines:
>
> Among the rich toolset of ecological research methods, *mathematical*
> *modeling* plays a prominent role (-potential citations-). In particular, it is a popular method
> for studying distribution of species within a geographical area and,
> especially, the distribution's dynamics (-citations-).
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: The first paragraph of any paper or proposal is always the hardest for me to write, and the first sentence is the hardest part of that paragraph. In my experience, no matter what I write, it sounds hackneyed; fortunately, the same is true of everybody else's first sentences, including *all* of the sentences you and other other answers have suggested. I used to spend *days* agonizing over the precise choice of words in each opening sentence.
So a few years ago, I adopted the following strategy, which works surprisingly well:
1. Typeset the phrase **INSERT FIRST GRAF HERE** in bold red 18-point text at the top of the first page of your proposal. Promise yourself that you will write this paragraph only at the very end, after you've written and polished everything else.
2. Start writing the second paragraph, which explains in broad strokes the **substance** of your proposed research. Assume that the first paragraph has already explained how novel/important/cool the research area is.
3. Make sure your introduction includes a few paragraphs describing specific prior work **and its impact**, as well as the specific work you are proposing **and its potential impact**. Keep it high-level; this is just the elevator pitch. You'll include a more detailed description of both of these points later.
4. When you are *completely* finished writing and polishing the rest of the proposal, delete the phrase **INSERT FIRST GRAF HERE** from the top of the first page and submit the proposal.
Yes, I really have done this, multiple times; and yes, the resulting proposals were funded.
To put it more bluntly: **Just get to the point.**
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I find the way you have expressed your example and interest somewhat confusing and potentially weak, independent of all your suggested phrasings.
I am going to take the fact that you don't know the plural of "wolf" as a subtle clue that you are not actually interested in "the dynamics of wolfpacks [sic] distribution in last 100 years in Country C" and are just choosing an example. But because you have chosen an entirely made up example it's not clear to me what you mean when you say your research is "purely theoretical". Doing purely theoretical research in a very (almost ridiculously) specific mathematical modelling problem just doesn't make much sense to me: if you are interested in the underlying mathematics of the model then it must be more generalizable than just wolves in Country C or what's the point? Or, if you are specifically interested in wolves in Country C then shouldn't there be some *practical* reason for this? Well, in fact there doesn't have to be: maybe every single animal group in every single country is worthy of some academic studying a mathematical model of the dynamics of their distribution across a given time scale. But there's the problem: this probably *is* worthy of study in some abstract, all knowledge is sacred sense, but as you are writing a **competitive research proposal**, something which is worthy of study only in some abstract way along with thousands of other similar things does not sound very competitive for funding.
I suggest that your problems may be more fundamental than writing: you need to identify why and in what way your proposed research is valuable. Really valuable: as in more valuable than someone else's. This is often truly difficult and makes the writing of such proposals emotionally intense (I speak from experience). In particular in mathematics there is some tension between the pure and the applied: tension not so much in the subject matter itself but in its relative value in the sense of research funding. If you are going to put in a mathematics research proposal, it needs have clear value as a piece of theoretical mathematics *or* have truly promising applications. Or both. (Since you do mathematics, you surely know that "or" is inclusive!) Both would be great. The problem is that what you're proposing sounds like it is attempting to stake out a position of value somewhere strictly between theoretical and applied, but that is not a locus of recognized value. In general, if there are clearly defined, venerable successful topics of interest A\_1,...,A\_n, and you pitch a proposal that is some kind of convex combination of them, then unless at least one of the coefficients has value very close to 1 then you are likely to lose out to all of the people who are vigorously doing any one of A\_1,...,A\_n. Again, I speak from experience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: While I think username_3's answer is still the best and most generic, there is a second strategy to reinforcing your front lines: throw the best names in the field on the front lines, by using citations. I believe in citing heavily. First, it's good practice and great for cross-referencing later. Second, people you cite might be reviewing you if they're in any way relevant (so better make sure you're representing their main points right). Finally, it allows you to skip explaining things that others have already done a good job with.
>
> Moe (2014), Larry (2015), and Curly et al. (2013; 2015) have indicated
> that this a critical period for studying wolf dynamics, due to (timely
> problem, such as tundra erosion in the Arctic) and advances in (your
> method), which can identify key tipping points. These techniques can
> not only reverse the decline of wolfpacks, but in fact introduce a new
> world dominated by wolves, in a Planet of the Apes (Schaffner, 1968)
> type scenario. A society of wolves will completely reshape how science in
> wolfpack dynamics is conducted, enabling self-directed wolf research.
>
>
>
Well, maybe not the last couple. However, in total, that paragraph does the following rhetorical moves:
* Top people say: This is the time to solve Problem
* Problem + My New Method = Solution
* Solution => Broader Impacts
* Solution => Change in Research Practice
While you don't want to oversell, those are the main points you want to reinforce. Say them if you believe them and think others will consider them if you can back them up with sound methodology. In general, I would say introducing a research concept requires saying:
1. Why it is important: What are the consequences? Why do we *need* more basket-weaving Maker Spaces? As a general rule, the more people it kills and the faster it kills them, the more money is spent on researching it (hence why rail guns and cancer medicine are both well-funded).
2. What is the research impact (ceiling): How long have people been debating it? How much will it change how everyone does their research in the future?
3. Why now: Why can we do it now, but it wasn't done before? Additionally, what makes you so special? Why can you do it but others won't/can't?
4. What is the research impact (floor): Even if your approach fails miserably, what would be learned then?
You have the whole proposal to prove this (show, don't tell), but it's good to at least summarize a couple times in the proposal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Just a quick comment -- Whichever sentences you choose, PLEASE run a spelling and grammar check! No matter how strong your first and any subsequent sentences might end up being, if they contain many spelling and grammar errors, then you're just defeating your own purposes.
Please note, I'm still not clear what you meant by saying, "Let's assume I want to study a mathematical model of dynamics of wolfpacks distribution..." ... In other words, is this what you will be writing about, or are you just using it here as an example?
Either way, you should pay attention to these types of spelling and grammar errors:
1. The plural of "wolf" is "wolves" (not "wolfs"!)
2. "wolfpack" is a singular noun. Therefore, when referring to distribution, you would say either: "wolfpack distribution" or "(the) distribution of wolfpacks"
3. Where you wrote: "In recent years study of..."
That should be: "In recent years, the study of..."
4. "Wolfpacks distribution dynamics..."
should be: "Wolfpack distribution dynamics...", or "The dynamics of wolfpack distribution..."
(note the use of the singular noun, wolfpack)
5. "Mathematical modeling of ...has been proved to be useful..."
should be: "....has proven to be useful..."
6. Be sure you're using the correct spelling of "modelling" vs. "modeling". The accepted spelling can vary by country/region. In the U.S., it is typically spelled with one 'L' (modeling). In the U.K. & Canada it is generally spelled with two L's (modelling).
As others have stated, if you really can't think of a good first sentence (or a good first paragraph), just start working on the rest of it. You can always come back to finish the introduction later.
I often wait until the very end before I write the very beginning. :-)
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/08
| 1,145
| 4,832
|
<issue_start>username_0: California, for example, has two universities: University of California and California State University. Why would any state not simply have one university for all the higher-education programs it wishes to fund? It'd be easier for the students, as they now wouldn't have to go through a transfer application process just to go to a different state-run campus. They wouldn't even have to worry about whether the course work they did in - or to get into - their current university will be enough to get them onto that other campus.
The only reason I can come up with is feasibility.<issue_comment>username_1: Your question seems to assume the default is for all campuses to be the same, but there's no reason for this to be true. For example, the UC schools are far more research-oriented than the Cal State schools. There's nothing wrong with that: California wants to have some public research universities, but that doesn't mean every public university should be a research university. That would be extremely expensive, and the net result would be either more research than the state wanted to fund or fewer universities.
There are many ways universities can vary (degree of research focus, graduate and professional programs, selectivity and prestige, etc.), and by default they will be different. This is typical in U.S. states, not just limited to California.
>
> It'd be easier for the students, as they now wouldn't have to go through a transfer application process just to go to a different state-run campus.
>
>
>
That's not generally true, and indeed you can't easily transfer between UC campuses. From this perspective, California doesn't have two public universities, but rather dozens of them. It would require massive changes to make easy transfers work in practice, because some locations are far more popular than others and would be terribly overcrowded if everyone could transfer wherever they liked.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You seem to be mistaken in seeing only two universities in California. In fact, the two example you cite are University Systems, each with many universities under them. For example, the University of California system has UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, UC Los Angeles, and many more. The same is true for the other system.
In the end, one of the things to remember is that many of the US states are pretty big. California has a population of 38 million -- more than many countries in the world. It requires dozens of universities to educate its next generation, and for administrative purposes, these universities have been grouped into two systems (or, if you want to consider the community colleges as universities, into three). Other states have done the same.
These systems -- at least in most states in the United States -- do not usually provide any input into research or teaching. This is typically left to the individual university. Rather, the systems do things like property and land management, dealing with some financial matters such as issuing debt or bonds, providing political connections in the state legislatures, etc. In my current home state, the Texas A&M University System provides the administrative structure for the many universities under its umbrella, but the System itself is actually a rather small organization compared to the universities it oversees.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: For starters, in some states, there is simply so much area or population, a single university simply can not support the population.
California has several universities because of population. California has over 38 million people. That's more than all of the Scandinavian countries combined. Can you imagine if a single university tried to be the sole university to support Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Finland? That university would be overcrowded and probably not be able to support everyone.
Florida and New York each have approximately 20 million people, collectively beating Poland.
On the size matter, the state of Texas is larger than Ukraine. Do you think that it's logistically feasible for a single university to be responsible for all of Ukraine?
<http://www.ipl.org/div/stateknow/popchart.html>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: the CSU system - 23 universities - has its origins in agricultural and teachers' colleges, while UC had a traditional academic and medical bearing. recently, as you discerned, their roles have become more confused (CSU offers doctorate degrees and UC operates a ranch). any reading on this topic should start with the CA [Master Plan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Master_Plan_for_Higher_Education).
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/08
| 1,123
| 4,964
|
<issue_start>username_0: My interest includes pure math, string theory, quantum field theory and some applied mathematical topics, so I'd like to be so-called a pure mathematician and a string theorist. Considering my performance so far, I think I will have decent chance for any physics PhD programs except for top ones, while I will not have much chance for the math PhD programs of my interest. Therefore, it seems to me that the best choice is to go to the physics PhD program with faculties influential on string theory. Fortunately, such a school tends to have a math department with decent faculties on the fields of my interest, so all of my demands seem to be satisfied by this choice.
However...
How much is it possible for a physics PhD student to interact with math grad students and professors through math courses, research and seminars? What limitation will I be likely to experience?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, there is an entire broad field known as mathematical physics.
Your primary limitation will probably be time. There are a few issues of "language barriers", curiously enough, as mathematicians and physicists don't always use the same terminology for the same concepts, but that is a minor issue to get around if it is important to you.
You already have to deal with the requirements of the physics department, leaving you less time to also deal with courses in mathematics. Furthermore, the two departments don't always have synchronized schedules: you may find that their seminars conflict, or even that you have courses to attend during the other department's seminar times. This is especially likely if you have some sort of teaching/lab responsibilities. In my graduating university the physics department did their lectures mostly on Tuesday/Thursday, and labs were mostly on MWF. However, the math department lectured mostly on MWF, with discussion sections set for Tuesday/Thursday. Since the professors of both departments tended to prefer seminars and colloquia to occur on lecture days (since that's when the professors were most likely to be there, and graduate students are less likely to have conflicts), this meant that one department's graduate students were doing teaching duties during the other's seminars. If you get an early enough time slot for these duties you may be available, but you are still going to have to measure if you need to spend your time doing other work more--grading, your own homework, preparing for qualifying exams, research, etc. all take time.
However, this is not to say that it's impossible. I've seen physics and EE graduate students in graduate mathematics courses before (and vice versa, by virtue of my being an example). And not simply in applied math courses. I even know of one physics undergrad+master's student who, for the heck of it, took an undergraduate topology course, and was found so exceptionally gifted by the professor that he was given a full TA-ship in the mathematics department so he could spend more time doing mathematics for his last two years or so. Ultimately said student went on to do his doctoral work in particle physics at a top university, has written at least one book in the (vague) area of "abstract mathematics for physicists", and many other things befitting his intellect and character. As a curious aside, some other mathematics students and I had to actually convince him to at least leave with a Bachelor's degree. We couldn't quite get him to go through the trouble of a Master's degree, but I can assure you he could have easily earned a doctorate in mathematics if he had so desired.
There are several physicists who have joint appointments in the mathematics department, and vice versa--though in my experience it tends to be rare when they have a significant presence in the other department, even if they are known and well-respected there--and legions of graduate students who are unsure of whether they should be considered a mathematician or a physicist. At least one of which has made the hilariously inconvenient mistake of saying exactly this to US immigration officials.
So in the actual practice of your research, you can easily cross barriers or reside in grey zones between physics and mathematics, with researchers in either department taking note of your results, and working with you. Your ability to be actively involved with both departments, either as a student or faculty, however, will be heavily limited by time constraints.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Well, <NAME> won a fields medal for his work on string theory, so if you want to work in that field you'll have as much maths as you can handle.
However, you do need to think about what you actually want to do. If you want to study mathematics, go for a mathematics PhD even if you won't get into such a good school. Theoretical physics and mathematics are different in philosophy as well as approach and goals.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/08
| 3,800
| 15,650
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am close to finishing my PhD. Some of my peers use LaTeX. Obviously, it looks much better than Word and alike. As I wrote a few papers that go into my final thesis, I however have numerous formats depending on the journal in question. I would like to transform them all into one final document with matching layout. I am OK with TeX, but I'd rather see a professional do it.
I am now considering two options:
1. Taking my limited TeX-Knowhow to the next level.
2. Hiring an expert.
My time is limited. I've got a couple more weeks to go and that should be enough for option #1, as I already know a bit of TeX. But I am an external PhD student and I work on the side.
I have two questions:
1. What factors should I take into consideration in deciding which route to take?
2. If I decide for an expert, what criteria do I need to evaluate if the expert is any good?<issue_comment>username_1: The best thing to do would be to practice it yourself and code with the help from forums such as TeX-LaTeX at StackExchange. If your school/university provides the class file for LaTeX formats, then more than half your thesis compilation work is already done for you. The [Wikibook on LaTeX](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX) is a great start and should have nearly all you need to start typesetting your thesis in LaTeX.
As my University didn't have a standard thesis class (at that time) I had to come up with my own class file for my masters thesis by deriving it from the existing thesis.cls class file. It may take a bit of work for a week or two. But it really pays off at the long run. I never thought typesetting a thesis would be much simpler. I had a much easier time than my colleagues who used Word and was very easy to make from the very minute to the most complex changes without affecting the perfection of the formatting. It is what LaTeX is all about: focus on the content and not the formatting.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: (I will quote a [comment](https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/100085/how-long-does-it-take-to-format-a-book-in-latex/100124#comment216667_100124) by [kahen](https://tex.stackexchange.com/users/1495/kahen) and a [chat message](http://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/23948810#23948810) by [<NAME>](https://tex.stackexchange.com/users/2388/ulrike-fischer).)
You have got three qualities of the thesis production: good, cheap, fast. You can choose two.
* Hiring a LaTeX specialist is good (if you find a good one), fast (if you find a good one) but expensive --- typesetting a 100-page thesis can take around 20--30 hours of work, easily more depending on the text, on the person you work with, on the amount of discussion about the appearance, proofreading etc.
* Making it yourself is cheap. However, unless you are Jarod from the Pretender series or you know LaTeX already, it cannot be both good and fast.
Of course, making it yourself is better in moving your LaTeX skills forward, but **I do not think this is crucial for an academic career**, surely it is not more crucial than submitting a quality thesis in time. People hire services of all kinds, you get grant-writing, typesetting, conference organization, IT, etc. --- very various kind of out-sourced services for which someone can say: *"A good researcher has to be able to do this."*
To answer your question about LaTeX services: I doubt universities have, in general, such services themselves. Some have a LaTeX theses class (of varying quality), some even do not have this. However, there are independent LaTeX consults and consulting companies. I can't list any since (1) I don't know them and (2) this is not an advertising site. However, remember that these people are highly specialized, and the prices of their services reflect this.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a bad idea, as others have said. Instead I'd recommend a very simple copy-and-paste job by yourself. Once you have a template configured (I'm using [arsclassica](https://github.com/leodido/arsclassica), for example), writing LaTeX is for the most part just plain text; 90% of your thesis will copy-and-paste over without incident. Of course, the remaining 10% (tables, references, equations) will be more painful but after a few hours you'll have a great looking document and a decent life skill.
An alternative is to try an online LaTeX IDE like [overleaf](https://www.overleaf.com) (formerly writelatex) which some seem to prefer. I wouldn't recommend desktop LaTeX WYSIWYG editors, if you have all your content prepared I'd imagine such an approach would be more of a headache then the copy-and-paste method.
Finally, as yo alludes to, many academics do just fine producing horribly-formatted documents, posters and presentations — it's the content that's important afterall.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I agree with the sentiment(s) above. If you are really invested in having a nicely formatted document, learning LaTeX might serve you well. For me personally, using a program like LyX helped me make the transition between WYSIWYG ("What You See Is What you Get") editors like MS Word and LaTeX. I know that some people will disagree with me, but it worked pretty well for me.
Knowing people that already know how to use LaTeX or LyX will probably be your best resource if you are under a time constraint (you mentioned that some of your peers use LaTeX; maybe they have a template you can use). I was also surprised how much a mathematics/computer science research librarian was able to help me.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I would strongly advise against making the conversion yourself. Latex hase some nasty caveats which can cost huge amounts of time (creating a double-page table...), if you don't know how to solve them. Combine that with other last minute work, your work and you have a recipe for much more stress than is healthy.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Here's my brief story and two cents, since as recently as half a year ago I was in a similar situation. I was not considering hiring someone to help with LaTeX conversion or typesetting (so I won't be commenting on that aspect), so when I said "similar" I meant that in a sense that I had to choose between mastering LaTeX to a level good enough to produce my dissertation report of good quality format-wise and producing it in Microsoft Word, the format, which I have used for all of the previous iterations of my dissertation artifacts (multiple revisions of idea paper, proposal and dissertation report drafts). While I had essentially relatively much more time than you have now, I still decided against ultimately converting my dissertation into LaTeX format (though I have made some brief attempts, mostly using various software programs that automatically convert some formats into LaTeX with varying degree of accuracy). I submitted my final revision in the Word format, but when it was time to submit the document to my institutional e-repository and ProQuest, I have just converted it to PDF format, using Word's export functionality and the result was good enough.
I have made that decision, considering all circumstances at hand and realizing that it would be more valuable to not jeopardize my dissertation schedules, deadlines and defense, while, at the same time, spend more time on producing better software for data analysis and other tasks. Because I understood the importance of mastering LaTeX for my future career of researcher, I decided to go the gentle introduction route and started learning enough LaTeX and various packages (which involved lots of Internet surfing and some TeX.SE activity), so that I could use some of that functionality in my data analysis software reporting modules (hello, reproducible research!) as well as in my dissertation defense presentation slides (using LaTeX/Beamer).
While most previous answers make sense in various aspects, essentially they all are missing your main point and limitation:
>
> "My time is limited. I've got a couple more weeks to go...".
>
>
>
From my experience, it would be rather naive to expect to master LaTeX and a set of necessary supporting packages to be able to produce a good quality dissertation/thesis completely in LaTeX (even without fully reproducible workflow; that is, if you have some kind of data analysis part). Of course, it is possible, if you have had enough past experience of typesetting documents in LaTeX.
P.S. While I said that I won't be commenting on the hiring external LaTeX expert perspective, I just wanted to warn you that, if you will decide to go this route, it is imperative that you would be absolutely confident in a person, whose help you will use, especially, considering your tight deadlines. It is quite risky, as if something will go wrong (that person will not honor time frames or will have issues with conversion or will produce document of poor quality, etc.), you can imagine what kind of problems you might get yourself into. So, unless some people that you trust would highly recommend someone and assure about their LaTeX mastery as well as easiness to work with, I would stay away from that route for good. Good luck with your thesis and its defense!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: At my university there was an ancient latex class going around that had been used for years. Some of the comments date back to 1993!
If you know any other grad students it might be worth asking them if they have the appropriate style files and classes etc, with a bare-bones outline of their thesis. That's what I did for mine.
Even if you don't know any other PhD students at your university then I'm sure you could track down an email list and spam it. I think people will help you out because everyone knows that Latex can be a pain.
I would advise taking this approach or just trying to figure it out yourself. I did my PhD in Astrophysics and it had a lot of Maths in. After my viva I had a few corrections, most were very minor but involved fiddly corrections in Latex. If you pay someone it could be tricky to communicate exactly what the examiner is asking for.
If you want I could try to dig out my old classes/style files to get you started, but they are specific to my university.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Unless your subject is very mathematical and you have lots of equations in your thesis, I would stay away from latex at this stage-just use what you're more familiar with (I believe you're studying economics). Do not trivialise how much of latex you need to know to produce a good quality thesis bearing in mind you only have a few weeks and you're also working on the side. Alternatively, if you're ok with latex then just try it yourself for a week and see how you get on. As already mentioned, you really have to trust whomever you contract your thesis out to at this stage.
You also have to consider whether your supervisors or collaborators would be happy to edit your work in pdf which is the format latex produces-I've been forced to do my work in word because my supervisors prefer to add comments, etc in word. You don't want to do the same work twice!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: LaTeX is very easy to master in a one or two days. What you need to do is make a list of the non-trivial typesetting tasks. E.g. your thesis may contain equations, tables, figures, pictures etc.. Then you just look up in LateX manuals that you can also find online what the commands are. You then make a test tex file where you put in a template for each of the objects, compile it and then see if he result is what is should be. You can then make a few template tex files containing examples for whatever objects you need to use.
The next step is then to make a master text file containing the preamble and each chapter can be put in separate tex files. So, instead of putting the whole content in one big file, you make a master file containing commands like \include{file\_1}
\include{file\_2}
etc.
where file\_r.tex contains the rth chapter. This allows you to work on the editing of the chapters separately. If one chapter requires some more studying to get the typesetting right, you can just skip that one and finish work on the other chapters. You can compile the entire thesis without that chapter, so it's not going to be an obstacle to finish all the other work that you can already do.
So, I would advice against hiring an expert. In case you get stuck, you can get help from experts [here](http://tex.stackexchange.com) who help people free of charge.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: The most time efficient may be to autoconvert it and then fix the resultant markup. Although I started with TeX and was converting to other formats (\*.docx and MediaWiki), I have had acceptable results with [Pandoc](http://pandoc.org/). The main caveat I have is that tables required special attention to fix.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Evaluating costs and benefits.
------------------------------
This is not a LaTeX only problem, it is valid for almost every decision we make.
Is this a one time thing or are you planning on using LaTeX to prepare other documents in the future? If you would hire an experts once a year, this will be quite costly.
Many people do not like the work with LaTeX, because that little bit of abstract imagination that you need is missing. You got that? Great.
Are you open to the idea of expanding your knowledge? Great.
[Getting around the basics](http://www.dickimaw-books.com/latex/novices/index.html) should not take longer than a day. [Preparation for writing a thesis](http://www.dickimaw-books.com/latex/thesis/index.html) might take a few days. Once you have a solid foundation, prettyfying your thesis will be easy. If you have problems, you have enough knowledge to post a *good* and *clear* question that can be answered within an hour on [TeX.SE](https://tex.stackexchange.com/#). You will learn something new and will have fun.
---
You need this done just once and don't want to invest time in learning something you will never need again.
### Looking out for someone to hire ...
How do you do it when you are looking for a mechanic to fix your car or a doctor to fix up your knee? You talk to people, do some research, read some reviews etc.
As already mentioned, there are experts that can do the job for you. There are also non-experts who want to do the job for you, because you have the money. They might think they are experts, though.
>
> Service A has a nice and professional looking web site, whereas service B has a pretty ugly website. Service A charges more than twice the price than service B, of course you have to ask for the prices first.
>
>
>
Who do you choose? Ask a bit around and you will be told, that service A provides rubbish with a high chance; whereas service B will, with a very high chance, do some excellent work.1
---
In conclusion, you are responsible as an intelligent human being for making a reasonable decision. Will learning LaTeX pay out for me, or should i pay someone to help me?
1 Yes, this is a real case example.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_12: So here is what I did: I did it myself. However, I used a professional academic LaTeX and proofreading service as a final checkpoint - correcting both grammar/syntax and format/layout. I found numoerous services online and chose for a service offered by a renounced journal in my field. I believe I chose for the right mixture between knuckling down on my own and professional help. Thanks again for all the advice.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/08
| 924
| 3,310
|
<issue_start>username_0: Are you allowed to present data on those who declined to participate in your study?
The following is an excerpt from a study on whiplash-traumas where the authors clearly publish some basic statistics on people who declined to participate [1].
>
> Emergency departments identified 6952 eligible participants, of which 3851 (55%) agreed to provide follow-up data (figure). People who participated were older (mean age 37 years vs 32 years) and more likely to be female (2133 [55%] of 3851 vs 1435 [42%] 3430) than the patients who did not participate, but not different in whiplash associated disorder grade.
>
>
>
---
[1] <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>., <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, et al. Emergency department treatments and physiotherapy for acute whiplash: A pragmatic, two-step, randomised controlled trial. Lancet [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2013;381(9866):546–56. Available from: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61304-X><issue_comment>username_1: It seems to me that this is clearly relevant to the study. As long as no personally identifiable data (and just the numbers cited clearly don't qualify as that) I don't see a problem.
In the end, "declined to participate" is an indicator of some self-selection, which could introduce some bias.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is standard practice. And it is necessary in order to detect selection bias.
The [CONSORT initiative (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials)](http://www.consort-statement.org/) provides a [flow chart](http://www.consort-statement.org/consort-statement/flow-diagram) that includes entries for "declined to participate" and dropouts in various follow-ups.
The American Psychological Association, in its [Ethical Principles for Psychologists and Code of Conduct](http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx?item=11), section 8.05 "Dispensing with Informed Consent for Research", writes:
>
> Psychologists may dispense with informed consent only (1) where
> research would not reasonably be assumed to create distress or harm
> and involves (a) the study of normal educational practices, curricula,
> or classroom management methods conducted in educational settings; (b)
> only anonymous questionnaires, naturalistic observations or archival
> research for which disclosure of responses would not place
> participants at risk of criminal or civil liability or damage their
> financial standing, employability or reputation, and confidentiality
> is protected; or (c) the study of factors related to job or
> organization effectiveness conducted in organizational settings for
> which there is no risk to participants' employability, and
> confidentiality is protected or (2) where otherwise permitted by law
> or federal or institutional regulations.
>
>
>
The kind of summary statistics you cite falls squarely under point 1b.
Of course, you *do* need to exercise some caution, in particular to ensure that confidentiality is maintained. Listing the names of non-participants, for instance, would certainly cross the line. As would giving out "too much" information from which one could reasonably deduce the identities of participants or non-participants (if you work with a small, easily identified population, say).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/08
| 988
| 3,936
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am having a special subject named "*Methodologies of Scientific Research*" in which there is a reference on **Panel Studies** and **Cohort Studies** for conducting a **longitudinal survey**. I am confused to what is the difference between Panel Study and Cohort Study ? In Wikipedia they look the same, that is [Panel Study](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panel_study) redirects to [Cohort Study](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohort_study).
Edit: My field is related to Computer Science and more specifically Information Technology in an undergraduate level. The subject "*Methodologies of Scientific Research*" though is not constrained on applications on IT, rather it is more general and we have research examples from other sciences like Sociology, Biology, Economics etc.<issue_comment>username_1: The terminology for longitudinal research designs differs somewhat between disciplines. However, to my knowledge most discipline refer to a "cohort" as an entity that can be distinguished by a certain event as for example the year of birth or graduation from high school. The general idea is that there is an observable variable for the cohort membership and that individuals from the same "cohort" have something in common, e.g. the risk to die from lung cancer due to a common time of exposure. Thus, a "cohort study" looks at one cohort or compares different cohorts. In most cases, cohort studies use longitudinal research designs, but there are also cross-sectional cohort studies.
The use of the term "panel study" seems to me more vague but a "panel study" is in most cases a longitudinal study which has at least observations from two points in time. Panel studies do not need to focus on cohorts.
Hence, cohort and panel studies both look specifically at the timing of certain events and variables.
For further information you could for example have a look at the following articles in the International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences:
* <NAME>. and <NAME>. 2001: Cohort Analysis, in:
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,
edited by <NAME> and <NAME>, Pergamon, Oxford, pp.
2189-2194.
* <NAME>. 2001: Panel Surveys: Uses and Applications,
in: International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences,
edited by <NAME> and <NAME>, Pergamon, Oxford, pp.
11009-11015.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Cohorts and Panels are techniques employed for selecting a sample frame for a particular study. They do not specify the time frame for data collection. So, therefore, cohorts and Panels can be formed to collect data for both cross-sectional (one-time data collection) and longitudinal studies (repeated data collection over a specified period of time).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: In research,panel and cohort studies are both longitudinal studies.in cohort studies the researcher makes repeated measurements on a group of people,elements or characters which or who share the same experiences. I tend to think that in cohort study,for example a researcher carries out research on class 8 cohorts of 2014 then after the cohort leaves he or she continues carrying research with the class 8 cohort of 2015. The researcher in this case is interested with the class 8 cohort because probably he is doing a research on let's say , "why do class 8 pupils perform poorly in mathematics"
In panel studies,data are collected from the same set of people at specific intervals over a long period of time. The key feature in panel studies is that they collect repeated measurements from the same sample at different points in time.A researcher might for example follow a set of people from when they are in kindergarten to secondary then university and so on.
If you want to read more,look for a book by <NAME> on research.
Just my thoughts,I stand corrected.
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/09/08
| 495
| 2,038
|
<issue_start>username_0: I would like to know, if anybody is familiar with any open crowd-based peer-review tools?
If I as a student, for example, use [www.academia.edu](https://www.academia.edu/), is it then possible to get my papers peer-reviewed? I understand that this normally happens if I write a conference paper or a phd. But would like to know, if there is any open tool, where I can add papers and get reviews in a not-formal way?<issue_comment>username_1: <http://peerevaluation.org/> was envisioned as such a forum. I am not sure to which extent it is popular in your comunity and what is the current status of the project.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Besides <http://peerevaluation.org>, there is <http://www.peerageofscience.org>; and there is also reddit.com. Reddit is most like SE in terms of user interaction, however they have some problems with quality control. It is "open" in the sense that anyone can offer material and make a comment (review): it is "not entirely open" in the sense that authors and reviewers have the option of using a pseudonym, so real identities are usually not known. The other two sites are open in the latter sense, that authors and reviewers are openly identified (as far as I can tell), but peerageofscience requires reviewers to "have published a peer reviewed scientific article in an established international journal, as first or corresponding author", so it is closed to reviewers without that credential. (I am not sure about peerevaluation but it does not seem to require any qualifications from reviewers though it does ask you to categorize yourself).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: "Crowd-based" is not "peer review". So, while there are platforms Open Peer Review, these still assume that the person doing the reviewing is a "peer" and not someone random from the public. The only mature one I know of is [Science Open](http://about.scienceopen.com/what-is-post-publication-peer-review) which does both publishing and peer-review.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/08
| 541
| 2,410
|
<issue_start>username_0: I was asked to review a paper for a rather important Journal in my field (engineering discipline). The editor (professor) who assigned the review to me is based at the same university as the first author (PhD student). The two do not come from the same chair, but the university is quite small and it is likely they do know one another personally.
Furthermore, the editor suggested a meeting to discuss my opinion on the manuscript in person. He is currently in my area. Since I know him from conferences it would be difficult to decline his meeting request.
So now I am not sure if this represents a conflict in interests or if I am being too paranoid here? If this is critical, how should I react?<issue_comment>username_1: Being from the same university may or may not be an issue (it's hard to judge without knowing more details). Asking to discuss a manuscript in person, however, is a *huge* red flag.
Communication about manuscripts should pretty much always go through official channels only, thus keeping an accessible record of the complete decision-making process. Only in dealing with exceptional situations (e.g., plagiarism, negotiating transfer to another journal) is there likely to be any communication outside of these channels, and even then it should be written down. This is to protect both the integrity of the process and also everybody involved---authors, reviewers, editors, publisher---since both acceptance and rejection are capable of ending up quite contentious.
The fact that this editor is asking to talk with you in person before you've even written your review sounds extremely dubious to me, and would cause me to decline to review for reasons of unprofessionalism. There may or may not be anything incorrect going on, but it's at least evidence of a rather callous sloppiness that I would not like to be involved with in any way.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Is it too late to tell the editor you have not yet had time to review the paper and you will give him your feedback in writing? It is not your job to call out what may or may not be conflict of interest - but you can preserve the integrity of the process by submitting your review in writing only. Unless you already did and the editor wants some clarification. It is conceivable there are no ill intentions here, just clumsiness, but you are right to be cautious.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/08
| 937
| 4,181
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am about to start a masters degree in the UK.
Our induction day is late next week and on this day we will have a talk on choosing our modules and preparing for the dissertation. Formal teaching begins in 2 weeks time.
On the website it says that we can select dissertation topics listed on the website or if we have a topic in mind, we can pursue this as long as we can find a supervisor.
Say I have already found a topic that I would like to pursue.
Would it be inappropriate to contact the supervisor for that topic this early before the start of term?
Or should I wait after induction?
I do not want to miss out on this topic.<issue_comment>username_1: It would not be inappropriate to contact a potential supervisor in advance. Getting in touch early and specifically mentioning your topic of interest seems a good idea and an opportunity to make a good impression.
A potential issue is that, assuming the MSc begins with taught courses, you may meet other academics you'd rather work with or your interests may change before the project begins. Still, informal discussion about a potential project down the road would be fine.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Guidance is typically provided on when you'd be expected to come up with your research question and your nomination of supervisor. Follow that guidance. If you haven't been told yet, then at least wait for the induction week to find out how things are organised. To kick off on choosing a dissertation topic and supervisor **before induction** really would be too early. Indeed, it would just look silly. So at the very minimum, do at least wait for two weeks.
On our (UK) Masters courses, the selection of thesis topic and supervisor doesn't happen until the second term. That's because the taught modules in the first term gives the students the grounding in research skills and research areas, and an introduction to the staff, that enables them to make better decisions.
If a student approaches a member of staff earlier than that, then a common response would be to note the interest, and to invite them to come back in the second term if they were still interested, but that there's no commitment to do so, as lots of things change after the first term.
An early approach does not necessarily make a good impression. It can look hasty. It can look like you're not expecting to learn anything in the first term.
And we don't really do reserving of research-questions, as such. At least, merely being the first to propose a research question for your dissertation doesn't give you priority in doing it. We work with students to get the best match of question, student skills, and supervisory support. If student B provides a better match than student A, then we'll recommend that student B does that dissertation, regardless of whether A or B proposed it first. In recent cases where we have had overlaps between particular students, then the research area has has sufficient open questions that the students have each been able to do a distinct dissertation within it (and indeed subsequently co-author papers together). So I don't really recognise this notion of "missing out on a topic".
It takes quite a bit of subject familiarity to understand where the open questions are, and that's one of the reasons why we wait until the second term before we get to topic and supervisor selection.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In my experience having done an MSci in the UK, if there is a list of possible topics there will probably be a process to enable people to best choose a project suitable for them.
When I did it we had to rank our top 5 or so projects from the list by a certain date and then you would be assigned one from your selection. This was because most projects could only support a pair of students and some would be very popular.
I suspect most institutions will use some variant on this sort of system, in which case contacting academic very early is of no advantage and you will only have less of an idea of what you actually want to do. In any case I would at least wait until you know what the system used is.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/08
| 4,761
| 17,316
|
<issue_start>username_0: (this is coming out of a comment thread regarding [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52678/what-is-the-point-of-a-lecture-when-you-have-a-textbook/52690#52690).)
The USA has a Fair Use legal provision restricting its copyright law:
>
> 17 U.S.C. § 107
>
>
> Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. §
> 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work,
> including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any
> other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism,
> comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for
> classroom use), **scholarship**, or research, is not an infringement of
> copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any
> particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall
> include:
>
>
> 1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
> 2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
> 3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;
> 4. and the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
>
>
> The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
>
>
>
Obviously there might be other relevant statutes and legal precedents, but still,
1. Is it legal, considering the above, for a university/college student to download a copy of a textbook (say, in a course s/he is taking), for studying the course material?
2. Same question, for a student not enrolled in a class for which the downloaded book is a textbook?
3. Same question, for self-study outside of Academia?
Notes:
* "Legal" in two senses: First, the sense of very small chance of being convicted of a criminal act or obligated to pay money; second, the sense of there being a solid argument for the legality of this act which is likely to hold up if you appeal and appeal and maybe get to the supreme court.
* Assume it's been established that the downloader did not publish the copy elsewhere, did not cite from it extensively, etc. etc.
* I'm not asking whether it's *moral* or *ethical* to download textbooks, only about the legality. I believe it *is* moral and ethical, but that discussion is not what this question is about; please don't start it.<issue_comment>username_1: In general, it is not considered fair use to download the entirety of a textbook, regardless of whether or not you're a student or enrolled in a class using the textbook. Fair use normally is considered to extend to making copies of small excerpts of larger works. For instance, you could copy a particularly relevant figure from a book, or a quote from a textbook or reader for use in a class discussion.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Short answer: **Nope**.
Long answer: **It's complicated.**
The proportion of the work copied can actually be the whole of the work (i.e. 100%), if the *other* parts of the fair use test provide a strong enough justification:
>
> The extent of permissible copying
> varies with the purpose and character of the use. Taking more of the copyrighted work
> than is necessary to accomplish the fair user’s salutary purpose will weigh against fair
> use. **In some cases, the fact that the entire work** — for example, an image — **was needed to
> accomplish the fair use purpose has led the court to hold that the third factor was neutral,
> favoring neither the copyright holder nor the putative fair user**.
>
>
>
[Copyright and Fair Use: A Guide for the Harvard Community](http://ogc.harvard.edu/files/ogc/files/copyright_and_fair_use_a_guide_for_the_harvard_community_0.pdf), Harvard University Office of the General Counsel, Last Updated
November 23, 2009
Unfortunately, the courts haven't consistently viewed educational use as 'fair use' *per se*:
>
> On its face, the text of the statute seems to favor educational uses of works as fair uses. It first lists a variety of educational purposes such as criticism, comment, teaching, scholarship, and research as prototypical fair uses. It then identifies the use of content for “nonprofit educational purposes” as an explicit consideration in the first of the four enumerated factors for consideration in a fair use analysis.
>
>
> In practice, however, **courts have not consistently found that educational uses qualify as fair uses**. Because the doctrine is applied on a case-by-case basis and resists reduction to a per-se rule, it provides limited assurance to scholars and teachers seeking bright-line guidance. ... even scholars well-read in precedent may be hard-pressed to find consistent analyses, across different federal courts, of educational copying and other scholarly uses.
>
>
>
[Digital Learning Legal Background Paper:
Fair Use and Educational Uses of Content](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc), <NAME> for the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School
So you need to look at how the other three parts of the test pertain in the particular case at issue.
Unfortunately, in regard to the first factor:
>
> In determining whether a use is “commercial,” courts generally find that the “distinction is not whether the sole motive of the use is monetary gain but **whether the user stands to profit from exploitation of the copyrighted material without paying the customary price**.” Thus, despite the fact the statutory text contrasts commercial with nonprofit educational purposes, courts may exclude schools and universities from the protection of the fair use doctrine if they “benefit” from such uses.
>
>
>
Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539 (1984) as cited in [Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc)
And in regard to the fourth factor:
>
> the Court has held that “a challenge [of a use]…requires proof either that the particular use is harmful, or that **if it should become widespread, it would adversely affect the potential market** for the copyrighted work.”
>
>
>
Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) as cited in [Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc).
We should therefore take account of a couple of facts that pertain in our hypothetical situation:
* the student benefits from their use of the material,
* if all students were to copy the material without paying for it then the market for the material would be destroyed, which would hurt the incentive system for the production of new works,
and those facts seem to me to imply that copying (or downloading a copy of) an entire textbook, where the alternative is paying to purchase the textbook, would *usually not* be 'fair use' under US law.
**But** exceptions to this are possible. If the *whole* work was *vital* for scholarship but *not* commercially available then a pretty strong argument for 100% copying as fair use could be made. For the full picture read [Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc).
---
**Update** in response to comments:
@einpoklum, thanks for your insightful comments. I thought they deserved proper discussion, so I'm answering them here, where I've got more space to address them.
>
> *It seems that the complicated situation is more in the case of educational institutions using full cpies.*
>
>
>
You're correct that the case law (at least as far as I'm aware) that's specifically about textbooks concerns organisations (such as businesses and educational institutions) rather than individuals.
That's likely to be because it's not worth suing an individual for a very small loss. If the textbook only costs $20 - or even if it costs $100 - the publisher would lose money by suing the student, because the non-recoverable costs of the case (such as the time of the publisher's staff) would cost more than that. This is the reason why lawsuits in P2P filesharing cases tend to be filed against the uploader rather than the downloader.
>
> *But has there ever been a conviction, or a ruling in a civil suit, against a student who downloaded a copy of a textbook?*
>
>
>
Not that I'm aware of. The very small amount of damages that could be recovered would mean that this would be a loss-making lawsuit even if it were won, although it might have a certain deterrent effect.
"Can I get away with doing this without being sued?" (to which the answer is almost certainly '**Yup**') is of course a different question from "Is it legal?".
>
> *Also, any copier of any work stands to benefit from it somehow, otherwise they wouldn't make the copy; it seems you're interpreting that sentence too widely.*
>
>
>
It certainly is a very wide interpretation! Unfortunately this is the interpretation which the US courts seem to give it.
[Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc) makes this point as well:
>
> of course, one might strain to find a situation in which educators would use content without benefiting from it somehow.
>
>
>
[Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc), footnote 10, page 5.
>
> The Guidelines for Classroom Copying have received the most scholarly and judicial attention. While recognizing that some photocopying of copyrighted material for classroom distribution is fair use, the Guidelines require that such copying, in addition to having clear copyright notice on each copy, fall within three specifically described limits: “brevity,” “spontaneity,” and “cumulative effect.” The American Association of University Professors and Association of American Law Schools vigorously opposed these Guidelines, stressing that they “**restrict the doctrine of fair use so substantially as to make it almost useless for classroom teaching purposes**.” Meanwhile, in a series of strategic lawsuits filed soon after the passage of the 1976 Act, publishing interests succeeded in persuading some courts to view those Guidelines as an authoritative gauge of fair use.
>
>
>
[Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc), p.7
>
> *Also, your claim about market destruction is simply invalid - just like with the music industry, people continue to buy music, concert tickets etc. despite having downloaded copies off of the Internet.*
>
>
>
This is a view with which I have much sympathy. Unfortunately the same cannot be said for the US courts.
An example from the Napster case:
>
> 4. Effect of Use on Market ...
>
>
> [31] Addressing this factor, the district court concluded that **Napster harms the market in “at least” two ways**: it reduces audio CD sales among college students and it “raises barriers to plaintiffs’ entry into the market for the digital downloading of music.” Napster, 114 F. Supp. 2d at 913. The district court relied on evidence plaintiffs submitted to show that Napster use harms the market for their copyrighted musical compositions and sound recordings. In a separate memorandum and order regarding the parties’ objections to the expert reports, the district court examined each report, finding some more appropriate and probative than others. A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., Nos. 99-5183 & 00-0074, 2000 WL 1170106 (N.D. Cal. August 10, 2000). Notably, plaintiffs’ expert, Dr. <NAME>, conducted a survey (the “Jay Report”) using a random sample of college and university students to track their reasons for using Napster and the impact Napster had on their music purchases. Id. at \*2. The court recognized that the Jay Report focused on just one segment of the Napster user population and found “**evidence of lost sales attributable to college use to be probative of irreparable harm for purposes of the preliminary injunction motion**.” Id. at \*3.
>
>
> [32] Plaintiffs also offered a study conducted by <NAME>, Chief Executive Officer of Soundscan, (the “Fine Report”) to determine the effect of online sharing of MP3 files in order to show irreparable harm. **Fine found that online file sharing had resulted in a loss of “album” sales within college markets.** After reviewing defendant’s objections to the Fine Report and expressing some concerns regarding the methodology and findings, the district court refused to exclude the Fine Report insofar as plaintiffs offered it to show irreparable harm. Id. at \*6.
>
>
> [33] Plaintiffs’ expert Dr. <NAME> studied several issues (“Teece Report”), including whether plaintiffs had suffered or were likely to suffer harm in their existing and planned businesses due to Napster use. Id. Napster objected that the report had not undergone peer review. The district court noted that such reports generally are not subject to such scrutiny and overruled defendant’s objections. Id.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> [36] We, therefore, conclude that **the district court made sound findings related to Napster’s deleterious effect on the present and future digital download market**. Moreover, lack of harm to an established market cannot deprive the copyright holder of the right to develop alternative markets for the works. See L.A. Times v. Free Republic, 54 U.S.P.Q.2d 1453, 1469-71 (C.D. Cal. 2000) (stating that online market for plaintiff newspapers’ articles was harmed because plaintiffs demonstrated that “[defendants] are attempting to exploit the market for viewing their articles online”); see also UMG Recordings, 92 F. Supp. 2d at 352 (“Any allegedly positive impact of defendant’s activities on plaintiffs’ prior market in no way frees defendant to usurp a further market that directly derives from reproduction of the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works.”). Here, similar to L.A. Times and UMG Recordings, the record supports the district court’s finding that the “record company plaintiffs have already expended considerable funds and effort to commence Internet sales and licensing for digital downloads.” 114 F. Supp. 2d at 915. **Having digital downloads available for free on the Napster system necessarily harms the copyright holders’ attempts to charge for the same downloads**.
>
>
> [37] J<NAME> did not abuse her discretion in reaching the above fair use conclusions, nor were the findings of fact with respect to fair use considerations clearly erroneous.
>
>
>
[A&M RECORDS, Inc. v. NAPSTER, INC., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)](https://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/239_F3d_1004.htm)
>
> *I'm hearing speculative opinions on the prospective interpretation of the law.*
>
>
>
Yes, that's entirely correct. In the absence of an existing case which exactly replicates the hypothetical situation you're proposing, that's all that anyone can give you. If you want a probably-more-accurate speculative opinion then consult a lawyer, but it'll still just be their opinion.
That doesn't mean, though, that the law doesn't apply until there's been a case which covers exactly these circumstances.
>
> *In the mean time, it seems perhaps nobody has even been sued or tried criminally for doing this, and it is a widespread practice. So...*
>
>
>
So you'd probably not be sued. That's correct, but doesn't mean that the practise is necessarily legal.
A few notes:
* You should also be aware that many US universities have their own rules which are **more** restrictive than copyright law:
>
> more than 80 percent of American universities now adhere to internal policies derived from the Classroom Guidelines that university lobbying groups has rejected. Some enforce even stricter guidelines, all but prohibiting reliance upon fair use. At least one commentator has predicted that, in this environment, “**current trends…will eventually eliminate fair use for schools, colleges and universities**.”
>
>
>
[Aull](http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/wg_home/uploads/817/Fair_use_legal_background.doc), p.8
* I encourage you to continue to campaign in favour of a more liberal definition of 'fair use'. [The EFF is an excellent place to start.](https://www.eff.org/issues/intellectual-property) Lawrence Lessig's book '[Free Culture](http://www.free-culture.cc/freeculture.pdf)' also makes for an interesting read on this topic.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It's my understanding is that "fair use" is about the **reproduction** of copyrighted materials.
I don't believe it has anything to do with how you **obtained** those materials.
If you stole the same textbook from Barnes & Noble, would you claim fair use?
It is true that the RIAA and others are suing on copyright grounds & not for plain theft.
How that works exactly, I'm not sure. [You can read more about it on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aspects_of_file_sharing#Copyright_law).
This excerpt is relevant to your question:
>
> Where a defendant has admitted downloading and copying song files from
> other users in the P2P network without permission of the copyright
> holders, she cannot claim that such copying is a "fair use".
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/09/08
| 1,228
| 4,870
|
<issue_start>username_0: When looking at the **paper-is-cited-by-paper** binary relation in an **undirected** manner: Is all research connected to each other or will there be many connected components?
In other words: Is there a way from a, say, computer science paper to a chemistry paper by walking along the citation graph?
Let's say we are only looking at publications in established, well-known conferences conferences/journals.<issue_comment>username_1: In short, no. For starters, and perhaps surprisingly to many folks, a large number of papers in the scholarly literature have neither incoming nor outgoing citations. These obviously won't be connected to anything else. Let's throw these out and look only that set of papers that do cite journal articles or do receive citations from journal articles. Even then, not all articles are connection by citation relationships.
Depending on which data set one uses, the fraction of papers in the [giant component](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giant_component) of a citation graph will vary, but in my experience typically 90-95% of papers will be in this giant component and the rest will be singletons or members of small connected components.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm sure, each paper is connected to all others. The question is, how long is this citation way from one paper to the other. This is the sort of the 5 handshakes rule thing.
I bet, one can even prove that all academic texts are interconnected through the works of, for example, Sigmund Freud.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> When looking at the paper-is-cited-by-paper binary relation in an undirected manner: Is all research connected to each other or will there be clusters?
>
>
>
First, it's possible to have an unconnected paper. Unlikely, but possible, to write something that has no citations and is never cited. This is clearly an edge case, but you did say *all*.
Second, all research can connect, but there can still be clusters. The two are not mutually exclusive - fields will cluster, presumably, but there will then be some links between fields. My suspicion, from personal experience, is that these papers will be methodological in focus primarily.
>
> In other words: Is there a way from a, say, computer science paper to a chemistry paper by walking along the citation graph?
>
>
>
Third, yes, you could get from a CS paper to a Chemistry paper. I know this because I can trace that tree in my own work, and the work my work cites. The path isn't even all that convoluted or exciting.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **Most likely not (but almost)**. Apart from the specific papers without references that people have already mentioned, we can look at crawls of large collections of papers. Take, for example, [this dataset](http://snap.stanford.edu/data/cit-HepTh.html) of all papers in the theoretical high-energy physics section of ArXiv:
>
> Nodes 27770
>
> Nodes in largest WCC 27400 (**0.987**)
>
>
>
>
The largest weakly connected component (WCC) is what you're after: the largest subset of papers that are connected to each other by a path of citations (ignoring direction). While the largest WCC is almost as big as the entire graph, there are papers outside it. Usually, with graph like this, these form little clusters of their own.
For a more cross-domain dataset, consider the [citeseer graph](http://konect.uni-koblenz.de/networks/citeseer), again a small proportion of papers, outside the largest WCC.
Now, of course, these datasets don't contain *all* of academia, and adding more papers would mean connecting some islands to the WCC, but I'd say adding more papers also adds new little islands. No matter what rule you use to decide which papers count and which don't, I think you always end up with disconnected islands.
Of course, if your question is whether any randomly chosen paper in domain A is likely to be connected with a random paper in domain B, the answer is **yes**. There will be a large WCC encompassing all domains, and a few tiny islands. I've seen visualizations to this effect, but unfortunately I can't find them at the moment.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't see how this can be answered short of actually generating the relevant graph and analyzing it. All answers here are simply conjecture. Very reasonable conjecture, based on valid assumptions and reaching conclusions that I find very plausible, but conjecture nonetheless.
I would expect most papers to be connected by a (sometimes very long) path, but not all. However, there is no way of demonstrating this unless we have the graph. I'd be interested to check this, by the way. If anyone has an idea of how to get the relevant nodes and edges, I'd be happy to give it a go.
Until then, I'm afraid this question has to remain unanswered.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/09
| 1,645
| 7,171
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a 2nd year math PhD student. If one specializes in pure math (say dynamical systems with no particular real-world application in mind), **how difficult can it be to transition into industry after the PhD? What are measures one can take to make this a smooth transition?** I am not particularly interested in applied math at the moment, but I'm not too optimistic about the future of the pure mathematician (unless he/she solves some Millennium Prize Problem!!). I would like to think that I have the option of switching from academia to industry if I had to. I am haunted by words of one of my undergrad math professors: "No one should major in pure math. You major in applied math and you continue to study pure math if you're interested in it."
I have a M.A. in math, and my thesis was concerned with estimating the fractal dimension of sets arising in dynamical systems. My ideal profession with a PhD in math would be to teach and to do research. My research need not be limited to pure math.<issue_comment>username_1: A lot of PhDs in theoretical mathematics end up "in industry" of one part or another. Many times this is not by choice, which is sad, but it also means the learning curve is not too steep. There is a reputation, reasonably well-deserved, that a PhD in mathematics teaches you how to think and solve problems in a rather fundamental and robust way, and that all other skills can be overlaid on top of that. Certainly I've seen PhDs in "purely theoretical" mathematics with no programming skills, actuarial or statistical knowledge, etc. be hired by industry. In fact many of these people get on-the-job training in the first year of their job...while they are getting well paid.
Well, but the job market is pretty tight all around these days, as perhaps you've heard. If being totally clueless outside of theoretical mathematics can land you an industrial job, being less than totally clueless will be even better. I advise PhD students that as soon as they have real thought of a non-academic post-PhD career they should explore this in a positive way, including mentioning it to their advisor so that aspects of their program of study can be adjusted. For instance, in my PhD program you need to take two exams in foreign languages, but one of these can be replaced by a computer project. Although I think the computer requirement would serve many would-be academics better as well, if you think you may go into industry, then reading in a third language is obviously not going to be as marketable as computer skills.
While you're in a PhD program in mathematics, talk to the students and faculty who have connections and experience in industry. (Realize that your thesis advisor may not be such a person. For instance I have **zero industrial experience**. I do not pretend to give advice in this area -- well, not *specific advice*, anyway! -- but I try to find other people who can.) Don't be shy or embarrassed about this. It's your life and you get to do what you want to do.
My feeling is that solidifying basic industrially applicable skills -- e.g. programming and even lower-level tech-savviness like spreadsheets, learning how to share and transfer files, etc. -- and supplementing with coursework and other training (e.g. taking actuarial exams; taking one solid course in statistics or financial mathematics) is a better bet and easier to do in your spare time than trying to change your thesis topic to something more applied. As above, my feeling is that most industrial jobs don't care what you did your thesis on, and having done it on something rarefied and inapplicable is actually fine with them as long as you have, or can make them confident that you can learn, the skills you will need on the job. But again, talk to people other than the academic lifers like me!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This question is likely to be closed in the end because it depends to a great extent on the exact details of your personal situation, and there simply isn't enough information available to us to know how things might work out for you.
You're certainly smart to be planning for the possibility of transitioning out of academia into a career in industry. The current academic job market can be extremely difficult for new PhD's and it's impossible to accurately predict whether the market will improve or get worse by the time you complete your PhD. Your own marketability in the academic job market will also depend on how successful in research you are as graduate student and post-doc. Finally, getting a tenure track job is to some extent a matter of dumb luck- many well qualified applicants fail to find a tenure track position while similarly qualified applicants do succeed. It's unreasonable to believe that this is all the result of a meritocracy.
What really matters in finding work in industry are your skills and experiences. There's certainly some value in having completed a PhD in mathematics, but when it comes time to interview for a job in industry, the most relevant sections of your resume are going to describe skills that you have (e.g. computer skills, communication skills, ability to collaborate with others, and ability to solve problems creatively) and relevant experiences that demonstrate what you have done.
As you go through your PhD you should take time to develop those skills that would be useful in both academia and industry and you should consider carefully whether you want to take time to develop skills that would be of more value in industry even if doing so might take time away from developing your academic career.
Here are some options to consider:
1. Switching to a more applied area of mathematics.
2. Earning an additional certificate or master's degree in a more applied area such as high performance computing, data science, or software engineering.
3. Taking time off to work in an industrial internship.
Ultimately, it's your life, and you'll have to decide what's most important to you. It would be foolish to simply give up on the career that you've dreamed of, but it would be equally foolish to not have backup plans.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You need to make a decision as to what the alternate career will be. This will depend a lot on your own aptitudes and interests.
Certainly, there are many roles that can make good use of a mathematician: both in terms of how they think and what they can actually do.
I would think that many of the latter involve being able to perform mathematical computations of some kind. In other words, programming.
So if you haven't already, consider making an effort to learn some **computer science, software engineering and programming** skills.
Note that these are not the same. Mathematicians who refuse to learn the difference are often terrible programmers. Those who do learn it are often great engineers.
Doing this:
* May tell you that its not for you; better to know sooner than later
* Can be very useful whether or not you continue as an academic mathematician
* You may find you really enjoy it, and become the focus of a career
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/09
| 1,693
| 7,079
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm current an undergraduate student working on a research project for my thesis.
In my project, I obtained quite a large number of inconsistent or strange result for my lab analysis of my samples and I just couldn't get a reliable or sound result for my analysis. I have been struggling in repeating the experiments for a prolonged time and done a lot of attempts, yet I still have not got a good result for it.
While my viva session and thesis submission date is approaching nearer, I am really stressed and have thought about modifying my lab results so that it is more presentable for my thesis since time is running out.
However, I really am not sure whether that is it ok for me to do so. I got a guilty feeling that I am doing something that is against my morality for submitting results that are not 100% originated from my own work. On the other hand, if I report my original results that didn't look appealing for my supervisor, I'm also afraid that she would require me to redo my whole experiment and delay my graduation date.
I really hope I can get an advice from a reliable researcher or student about my case.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I am really stressed up and conceived the notation of modifying my lab results so that it is more presentable for my thesis since time is running out.
>
>
>
No, no, no
==========
*Never* do this - it is highly unethical. If your deceit is discovered, you are likely to lose your degree, and may possibly face other consequences. (For example, if you have a job based on that degree, you may lose the job when the degree is revoked.)
It is always disappointing when a project doesn't work out the way you hope it will, but there is always that risk when you set out to do something that isn't completely straightforward. See, for example, this related question: [What to do when research leads to poor results?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47692/what-to-do-when-research-leads-to-poor-results)
Even experiments that are "known" to work (in the sense that someone claims to have previously achieved "good results" with that experiment) can't always be repeated reliably. See [Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science](http://www.sciencemag.org/content/349/6251/aac4716), in which the authors attempt to repeat 100 published psychology experiments, and "replicated the original result" in fewer than half of them.
The correct response is to
write your thesis giving all the details of your work as it happened: the background, the experiment design, and the results. This serves to document your efforts, and may prove to be useful to other people who might try the same experiment in the future. You may also explain *why* you think the experiment may not have yielded the results you expect, and possibly propose a new experiment (if you have any ideas for improving your work).
Note that even when scientific findings do not match our expectations, the study is still considered a success (of sorts) if we can learn something from it. Even if what we learn is "this experiment does not yield consistent results in many cases." In contrast, false results might look nice, but are worse than worthless.
A lack of "good results" does not necessarily doom your thesis. To quote [another answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/12503/11365):
>
> My PhD thesis was trying to demonstrate the nature of the relationship between stress and psoriasis symptoms (many people say "stress worsens psoriasis" - it's taken as a given truth, but it's never been empirically demonstrated). I was trying to answer things like what kind of stress, how long does it take, does it differ between people? I never found any evidence that stress did worsen psoriasis. Nor that psoriasis worsened stress (or any other psychological symptom).
>
>
> A PhD is an educational process. One should demonstrate that one has learned. The most important thing about a PhD is showing what you know, what you have learned, and what you understand. If anyone gets to the end of a PhD and says "Well, those results were all positive, just as I expected", they've learned little. At the end of your PhD (or any research project) you should want to start again, and this time do it properly.
>
>
>
The excerpt above is about a PhD, but applies at all levels of study.
>
> If I report my original results that didn't look appealing for my supervisor, I'm also afraid and doubt that she would require me to redo my whole experiment and delay my graduation date.
>
>
>
You should talk to your supervisor *now* - don't surprise her the week before your submission date and tell her that the experiment failed! Talk to your supervisor and ask for her advice on how to proceed with your experiment. Presumably she has more experience than you in this area and may be able to suggest a solution you haven't thought of. (And she probably does not want to delay your graduation any more than you do...)
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Have you considered asking your supervisor for help in this case? That's what a supervisor, especially on undergraduate levels, is there for: Advising you, when you need it. I have supervised several Bachelor Theses so far and cases like yours happen more often than you think.
In some cases I could point to some literature which had similar issues. There the students often found helpful insights which showed them what might have caused the somewhat "strange" results. It also helped them a lot to know that they're not the only one struggling with that particular issue.
From your question I concluded that you have no idea yet what your problem actually is (you just have not "reliable" and "sound" results). I suggest you do further analyses together with your supervisor and see if you can pinpoint the problem.
Maybe you also simply found out that other people's results were wrong. Maybe the experiment is not supposed to show their results but yours are actually correct. There might be reasons why the look not "reliable" and "sound" to you.
Things like this can happen. Empirical results are empirical results. If the outcome differs from the expectation even though the experiment has been carefully conducted then the probability is high that the expectation was wrong.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Submit your results as they are. When you give your plan, your hypothesis, your procedure, then say "But, nothing really turned up.", you gain respect. Yeah, she may want you to repeat everything if she sees something you missed, but that's sort of the point!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You should never falsify data. It is literally the highest sin you can commit in science.
Bear in mind that in my lab (and likely yours too) we have and use bachelors and masters theses as reference documents on various methods and apparatus that were worked on by past students. If you falsify your data, your academic dishonesty can have real effects and unwittingly waste a lot of the group's time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/09
| 1,069
| 4,719
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working in a group project of six people at university.
I think I made an substantial effort, and would consider me among the two best performers in the group (please accept this as a fact for answering the question). I do not bear grudges against my group, I think we worked well together and I liked working with all of them. I just put more effort in the project, and I am proud of my contribution.
Now the grades have been published, and I have been graded worse than two other students, because of things which were not communicated to be part of the grading process:
We finished the project mid of July. Recently, there has been a presentation of parts of our results, which required some extra work. I am currently abroad in an internship. The two students did some additional experiments for the presentation. I was not aware of these additional experiments, because there was no communication about that on our mailing list, basically the two students just happened to be around. I communicated my internship early, and this was accepted by the supervisor. I think the additional experiments do not outweigh my previous contributions by far. Also, I would have helped with the experiments from abroad (which would have been easily possible, because it's computer science), if I would have known.
I am unhappy with this distinction, because I think it is not fair and does not represent my performance, which is also admitted by the two students with the better grades. For me, it would have been ok, if we all got the same grade.
However, the grades are already published, and there is no good way of changing the grades now (pushing the entire team to the better grade is not an option because of politics; I do not want the two to get a worse grade; I would feel unhappy with only me being upgraded). I know this and I accept this.
Now, should I tell my supervisor, that I am unhappy with the grading and explain my reasons why, even though I know it will change nothing in the grades? I do not want to make accusations or anything, just express my problems with the grading.
I do not want to burn any bridges, and might want to work with this supervisor again in the future.
I would see this as
(i) feedback for my supervisor for the grading process
(ii) a way for me to finish the project and get over the frustration (again, I do not intend to make accusations, just lay out why I am unhappy).
Should I do this or should I just swallow my pride and deal with it?<issue_comment>username_1: Unless this decision is somehow going to jeopardize your whole future and not just this one grade then I would suggest to "swallow your pride." You mentioned that you are interested in working with this supervisor in the future. That would certainly be great networking which could bring you a number of opportunities and I wouldn't say risking all of that is worth contesting this one grade (which you may still not be in the right). Leave your pride at the door and reach for your goals only until sometime truly disrespects you. Otherwise try to focus on the positives.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is certainly possible for a student to have a talk with the supervisor about dissatisfaction with a grade. In fact, we professors sometimes want to know these things (though I admit that there are nicer conversations to have). To give an example: Some months ago, I received an email from a student who asked politely for an appointment to have some additional feedback about her thesis grade.
During our talk, she said that she was okay with her grade, but not with the fact that others got higher grades, although she worked harder.
In fact, she was right in some way. She decided to use an extremely complicated approach, that took a lot of time, which is why she lacked that time for improving other parts of the thesis. Others used a simpler approach and had plenty of time to get everything perfect.
I was happy to explain to her that I shared her discomfort, but that the grading scheme (which she was familiar with) awarded only very few points for the complexity of the method she used. Having such a talk is way better than having rumours circling around that grading at the Department is unfair.
To make a long story short: You can always mail to ask for 'feedback about the work/grade'. But you should indicate whether you actually intent to have the grade changed (which you probably do not want to do, for various reasons) or not. As a professor, these later type is a good feedback opportunity. In fact, after the episode described above, I discussed with colleagues the possibility of changing the grading scheme in the future.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/09
| 999
| 4,398
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper that only contained a title and an abstract to an international meeting, which is one of the most important conferences in my major. I will give an oral presentation in one session of the meeting. Because it is not a full paper, I want to know whether I can put it in my CV as a publication.<issue_comment>username_1: If it is published in the proceedings (and if it is a major conference, would suggest it is available online), you can list is as a publication, but I would be cautious to leave it at that. I would include the information that it is an abstract. If it is in a publications section, I would make sure to differentiate between peer-reviewed and not (depending on your case).
More realistically, I would see this listed under 'presentations' section, or 'talks'. Again, this depends if you have sections for both invited talks and talks given through applications.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If you consider it an important part of your portfolio (which is perfectly possible), then: sure, you should list it.
You might want to indicate that it was only an abstract + oral talk. When you have different sections (e.g., conference papers, journals), you might put it under an 'Conference abstracts' or 'Oral presentations' section. Otherwise, you might just put 'abstract + oral talk' in the reference.
In some fields abstracts + oral talks/posters, is the only way that conferences are published (e.g., medicine). In those fields, full papers are for journals.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Congratulations on presenting a paper in one of the most important conferences of your field. That is certainly something to be proud of, but the correct place to list the achievement would be under a heading such as "Conference talks" or "Presentations" as others suggest. A title and abstract cannot under any reasonable definition be considered a publication, and personally if I were looking at your CV and saw it listed as a publication (and looked it up to see what it contained, which I often do in such situations), I would get a pretty negative impression of someone who is trying to dishonestly pad their CV with dubious achievements.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Even if there are already a few answers that advice caution, to which I agree, I think it is important to consider another perspective.
An abstract is a piece of text that advertises the work. In the case of a conference the work is the oral presentation, the poster, or maybe an article published in the proceedings.
The way I see it, you should want to advertise your the work directly in your CV, not an advertisement to your work. Therefore, you might want to make it clear that you gave a presentation on a specific subject, not that you wrote an abstract to advertise the presentation.
I am aware that there are some fields that use the concept of extended abstracts (that don't obey the rules of abstract writing), for scientific writings that are in essence abstractless articles published in conference proceedings. If you're in such a field, I pity you, and your entire field, and I damn those who abused the word abstract to the point expressions like "presenting an abstract" or "the summary of the abstract" started to make sense.
From the perspective of English language, it is perfectly fine to put an abstract under publications, as an abstract is a piece of text that was made available to the public through the proceedings of the conference. There are some that reserve the word publication only for research articles, and not for other pieces of work that were made public. Why research article or the synonym, research paper, are not enough, I don't know. From my point of view this is another abuse of language, which I hope it doesn't catch. Using publication as synonym to research article, devoids English of a word that describes any work that has been made public. A scientific article is indeed a publication, but so is a dataset, a public talk, an abstract, a blog post, or even this answer on stackexchange.
From a logic perspective, mentioning the abstract, and not the presentation in your CV, is as if you brag about going to a festival, but forgetting to mention that you're actually the headliner, ok, maybe not the headliner, but you're still performing on the main stage.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/09
| 564
| 2,569
|
<issue_start>username_0: Reviewing advertisements for junior faculty positions, I noticed that it is a relatively frequent occurrence, when there is a requirement (or strong preference) for candidates to provide three *working papers*, along with other materials. Thinking about that aspect and considering the often lengthy process of reviewing papers in decent enough journals, I am considering a strategy of splitting my short-term future efforts (real efforts, not just on paper!) into three more or less related (perhaps, but not necessarily, adjacent) areas of study and preparing three working papers on topics from my research agenda *simultaneously*. I realize that due to parallel efforts the progress on each paper will be less than, if I would focus on a single topic, but, again, considering lengthy academic review process, following this strategy would allow me to have at some point three relatively developed working papers, which can be listed in CV, presented at conferences or workshops or to hiring committees and, ultimately, transformed into full-blown research papers.
**Question:** What do you think about such *simultaneous working papers strategy*? Please mention advantages, disadvantages as well as other potential considerations of my suggested approach.<issue_comment>username_1: If you work with coauthors, who will all have their own conflicting responsibilities, there will frequently be times when someone cannot work on a paper and the others cannot meaningfully proceed. In such times, you switch your attention to a different paper you are working on (alone or with other colleagues).
So, unless you work alone (not recommended), the "parallel working papers" strategy is less of a choice and more of a necessity. I personally am currently trying to juggle a textbook, two coauthored and one single-authored paper.
The same will apply to grant writing.
And even if you *do* work alone, there comes a time in a project when it's useful just to take a break and do something else for two or four weeks, then return to your initial project with a fresh mind.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would consider working on several things at once to be pretty normal. As <NAME> said, it's good to have different things to think about when you get stuck on one for whatever reason.
However, don't do it purely because you think that's what hiring committees will want. I don't have direct experience, but what I've been told would suggest that a paper in the hand is worth three in the bush.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/09
| 2,417
| 9,656
|
<issue_start>username_0: The PLOS ONE journal has an impact factor over 3. The specialist journals in my field top out with impact factors of about 3. As impact factor is in essence a measure of citations per article, it seems surprising that a journal like PLOS ONE that prides itself on not making subjective judgments on things like "importance" can maintain a higher impact factor than journals that prioritize "importance".
I have only cited handful of articles published in PLOS ONE and looking at what has been published in PLOS ONE in my field, the majority of things look "unimportant." It seems like in my specialty that PLOS ONE publishes a higher percentage of "unimportant" work than the specialist journals. This of course could be due to sample size and my own bias.
I am curious about what drives the impact factor of PLOS ONE. Are there specialties for which the PLOS ONE impact factor is low compared to specialist journals? Are editors and reviewers of specialist journals particularly bad at identifying "importance"? Is there something else?<issue_comment>username_1: There are, I think, two distinct factors at work that may help explain some of your puzzlement:
* Your field's impact factor is not academia's impact factor. For example, society journals in my field have an impact factor of ~ 5, and some of the big names for very splashy studies have impact factors ranging from 20 to 56. Depending on the balance of fields submitting to *PLOS ONE*, their impact factor may be coming from more cited fields.
* Long-tailed citation papers. Impact factors, like many averages, are susceptible to long-tail effects. *PLOS ONE* is an open-access journal, and a highly visible one. It's possible that the occasional highly accessible generalist paper makes it there, and yields a large number of citations as a result, pulling up the overall impact factor.
Both of these are helped, in my opinion, by the lack of review for "importance" - beyond your suggestion that this does result in less important papers ending up in *PLOS ONE*, it's also a benefit to papers that don't quite "fit" in highly specialized journals, but may still be impactful.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think that PLOS ONE is gambling on two key hypotheses:
1. People are very bad at judging future importance --- thus, no "significance" filtering.
2. Search engines and social networks are now much better at delivering articles than subscriptions --- thus, open access.
This certainly conforms with my experience: at present I have two PLOS ONE articles, each published about 5 years ago, one with 80 citations and the other with 9 citations as of this writing. Both are quite specialized and likely would have had a hard time getting published in "selective" journals, yet have found some sort of audience. I'm thus not surprised that they seem to be able to maintain a reasonable impact factor.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: One thing that seems to have been left out of this thread is the volume of articles published by PLOS ONE. Approximate 85 per day according to their wikipedia page. It seems that that would argue against a long tail effect.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: The key selling point of a top-tier journal is not that the content is more important, rather, their standards for publishing in general are much higher. Of course one criteria is impact, but arguably the most important criteria is the level at which the peer review is done. I've seen papers requiring 3 or 4 new experiments to please reviewers in Cell/Nature.
What difference does going-the-extra-mile in due diligence have on a paper's citation rate? I doubt little if any. People cite publications relevant to their work, regardless of how many replicates that cited paper used or how many supplementary figures there are. Of course, high-impact journals have other criteria that does push up the citation rate, such as impact, but my point is that it's a false assumption to assume the only thing going for top-tier journals is their impact requirements.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: 1. The large number of papers published by PLoS ONE may increase the likelihood of some being very highly cited. This may drive up the Impact Factor.
2. I agree it may also reflect the average (geometric or arithmetic) across all journals. Because PLoS ONE publishes a lot of biology, especialy biomed papers, these tend to be more cited because it is a larger field (e.g. compared to geology or statistics).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Note this answer is anecdotal, but since I have heard this stated by 3 high volume publishing professors now, I believe that it may be a factor. These 3 professors claimed to rank journals as follows (approximately)
1. nature and science
2. PNAS and the top specialized (but still fairly broad) Journal in their field
3. All other journals including PLOS one
One philosophy for academic success is that once you have many publications in reasonably good journals, the marginal benefit of one more isn't that great. However, the marginal benefit of one more Science or Nature paper is quite big. Therefore, since PLOS one is often less of a hassle to submit to, if a paper is rejected from Science or Nature or PNAS the next stop for these high impact professors is often PLOS one. It just isn't worth it for these busy professors to trudge through multiple submissions down the journal food chain because they want to focus on their next Science/Nature submission or Grant proposal which could lead to such a paper. This means PLOS one gets a lot of papers that are written by pretty famous professors that just weren't jazzy enough for Nature and Science. Of course, PLOS one also gets a bunch of unimportant papers (by famous and non-famous authors) but I suspect some of the heavy tail papers that @fomite suggested are from academics with this philosophy.
I again stress that this is anecdotal and that I have no data to confirm this hypothesis.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: While PlosOne ostensibly publishes papers from all fields of science, it is heavily weighted towards biology and medicine. Journals in these fields have higher impact factors because (a) they have more references per paper (I'd hypothesise that this might also be related to the use of numeric citations rather than apa/harvard style), and (b) they have shorter reference half-lives (i.e., papers accrue a greater proportion of their total references in the two to three years post-publication period that is used to calculate impact factor).
These are purely idiosyncratic factors that influence the average impact factor of journals in a particular field.
* If you come from a field in biology or medicine, you might see an impact factor of 3 as perhaps average or a bit above average.
* In psychology where I come from, some of the best journals in a given subdiscipline have impact factors in the 3 to 6 range.
* In other fields like mathematics or the humanities, an impact factor of 3.0 would be perceived to be even greater.
The main point is that impact factors are more highly correlated with subjective evaluations of quality and importance when such comparisons are performed for journals within a discipline.
In addition, even relative to fields like medicine and biology, the impact factor for PlosOne is respectable. Articles are clearly being cited quite a bit in these areas. You can see more information by going to [scimago](http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=10600153309&tip=sid&clean=0) or Web of Science Citation Reports.
If you want to compare journals in a more discipline-neutral way, you might want to look at the SJR. It uses an iterative weighting procedure which I believe weights references coming from more prestigious journals more highly and allows each article to only give away a finite amount of prestige. So for example, an article with many citations can only give fractional prestige. This allows disciplines with more references per paper to count a little less.
For example, on that metric, [PlosOne](http://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=10600153309&tip=sid&clean=0) has an SJR of 1.3.
In contrast, a psychology journal I know which has a similar impact factor to PlosOne had an SJR or 1.8, presumably adjusting for the different citation practices and relative prestige of source publications. You might want to look up the SJR of journals in your field to compare.
As an aside, metrics of impact at plosone have declined substantially in recent years (compare 2010 to 2016); albeit, it is still a first quartile ranked journal.
Two possible explanations: (1) as a multidisciplinary journal, the mix of articles the proportion of articles coming from disciplines with high numbers of citations has declined, or (2) the average quality/impact of the research has declined.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Ax90u.png)
<https://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=10600153309&tip=sid&clean=0>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: The answer to this question is given by the Central Limit Theorem. Basically PLoS ONE is so large that is samples the population of *all* papers out there, which together (if published in a single, catch-all journal) have an IF=3. In statistics this is called "regression to the mean."
For more info, please see my paper "[Impact Factors and the Central Limit Theorem: Why citation averages are scale dependent](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157718301238)" in the *Journal of Informetrics*.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/09
| 625
| 2,464
|
<issue_start>username_0: Some time ago, I enrolled in a PhD programme and at the same time I started a full-time job. The full-time job became so time-consuming that progress on PhD related duties became really slow. As a result, I decided to terminate my PhD studies, however I would like to finish a paper that I have worked on.
Currently, the paper containts the estimations with results and the approx. fifth version of text, that makes sense to me. Unfortunately, my supervisor tells me that the text needs to undergo some changes in order to bring it closer to the "academic English".
As I do not intend to continue an academic carreer, I have no use for learning academic English beyond the scope of my Bachelor and Master theses. Hence, forgoing one or two month's evenings/weekends just to learn academic English well enough to publish is something I am unwilling to do.
What would you do in my position? Get someone else on the paper and give them co-authorship for editing the text into publishable form? Or something entirely else?
Any input is much appreciated,
Daniel<issue_comment>username_1: Why not ask your supervisor to give you examples of what editing he wants done and see if its something you can do on your own? If you've worked on the paper up to the 5th draft, it seems a shame to then allow someone else to take the credit for your own hard work. You can also read some good books on academic style of writing. Depending on your field, I can recommend this [book](http://www.amazon.co.uk/Essentials-Writing-Biomedical-Research-Papers/dp/0071345442). I'm sure there are [many others](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/47813/aside-from-working-on-a-manuscript-what-activities-can-help-improve-scientific/47951#47951).
So in summary, if I were in your shoes I would do it on my own. I'm sure good writing skills is something that's valued even in most jobs.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Judging by your grammar and spelling in this question your advisor might be being kind and telling you that you need to correct the grammar and spelling to a readable level.
"Get someone else on the paper and give them co-authorship for editing the text into publishable form?" No. Authorship should not be granted for editorial changes, only for significant work towards the research the paper presents. The "paper" is just an output, it is how the research is often measured but that is all.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/09
| 1,023
| 4,140
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have the find a time slot that all faculties can attend. As everyone is very busy, I want to do it in a most efficient way, i.e. minimizing back and forth emails as much as possible.
One trick I can think of is to ask each of them "What time you CANNOT attend?" instead of the usual "What time you can attend?" That way, I'm more likely to get all the free slots and able to schedule after only 1 round of emails.
Is there any further tips?
A big remaining obstacle is that the faculties still have to look at their calendar and write back to me all the time slots that are not free. I wonder if there's any technology (e.g. sharing a Google calendar?) that makes this process less time consuming for the faculties.<issue_comment>username_1: Use a polling tool, like Doodle. You create it, they fill in which times they are (not) available, and based on the results you choose a meeting time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: From my prior experience scheduling numerous committee meetings (and other multi-person meetings), I've found that the "When Aren't You Available?" approach doesn't always work very well. Providing a proposed list of times can sometimes be more efficient. -- Particularly because it requires the *least* amount of effort on the part of the people you're asking to attend your meeting:
1. Pick a few times that you might propose for scheduling the meeting. Start with days/times that *you* would prefer, based on your own availability and general preferences (e.g. what time of the day you tend to be the most alert. :)
2. Send each person an e-mail saying something to the effect of:
"Please indicate which of the following times you might be available to meet. If none of those times work for you, please let me know if there are any other time(s) on those days that would fit your schedule."
3. Include a list of about 4 or 5 different times (or time ranges). This requires a lot less effort on their part to just pick from a list of times. People usually reply more quickly if you make it a simple task. For example, you could list some items in this form:
"Tuesday, September 22, from 11am to 12pm." or
"Thursday, October 8, any time between 1pm and 4pm (please indicate any preferred time within that range)."
NOTE: ALWAYS, specify the Date AND the Day of the week! This can help to avoid any mix-ups resulting from people misreading their calendar. ( It happens to the best of us! :)
4. Wait to see what they say. Hopefully, there will be at least one day & time on that list when everyone is available. If one or two people are not available for any of the proposed times/days, you could contact them specifically and ask if/when they are available within your target range of dates. Then, you can send everyone a *new* email, with a new list of proposed times.
5. If "Round 2" of the emails doesn't work, then it might be necessary to resort to that approach of asking, "When Aren't you available?"...
---
AFTER you figure out the best time for the meeting, don't forget to do the following:
6. Follow up As Soon As Possible with a final confirmation e-mail, stating the finalized date, day, and time. Politely ask them to reply to your e-mail with a confirmation that the specified time is still good for them. Also, you might want to include the Day/Date/Time in the Subject line as well.
For example: "Confirming <NAME>'s committee meeting: Sept 22, 11am"
7. A few days before the day of the meeting, send them a "reminder" e-mail, politely requesting that they reply to confirm they got your message. (Let's face it, there's a good chance that someone in the group forgot to mark it on their calendar and/or doesn't even know what day it is Today. :)
8. Don't forget to Reserve the Room for your meeting well in advance! Also, double-check to confirm the room reservation a few days before your meeting. The last thing you want is to *think* everything is set, only to find out you don't have a freakin' room to hold your meeting!! (Faculty committees don't look favorably on that sort of thing) :)
Best of Luck!!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/10
| 542
| 2,263
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am starting my second academic year as an assistant professor at a university in Europe. I'd like to move back to the US at some point in the near future. If I stay at my current university for 2 or 3 more years, it's likely that I will be offered tenure. Based on the openings I see in the US in my field, there are more assistant professor positions than associate professor positions.
* Will it be better for my career prospects to apply now for assistant professor jobs in the US? If so, should I expect a reduced tenure clock?
* Or should I wait a few more years and with tenure under my belt, apply for associate professor jobs?<issue_comment>username_1: As someone who is just now making such a transition, my sense that it's hard to make the transition in either direction at any stage of your career.
My sense is that as a less senior faculty member, you'll have an easier time getting things going, because the expectations on junior faculty are lower in the sense of ramping up the group in the first few years. But whether or not you should wait is really a function of what you're looking for in your career.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: What's better for your "career prospects" depends on your situation, but there doesn't seem to be much harm in applying now to see what you can get. From what I've seen, it's much more common for people at the top of their field to move after tenure than it is for people not at the top. If you make a big breakthrough, then it's usually not so hard for you to move. For good but not top researchers, it's not impossible, but it may take many years of applying.
One issue is that it's harder for most schools to hire people with tenure (more expensive) than into tenure-track positions (cheaper) and places don't normally expect candidates to be willing to enter at a lower level than what they had. Another issue is that there are so many good new PhDs to compete with, if you've been out longer, you need to be that much more impressive to compete with them. Most of the open tenured positions I notice in the US are to lead a department or group (e.g., an external search for a chair), which is a different sort of position than I guess you are looking for.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/10
| 2,540
| 10,917
|
<issue_start>username_0: I understand that it is not a good idea to speak more after your time is out during a conference presentation. So we generally distribute our total times among each slide depending the contents and priority during the preparation. But sometimes what happens one/two particular slides take little more time. As a results your time goes out before summarizing your presentation.
So I sometimes skip my summary and acknowledgement slides to avoid the loss of discussion time. I am wondering whether this is a good idea, or whether I should finish my talk with more 30–40 seconds?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, I would try to adhere to your presentation time as closely as possible. If all that's left are summary or acknowledgment comments, I'd simply leave them up on the board while the first questions are being asked. However, if you have a critical content slide—the one that delivers your "punchline"—that you haven't talked about, then you should use the time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First, some conferences have really strict timing and you will be given no extra time.
Second, if there is important slide or two, just do it. But make sure that you only *slightly* extend your time (e.g. 10%). If you are going to extend it by 50%, or 200% (I saw that, and I was pissed at both the speaker and even more - the chair for allowing that) - please, don't.
Side note: as a chair I am an ass. And while I give something like 1 min grace time (for 15 min talks), then after that:
>
> speaker: "But there is an important slide afterwards!"
>
>
> me: "But not as important as other participants' time."
>
>
>
EDIT: By all means I recommend rehearsing and finishing on, or before, time. I only answer the question - whether to use extra 40 sec for 2 unfinished slides or not. "You should prepare to avoid such situation" is as on-topic as "you should go fishing instead of attending a conference".
(If the question is "Given X, should I do A or B?" all legitimate answers should assume "X", even if it is a suboptimal/nasty/unprofessional/embarrassing situation.)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It comes down to how well you prepare. After practising a trial version of your talk with own research group and taking on board their changes, it's well worth practising again. This *could* be in front of the same group, but better to grab some people at a similar level who might be interested either in the work itself or in you returning the favour (especially important for postgrads, help each other out). Then you'll get a much better feel for your real timings.
If you have a good summary slide, just displaying that as you finish can gain you a minute or so as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a rule of thumb you should aim your presentation to be finished 2 to 3 minutes *before* the allotted time. This way, slight delays like the ones you mention (in the sub-1-minute range) should not require you to skip any material *or* cut into the discussion time.
However, even if you do not do this, cutting 30 seconds of discussion seems like the lesser evil as compared to skipping over slides, which is often perceived as a sign of a badly prepared talk (at least in my circles skipping slides is considered at least slightly unprofessional). Even if this is not the case, 30 seconds of discussion seems like such an irrelevantly short time that I can't imagine changing my presentation for it (in slightly larger conference halls it may take the student volunteer longer than 30 seconds to get a microphone to a person asking a question).
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_5: You should probably not skip your summary talk. If you are running out of time you should notice this early, and skip some of the previous slides so you can get to your summary on time. Regarding obviously skipping slides looking unprofessional, you should use something like the Presenter View on PowerPoint if possible, so you can skip slides or show other slides of more interest to your particular audience without them seeing you run through everything.
You don't need to read out your acknowledgements. Few people want to hear them, especially if it takes away time from actually presenting your science in a short talk. Just put them on screen as you finish.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> *But sometimes what happens one/two particular slides take little more time. As a results your time goes out before summarizing your presentation*.
>
>
>
It's easy to see how this could happen. Somewhere in your talk, you have the nitty-gritty details, and it's hard to rush through that material.
Perhaps the best way to address this is by adding some slack time to your presentation, either by finding a way to get through the other slides in less time, or by finding a slide or two that can be removed from the presentation altogether.
>
> *So I sometimes skip my summary and acknowledgement slides to avoid the loss of discussion time.*
>
>
>
I think you can get away with not talking all the way through an acknowledgement slide. There's a good chance that most folks in the audience won't know who those people are anyway, and hearing their names isn't going to change anything. You can always put their names up, along with where they are from, and say something like, "Without the hard work of these talented associates and colleagues, this research would not have been possible," and leave it at that – particularly if time is a precious commodity.
Skipping the summary seems like a bad idea, though. You should be able to pace yourself so that you have a minute or two to summarize your accomplishments.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I have a few suggestions; first, if this really happens that you are out of time with only the summary slide remaining, just show the slide. Maybe only speak about it for a second and leave it up for people to read while you answer questions.
Really what you do is be conscious about your remaining time during the talk. If you are getting close to the end, and close to running out of time, maybe skip an earlier slide or a proof so you can make sure to get to your conclusion.
Taking 30 seconds or a minute over is usually fine. Whoever is chairing the session should be giving you a time warning, and then you can quickly finish up. If they have to warn you more than once that you are out of time, you will be making a poor impression on the audience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Plan your presentation so that about 10% to 20% of your time and slide allotment is optional detail material. Schedule this material right before your summary and conclusion, which should be really well timed. Once you only have time for your conclusion + 30 seconds or so, quickly wrap up your current slide and run through your conclusion. You will look really professional by finishing up a few seconds before your time is up - which reputation will result in more invites to present.
The real kicker is that all those extra slides never go to waste - they are slides for the inevitable questions that your audience will ask. Whther in the presentation hall or the bar afterwards, as professional as finishing on time is, wait until your audience sees you pull up a slide to address every question asked.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_9: If you tend to go over time then you are not pacing yourself throughout the presentation.
When preparing for the presentation you should determine *when* you are showing each slide throughout the presentation. Don't assume however that every slide will take equally long to talk about. A sequence of 5 diagrams (explaining a sequence of events for example) can take as long as a single list.
During the presentation keep an eye on the timer and when you notice you are lagging behind you can then say less about some less important slides. Conversely if you are getting ahead you can talk some more about the important ones (or just let it spill over into the questions slot).
Prepare those optional sections ahead of time while scripting out your talk.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Keep a timer and have a trigger that tells you when you have two or three minutes left. A vibrating alarm on a watch or cell phone is best. If you haven't gotten to the punch line yet, go there now.
You've now got a minute to rush through the remaining preamble, and then you have a "luxurious" minute or two to cover that point that you want to hit.
This is beneficial for two reasons
1. You don't look like a hack by going over and
2. In the scenario where you go over, you are rushing through what you think is *the most important part of the presentation*. That you aren't getting there until slide n-1 is a another topic, but if you give truncate something in the middle of the talk, you can then give your punchline the time it deserves.
Now, the discussion period will probably involve you answering questions by showing those middle slides you rushed through, but you're now being respectful by sticking to time and controlling the conversation. Win-Win.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: Not all conferences are equal. In some smaller workshops it is often perfectly alright to speak a little bit longer, and 40 seconds should not be a problem at all. In such smaller conferences and workshops, people often discuss rather freely and in detail on various aspects, and there is usually no need to maintain an excessively strict time schedule, except for the respect for the organizers, the chairperson and the colleagues - which are all doubtlessly important.
One may also observe how such cases have been handled in previous sessions (from my experience there is *always* at least one speaker who is not respecting the time schedule). In such smaller conferences it is also sometimes tolerated to interrupt the speaker with a question, and the time used for this interruption should obviously be taken into account by the chairperson.
In other cases, such as large conferences with parallel sessions, timing is absolutely crucial and I would rather stop the talk at most 30 seconds after the "red light bulb" goes on than trying to hastily convey all the information that I had originally planned to present. Fortunately I don't remember that this has ever happened to me. In such situations, which of course can and should be avoided with appropriate rehearsal, I would rather skip a result or an entire subtopic of the talk than the acknowledgments. The summary does not necessarily require an explanation if there is no time left and I agree that it may be sufficient to show it as final transparency; but I think that the acknowledgments are more important. One possibility to avoid such a situation is to acknowledge the coworkers and the funding agencies at the beginning of the talk.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/10
| 378
| 1,580
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am quite new to this game and I am not sure how to ask people to be co-authors on a paper I have mostly written myself but that I think would get better with someone else's input. When is a good strategy to offer a coauthorship and when should I simply ask for a feedback on the paper? This is somewhat of a review paper and I feel that it would be important to have some experts from the field. But regardless how should I decide when to offer a coauthorship?<issue_comment>username_1: I'd ask for help. If said help turns out relevant, add a footnote thanking for it. If the help is in some way crucial (found and fixed a fatal flaw, suggested a (better) way to compute the results, suggested a relevant extension, ...) ask the helper if they want to be coauthors or just be thanked as above.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Co-authorship depends on many factors, few of them are:
1. The authors who had worked with you together to achieve the results.
Since this is your review paper, then co-authors may be them who had
shared the knowledges to briefly summarize your findings to write
the paper.
2. To get the proper feedback of any research work mostly
depends on the methods, results and discussions. So you need to find
few researchers' paper which has a good overlap with your findings.
Then you can ask the most focused/ experienced/ renowned researcher
out of them to get some feedback.
3. To increase the standard of the paper, you can ask well known
scientists/ researchers who can reorganize your paper.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/10
| 800
| 3,398
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a fourth year undergraduate philosophy student.
Last academic-year, I took a seminar with a professor that I had known reasonably well before I took the course. During that seminar we had several lengthy after-class conversations about a topic related to the seminar. The professor seemed to enjoy the conversations, and I think we developed a good relationship (as far as undergraduate student-professor relationships go).
I plan to write an essay and submit it to an undergraduate journal in December. I know that the topic of the essay is interesting to the professor and covers some unconsidered possibilities that the professor expressed interest in during our conversations. That is to say, I think he'd enjoy thinking about what I plan to write about.
This professor is the only one in our department knowledgeable about the subject, so I can't ask anyone else for their thoughts on the essay. Unfortunately, he's on sabbatical this year.
Would it be rude to email the professor in order to ask him whether I might discuss my argument with him a few times during this term?<issue_comment>username_1: You can certainly ask, but your professor might or might not be interested in helping with this. If I got a similar request I'd almost certainly say yes, but your professor might have a different attitude and more extensive obligations.
I'd encourage you to go ahead and ask politely.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, I don't think it's rude at all.
A sabbatical is not meant as a complete vacation from work. Rather, it's a time for the professor to focus on scholarly work without the distraction of teaching or (usually) administrative duties.
I'd say that asking the professor to comment on your essay is definitely a scholarly activity, and so it's a reasonable request.
Of course, it's up to the professor whether he actually wants to do it or not, or if he has time to do it given his other activities. Don't be offended if he declines. Also keep in mind that many professors travel extensively during sabbaticals, or spend the entire time at another institution, so even if he is interested, he may not be able to meet with you in person - you may have to discuss it over email, Skype, etc.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you say that you knew the professor prior to the seminar, and engaged them in discussion outside of the seminar, then you have a more personal relationship than just a "cold call" email to some random academic that you have not interacted with. So a query to discuss the idea would likely not be unwelcome.
That being said, sabbaticals are sometimes take for issues of personal health or other life events. If you have a good relationship with another one of the department faculty then a quick knock on the door to see if they think your former professor is reachable wouldn't hurt either. If nothing else approaching the department chair will get you an answer one way or the other, as they will be in the best position to know that professor's current status.
I would also say that you probably shouldn't dive right into the request. If the sabbatical is not related to health, then a sentence or two asking how the professor's time off has been and what project they are working on may be appropriate as it shows interest beyond just obtaining their time and help.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/10
| 2,209
| 9,795
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have just started my second year in a Health Education and Promotion PhD program. It is a three year program and I will be done with classes after this year. Next year is my dissertation year. Currently I do research and teach. I started doing research as a senior in my undergrad program and continued doing research while getting my MS in Health Education. I have a lot of publications and research experience but do not see myself doing research in the future. For the last year I began to realize that I hate research. I LOVE teaching online and some small classes but I realize that it is unlikely I will get a great career teaching online. I hate to drop out now since I do enjoy learning, taking the classes, and I only have a year and a half left until I graduate. My question is, what can I do with a Health Education PhD that is not research related besides being a professor? Could I use this degree in another field than health education or health promotion? My advisor keeps pushing research but I know I do not want to do that. Thank you!<issue_comment>username_1: Contrary to how the world looks from inside of a Ph.D. program, most teachers aren't professors and most professors aren't focused on research.
The professors who educate Ph.D. students are mostly at research-centric institutions, but there's a lot more undergraduates in the world than graduate students, and most higher education institutions are not research-centric. There are lots of good undergraduate-only institutions out there, which expect their faculty to do at least *some* research in order to get tenure, but it's far from their primary duty. Many other higher education institutions are community colleges or other institutions that don't primarily cater to full-time just-out-of-high-school students, and they are even less likely to want research (or give tenure).
Next, don't forget that people spend a lot of time getting educated before they go to college. There's probably a lot of places to put health education to work both for teenagers and for younger kids in school systems.
Finally, there is also a large and complex educational ecosystem that exists entirely outside of traditional education institutions: companies educate their staff, government agencies, community groups, non-profits, etc. all have populations that they want to serve in various ways.
In short: you've got lots of opportunities, even of none of them is likely to make you rich.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Just as you have been doing research for a few years and now think it might not be for you in the future, so in the future after teaching online (and offline) for a few years you might think that's not for you either. We don't know what we will be thinking a few years from now, and for what reasons.
Burning out from teaching is no less likely than burning out from research. The issue is not what you are thinking at the moment, but what you feel competent doing, for what work you are valued by others, and what gives you a sense of fulfillment and good quality of life.
Teaching might seem feasible in the long run while the stakes are low and your compensation and job prospects are not completely determined by your teaching evaluations. But when the stakes increase, you might find that teaching has its own underwater boulders that aren't apparently visible on the surface. One advantage of a research component in a job is that not all of your job performance is judged by the teaching evaluations or affected as much by other anecdotal/informal feedback from the students. A single bad experience with a student can produce a 'reputation' that will be difficult to repair, causing years of anguish. In this sense, research can be viewed as a somewhat more consistent and objective yardstick (i.e., averaging 2 pubs a year typically means you are doing OK).
Considering your publication track record, I would expect you to be a competent, experienced and promising junior researcher. This (besides tunnel vision) might be another reason your advisor is channeling you toward a research career. The actual proportion of research vs. teaching can be tweaked later, but shutting the door on it completely and trying hard to reposition yourself as a "not a researcher" might backfire in ways you simply cannot foresee at this point, but that might cause regret later.
With this and the above-mentioned reasons in mind, I would encourage you to reconsider where your career might go (in terms of doors that would open and doors that would shut) with and without a research component.
As @username_1 noted, the post-PhD world is not defined by research-intensive institutions. There are institutions that emphasis research (i.e. expect research productivity from the faculty) to a lesser extent, such as smaller public universities, community colleges, and private liberal arts colleges. Plus all the types of organizations he mentions outside of the academe. But even research-intensive (R-1) universities can offer career pathways besides tenure-track faculty jobs. There are numerous research centers at large public universities that need PhD-level research or program management specialists, associates, assistant directors, directors, etc.
As one example, I used to work with a person who was an assistant director of a testing center on campus, but she also enjoyed teaching so in addition to her full-time job, she taught undergraduate social science classes in her PhD field of study. In her full-time job she split her time between what you might call 'research proper', but also had significant responsibilities around project and program management, evaluation, contract management, interfacing with departments across campus and outside foundations, etc. This allowed her to control the amount of time and effort she spent on teaching (i.e. if the regular job was too much in a given year, she could put her teaching gig on hold, then restart it the following year that was 'lighter' workload-wise).
There is a number of advantages to such setup. First, as I already mentioned, you can manage your teaching load. Second, teaching acts as a backup, creating an additional stream of income and serving as a potential second career pathway (as a full-time lecturer etc.) in case the full-time job doesn't work out in the long term. Also, the non-tenure track nature of the job means she was not expected to produce peer-reviewed publications and pursue grant funding, except for an occasional internal university grant or budget line (but that's not the same pressure and competition-wise as applying for an NSF or NIH grant). Finally, other job responsibilities meant that research was one, but not the only one or even a major component of what defined her performance. So she could split her time across a range of activities, and possibly afforded her the flexibility to channel most efforts toward areas that she most enjoyed doing and that gave her the most fulfillment.
Being a researcher means being able to think broadly, deeply, and analytically; to manage people and resources; to present and disseminate complex information in clear, persuasive form; to participate in professional communities in a range of disciplines or sub-fields, and to be able to network effectively within and across organizations. There are all skills that are valued and reasonably well compensated across a broad spectrum of organizations, whether academic institutions, government, or industry. You most likely already possess some or most of these skills. Rejecting this set of competencies in favor of focusing on teaching, which you have no experience doing full-time as a career, might mean giving up numerous known advantages in exchange for an occupation which at this time carries uncertain prospects and yields an ambiguous return.
So, I encourage you to rethink your career trajectory while giving research the benefit of the doubt and not dismissing it outright. Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Undergraduate degrees in quantitative analysis and computer science qualified me to work as a programmer in the chemical research and pharmaceutical world. In an excellent 20 years, there were many dozens of studies and significant successes. None of this work would have had meaning without our staff of Ph.D. Statisticians. Beyond what anyone seems to realize, the command of data they provide is unimaginable while being adaptable to any sector of science, industry, medical or social science area. I've since moved into the Behavioral Health space (call it Applied Behavioral Health) and can honestly say that the most complex issues with data I've seen are in Behavioral Health. They are trying but without the knowledge of a Ph.D. Statistician they continue to flounder without the understanding of what is missing. Each year that goes by where they are not collecting the data they need is another year lost. There is so much data in this field that has never been properly evaluated and it needs so much work. Please don't ignore them.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: This is an idea. Not well tested. However, these days, people can find some success combining their skills with something digital - like decent analytics or programming skills. (Hence the rise of coding bootcamps worldwide).
There could be technology-focused companies related to your background that would gain a lot if they could hire someone with your knowledge of the area but also with some technical chops. Is there a Health Education tech company out there? Likely. Not sure how to find them all, but as an example, interesting things show up on Angel List.
<https://angel.co/exercise/jobs>
<https://angel.co/fitness/jobs>
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/11
| 1,123
| 4,385
|
<issue_start>username_0: The ratio of staff/students is an important factor for university rankings. How are postdocs and non-faculty researchers considered in calculating this ratio?
I am referring to researchers who have an official contract with the university such as postdoc fellowships (which are competition based), higher level researchers like Senior Scientists (some universities give such titles) and even Research Professors?
To rephrase my question: **Are research staff considered part of "staff" in staff/student ratio?** They are not academic staff but they can do teaching jobs too!<issue_comment>username_1: In the UK post-doctoral researchers are staff, and their research is included in the REF (UK research rating table, which is bogus and biased due to oxbridge domination (separate issue)).
Technically if you are paying income tax then you are a member of staff not a student. Students get stipends or nothing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For the US, there is actually a fairly standardized answer, though it's complicated. The short version appears to be:
>
> Postdocs who teach count as 1/3 of a staff member. Postdocs who do not teach are not counted at all.
>
>
>
First, note that the number usually used in the US is **student-faculty ratio**. (Not "staff": in US academic parlance, "staff" typically refers to non-academic university employees: administrative assistants, accountants, gardeners, cooks, etc.)
We can pretty quickly eliminate the possibility of postdocs being counted as students - I've never heard of postdocs being considered students anywhere in US academia. They don't enroll in classes nor work towards a degree. (Even for PhD students working exclusively on research enroll in classes each term until they graduate, typically a 12-credit course called "Independent Research" or something similar. Postdocs do not.)
So, are they counted as faculty?
There is an organization called the [Common Data Set Initiative](http://www.commondataset.org/) which sets forth standard definitions for university statistics like student-faculty ratio. CDS doesn't actually gather data or publish survey instruments, but their [set of standards and definitions](http://www.commondataset.org/docs/2014-2015/CDS_2014-2015.htm) is written in questionnaire form.
Item I-2, "Student to Faculty Ratio", says:
>
> Report the Fall 2014 ratio of full-time equivalent students (full-time plus 1/3 part-time) to full-time equivalent instructional faculty (full-time plus 1/3 part-time). In the ratio calculations, exclude both faculty and students in stand-alone graduate or professional programs such as medicine, law, veterinary, dentistry, social work, business, or public health in which faculty teach virtually only graduate-level students. Do not count undergraduate or graduate student teaching assistants as faculty.
>
>
>
For the definition of "instructional faculty", we refer to Item I-1, which has a table explaining how various types of faculty members should be counted. For
>
> instructional faculty in preclinical and clinical medicine, faculty who are not paid (e.g., those who donate their services or are in the military), or research-only faculty, post-doctoral fellows, or pre-doctoral fellows
>
>
>
it says they should *not* count as full-time instructional faculty, and should be counted as part-time instructional faculty "only if they teach one or more non-clinical credit courses".
So this is the answer. A postdoc or other researcher who does not teach any non-clinical credit-bearing courses should not be counted in the student-faculty ratio. A postdoc who does teach at least one such course should be counted a part-time instructional faculty member, and contribute 1/3 of a person to the denominator of the ratio.
Of course, it should be kept in mind that this data is provided voluntarily by each institution, and it is ultimately up to the institution to decide how they classify each of their employees.
With regard to rankings, the best-known rankings in the US are the [*US News & World Report* Best Colleges Rankings](http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges). They [explain](http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-collects-rankings-data) that they generally follow the CDS definitions when collecting data from institutions.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/09/11
| 640
| 2,705
|
<issue_start>username_0: If I have a very good result, should I share it with an academic (Professor) from another part of the world who is an expert in the subject, but whom I have never met?
I’m interested in collaboration, but then again I don’t want to let the cat out of the bag and then have nothing come of it, especially before I’ve published anything. On the other hand as a professional, the other party should stick to their academic code of practice and I should have nothing to worry about, right?
This is work I’ve done in my spare time outside of my other academic duties. Work I do in my paid roles I would just publish myself and wouldn’t feel the need to seek collaboration in this way.<issue_comment>username_1: Collaboration is essential in an academic environment but I suggest you to research the ethical stance of the person you choose to share your ideas with. If you can get a satisfactory answer without having to explain your work in general, then there is no problem. But if you have to explain your work in detail then it becomes a little risky if the other person has a low ethical standards. However if the professor that you're talking about is a well published academic with lots of citations I don't think he\she needs anyone's idea to steal.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In science, just as in most areas of human activity, most people try to behave ethically but some have skewed views of ethics and some are just plain nasty.
Good ways to protect yourself are:
1. Asking somebody you trust who knows about the ethical character of the person you are looking to contact.
2. Putting a draft of your work up online, e.g., arXiv, that can clearly provide a time-stamp on your work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: No. I would recommend against this. If you have a good result, write it up and submit it (at least to ArXiV while you work on a stronger publication, if necessary). It is too easy to get burned. Whether it was paid as part of an academic position or not shouldn't matter, you want the publication so you can strengthen your academic record. Collaborations are great of course, and you shouldn't be secretive about everything you are working on. But to be cautious, if you already have a nice result, it should be something you have presented at conferences in front of other people, or that you have posted to ArXiV in a preliminary form, before you share it with someone that you don't know.
It doesn't matter who the other person is, what their academic position, or how many publications they have. None of this seems to really be a predictor of whether someone will scoop your idea or not, unfortunately.
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/09/11
| 511
| 2,197
|
<issue_start>username_0: More specifically how likely it is for me to get published as an independent researcher working as hard as an affiliated researcher? How much difference does it really make?<issue_comment>username_1: Collaboration is essential in an academic environment but I suggest you to research the ethical stance of the person you choose to share your ideas with. If you can get a satisfactory answer without having to explain your work in general, then there is no problem. But if you have to explain your work in detail then it becomes a little risky if the other person has a low ethical standards. However if the professor that you're talking about is a well published academic with lots of citations I don't think he\she needs anyone's idea to steal.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: In science, just as in most areas of human activity, most people try to behave ethically but some have skewed views of ethics and some are just plain nasty.
Good ways to protect yourself are:
1. Asking somebody you trust who knows about the ethical character of the person you are looking to contact.
2. Putting a draft of your work up online, e.g., arXiv, that can clearly provide a time-stamp on your work.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: No. I would recommend against this. If you have a good result, write it up and submit it (at least to ArXiV while you work on a stronger publication, if necessary). It is too easy to get burned. Whether it was paid as part of an academic position or not shouldn't matter, you want the publication so you can strengthen your academic record. Collaborations are great of course, and you shouldn't be secretive about everything you are working on. But to be cautious, if you already have a nice result, it should be something you have presented at conferences in front of other people, or that you have posted to ArXiV in a preliminary form, before you share it with someone that you don't know.
It doesn't matter who the other person is, what their academic position, or how many publications they have. None of this seems to really be a predictor of whether someone will scoop your idea or not, unfortunately.
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/09/11
| 764
| 3,381
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am supervising a last year high-school student (a very advanced one) who is doing some kind of a research project. He does some numerical simulations on problems that I suggest. If everything goes well the results of these simulations should be rather interesting and could be submitted to a reasonable journal.
I have an affiliation with a renowned university but the student obviously does not yet have any. Next year he plans to enter university X (and probably he can do that).
The question: can I submit a paper with him as a coauthor, stating that he is affiliated to the university X? May it create some problems for the student if he choses to enter another university Y later?<issue_comment>username_1: I published a paper with two high school student co-authors. I listed their high school as their affiliation. They were not paid by the university. It worked fine.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The question whether the student should be a co-author (of course, if he contributed a significant part of the work!) is separate from the question of what affiliation to list. For the latter, I think that in reality it does not actually matter -- the affiliation is simply a convenient form for readers to figure out how to reach the author in case they have a question, and a convenient form for authors to claim authorship in case their name is not unique by itself. In the case at hand, I see no reason why one shouldn't simply list the student's high school as affiliation. Or, if this was as part of some organized summer activity, the university at which that activity was done. From the perspective of the publisher, either should be fine, as would providing the student's home address.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: You don't need to include any affiliation. If you don't work at an academic institution then your affiliation is irrelevant private information that you should be able to keep private. It's none of the reader's business to know that the author works at some company X, or attends school Y in town Z.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The problem with affiliating the coauthor with university X is that if he does not manage to enter X for some reason (maybe because he leeched, for lack of a better term, on their fame by a false claim of affiliation), either the paper will have wrong affiliation which may mislead people, or you will have to submit a correction to the paper. In addition, this might damage the academical career of the coauthor, even if it wasn't his decision.
In extreme cases, it might lead to rejection of the paper because if you're lying about something as trivial as the affiliation, what else might you be lying about? At the very least, if one of the reviewers knows that it's wrong, they could submit it as an error you should correct.
There is nothing wrong with listing the coauthor's high school as his affiliation. If the coauthor were to work for a company, you would also put down their company, right?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I published during high school and my advisor listed me as being affiliated with his university. I think it was fair because I did the work on their premises and was basically a volunteer/unpaid intern at the university. I even went to their group meetings so I feel like I was part of the lab.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/11
| 634
| 2,844
|
<issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to a marketing journal and the reviewers recommended a major revision and a minor revision. I had to shorten the text and get professional help for proofreading. I addressed the every single comment of reviewers.
Now, it is in the “Awaiting Reviewers Selection” mode once again. Does anybody explain why the journal editor needs to select new reviewers at this step of review process?<issue_comment>username_1: I think that two explanations are possible:
* (At least on of) the reviewers did not agree to review the paper again. This can happen, as a reviewer you are not obligated to review a revision.
* The status on the webpage does not reflect the actual status the paper is in. E.g., the actual status might be 'paper lying on the editor's desk, collecting dust'.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: If you submit a revised paper to a journal, usually a few things happen before it is sent to the reviewers:
* The paper is checked for trivial problems such as broken links or missing figures.
* The editor at least superficially checks whether you addressed the reviewers’ comments appropriately. For example if you did not address a comment the editor considers to be major, the paper may be returned to you immediately without review.
* The editor decides whether all reviewers from the previous round are required to review the manuscript again. For example, if the editor thinks that you addressed all remarks of one reviewer appropriately, sending the manuscript to this reviewer again may be considered a waste of everybody’s time.
* In some situations, the editor may refrain from reüsing a reviewer from the previous round for other reasons, e.g., because this reviewer is known to be unavailable.
* In some situations, the editor may select additional reviewers, e.g., if in light of the first two reviews, the editor wanted a third opinion anyway, but wanted to give you the opportunity to reviese your manuscript before this.
Depending on the editiorial management system, some or all of these points may be comprised in *Awaiting Reviewers Selection.* Or with other words: It may as well mean *Awaiting Editor’s Assessment.*
Another possibility is that the manuscript was already sent to the existing reviewers but one of them declined to review very quickly and now the editor has to select a new reviewer.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The "Awaiting reviewer selection" is likely an automatc status for articles that have been passed to the acting editor (It very much sounds like you are in ScholarOne Manuscripts, S1M). The editor now has to evaluate your revisions and make a decision whether to accept, reject or pass the article on for a second review. The label you see is therefore slightly misleading but means it is back for evaluation in S1M.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/12
| 1,369
| 5,177
|
<issue_start>username_0: I live at a university town where I am freshman at a
senior high school.
Some years ago a car steered by an inebriated driver
smashed me off my bicycle and run over me.
Nowadays I am a paraplegic sitting in a wheelchair.
I can keep my head upright and move my left arm and
hand. Any other limb of mine currently is still -eh-
out of order.
Due to my physical deficiencies I don't do much
sporting activities. I get along with little sleep
(about 4 hours/day).
I have permission to go to the library of the faculty
of mathematics and natural sciences of the university.
I am interested in number theory and therefore I use
to spend large parts of the evenings and nights at the
library.
Two weeks ago at the cafeteria of the library building
I got into conversation with an elderly gentleman who
started small talk. After about half an hour I realized
that the small talk had turned into a private lecture
that I was recieving about the topic which I learn about
in the library (quadratic diophantine equations with
2 unknowns). The gentleman didn't seem to perceive
the surroundings any more and he was engrossed in
monologues at dissertation level.
I was deeply impressed.
At some point of our conversation I learned that he
is 86 years of age and a professor emeritus.
The next evening I met him in the cafeteria again
where he seemed to have been awaiting whether I
would drop in too. He had brought along some books and
papers which he thought I might be interested in.
Again the conversation turned into a lecture after
a while and again he seemed to enjoy teaching maths and
being in his element.
We met every evening since in this constellation
and I enjoyed these meetings.
But today a woman who introduced herself as his daughter
cut our conversation short. She told me that her father
in fact is a retired professor of the faculty of
mathematics and that he suffers from Alzheimer's disease
and that she wished to apologize for any inconvenience
her father might have caused.
To me the point is: Subject of our conversation was
number theory. I did not realize myself that he suffers
from that disease. Thus to me it seems that the disease
did not affect our conversation in a negative way.
I enjoyed our meetings and to me it seems that he also
enjoyed talking to me about maths.
At the moment I have the feeling that currently he still
is capable of talking about number theory and
that currently he still enjoys talking about that subject.
I fear that discouraging him in doing so by now would mean
anticipating some aspects of the disease having reached
levels that probably aren't reached yet.
How would you deal with the situation?<issue_comment>username_1: One of the things that helps Alzheimer's patients the most is routines - especially routines from earlier parts of their lives (such as when he was a full-time faculty member). Keeping the brain active by thinking through number theory is also very helpful in staving off further progression of his dementia.
So if it was part of his routine when he was active faculty to go to lunch everyday in the dining hall and then to lecture, then you have now become a living part of his past and current world and helping him (and his family) stay functional. As long as you are both enjoying it, there is no reason not to continue.
As username_2 says, I think his daughter would be heartened to hear that 1) you enjoy this and 2) you would not have known he had Alzheimers had she not told you. As gnome says, though, I would keep her apprised if you notice any changes.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to username_1's answer I fully agree with, 2 thoughts: (1) if you haven't yet, tell the daughter that not only did her father not inconvenience you, from your interactions you never even guessed his affliction - it will put the daughter at ease, and possibly even cheer her up a little about something surely hard on her; and (2) if the man can talk number theory at 86, his Alzheimer's is very early stage; and this could go on for a while (it tends to degrade discretely though, so be ready to step back as needed when you notice a sudden change).
(Per @jakebeal's suggestion, made into an answer)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Please read
*The Housekeeper and the Professor* is a novel by Yoko Ogawa set in modern-day Japan. It was published in August, 2003, by Shinchosha and was the first recipient of the Hon'ya Taisho award (Japan Booksellers Award).[1][2]
The story centers around a mathematician, "the Professor," who suffered brain damage in a traffic accident in 1975 and since then can produce only 80 minutes' worth of memories, and his interactions with a housekeeper (the narrator) and her son "Root" as the Professor shares the beauty of equations with them.
The novel received the Hon'ya Taisho award, was adapted into a film version in January 2006, and after being published in paperback in December 2005, sold one million copies in two months, faster than any other Shinchosha paperback.[3]
These paragraphs are from <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Housekeeper_and_the_Professor>
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/12
| 352
| 1,373
|
<issue_start>username_0: In the US, instructors sometimes ask one or two students to take notes for a given lecture, in view of releasing the lecture notes later on for the rest of the class. Such students are sometimes called "scribes". Is "scribe" a pejorative or a neutral term? If pejorative, is there any neutral or positive term? (I am asking as in French "scribe" can sound somewhat derogatory)<issue_comment>username_1: In all of the academic usages with which I am familiar, *scribe* is almost entirely a **neutral** term.
>
> Every student must act as a **scribe** for at least one lecture this term.
>
>
>
The one exception to this requires further elaboration to indicate that what one is doing is merely "reproductive" instead of "synthetic":
>
> He slavishly acted a scribe copying down the professor's words without understanding them.
>
>
>
However, such usage is generally written and somewhat formal (see how far you have to go to put it into a negative context).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: "Scribe" is definitely hierarchical: some trust from "superiors", but not their peer. And then if *everyone* is a scribe, the "trust" becomes uncertain. E.g., is it just that the instructor doesn't want to spend their own energy? Or is it that the instructor has confidence that all the students can make reasonable transcripts?
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/12
| 348
| 1,568
|
<issue_start>username_0: Is it common practise/frowned upon to have a figure in the introduction chapter of a thesis?
The figure is not a 'picture', but a relatively small tree diagram that in my opinion shows the structure I am talking about more effectively than describing it in words.
I ask this question because I do not think it is common practise but also can't think of a good reason not to do it.<issue_comment>username_1: If a graphic clearly gets across the message then why not use it? Just check what the regulations specify though,
To elaborate a bit more you need to think about what the introduction is for. If it is intended as an executive summary then a diagram that summarises the work could be very effective. If however it is setting the context of the work then I find it difficult to see how a diagram would help.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Having a figure in an introduction is a common practice, and one that I strongly recommend. Images are very good at conveying some ideas and relationships, and are also good for catching the eye and helping pick out key elements of a document (i.e., the things the author thinks are important enough to illustrate). There is nothing special about an introduction that means it should be image-free, especially in a thesis where there is a whole chapter dedicated to it.
Yes, some people do not put figures in their introductions. Indeed, some people don't put any figures in their scientific writing, and I really hate reading the documents that they produce.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/12
| 477
| 2,165
|
<issue_start>username_0: When applying for an academic position, usually you provide a list of names of people who can give you a reference or letter of recommendation e.g. postdoc advisor or someone you often collaborate with. In this case, obviously you first ask the person if they are willing to do this.
However, for applications to academic positions in some countries, e.g. Switzerland, there's a different system. One is asked to provide the names of potential external referees, i.e. people who work in the same field as you and can evaluate the quality of your scientific output. These are people who don't necessarily know you personally, i.e. the kind of people you would suggest as potential reviewers for one of your articles or grant applications.
My question is this: in the latter case, is it usual or necessary to contact the people before suggesting them as referees? Obviously you wouldn't do so for an article or a grant application, but what about when it's for a job application?<issue_comment>username_1: If a graphic clearly gets across the message then why not use it? Just check what the regulations specify though,
To elaborate a bit more you need to think about what the introduction is for. If it is intended as an executive summary then a diagram that summarises the work could be very effective. If however it is setting the context of the work then I find it difficult to see how a diagram would help.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Having a figure in an introduction is a common practice, and one that I strongly recommend. Images are very good at conveying some ideas and relationships, and are also good for catching the eye and helping pick out key elements of a document (i.e., the things the author thinks are important enough to illustrate). There is nothing special about an introduction that means it should be image-free, especially in a thesis where there is a whole chapter dedicated to it.
Yes, some people do not put figures in their introductions. Indeed, some people don't put any figures in their scientific writing, and I really hate reading the documents that they produce.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/12
| 136
| 604
|
<issue_start>username_0: My professor sent me an email. At the end of the email he asked for receipt acknowledgement.
Please should I send the receipt acknowledgement separately and then answer the email or just answer the email, giving that I will do it instantly?<issue_comment>username_1: Probably best to acknowledge first anyway, since there is inevitably some risk that "instantly" becomes less instant...
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you can reply instantly, that covers the request for an acknowledgement and you don't need to send two separate messages.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/12
| 373
| 1,523
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm sure we need to pay credit to every R package developer. Just in line with [this post](http://www.r-bloggers.com/r-and-citations-by-david-firth/).
My question is, how better to integrate the citations of R packages into my paper. Should it be part of the methodological part? I saw papers that just throw the citations into the reference list. But it just doest not seem right.
---
There is a [similar question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27921/should-i-cite-all-r-packages-i-used) on Academia. My focus is on the way one should incorporate the actual citations into the paper.<issue_comment>username_1: This should be included in your Methods section towards the end of the section.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You should cite the software packages that you use just like any other piece of scientific work that you build on. If they are significant enough to make it to your main narrative, then cite them there just like the other key techniques you build upon. If they are useful but uninteresting methodological detail (e.g., equivalent to a microscope model or reagent brand) then they should in just the same way be relegated to an equivalent methods section, appendix, or other piece of supplemental material.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The analysis/statistics section of your manuscript would be the appropriate location. It is here that you should mention what R version, what additional packages were used, etc.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/12
| 1,060
| 4,456
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a Ph.D. student in Germany, I got my M.Sc. degree in Finland, I have friends in different countries doing their Ph.D.s, especially in the US, and there are also my fellow students in our group. So I have had the chance to learn about people's experience with their Ph.D. And there's one thing I see frequently which is annoying and frustrating: Ph.D. supervisors (people on tenure track/group leaders/senior researchers/...) are apparently not trained for this job and the job happens to be a very difficult one.
It seems that it's quite common to hear terms like arrogance, micro-management, exploitation of students' capacity, lack of respect, etc. attributed to a supervisor. I'm personally living with it, but I would like to be able to formulate all these thoughts in a meaningful and mature way. I need to have a clear understanding of what I'm going through.
Now I have one specific question (but I'd also appreciate knowing other ways of approaching it): is there a worked and published text on the supervisor-student relationship? like a code of ethics? I don't really know what to name it.<issue_comment>username_1: In agreement with the other posts there is no set code of ethics between universities for a PhD supervisor. Although my university does have a code of practise that I am unfortunately not privy too, although [reading university's is](http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/graduateschool/pgrsupervisiongoodpracticeguide.pdf). What I do know is that new researchers are required to take in-house training to help improve their teaching abilities. This is starting to become common practise at Uk based universities, due to pressure from the teaching union. And clearly has been beneficial to some members of staff and students. However this only applies to new members of staff with no previous experience.
At my own university they track the number of supervisory meetings, and the content of those meetings. Along with reviews of the the student, conducted by lecturers who are not associated with our lab group, once a year to make sure they are getting appropriate support, and making acceptable progress. Failing these expectations creates problems for the supervisors and their contract renewals, and may even lead to disciplinary action.
Just one personal point, ignore if you like. Personally I believe the issue of poor supervision is down to the personalities of academics and their students. Expectations play a significant role in this. In my own experience my supervisor has been excellent, but the same things that make him excellent me are things one of his other PhD researchers does not like. I'm not sure how much training would help this.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There is nothing commonly accepted. And you are right that nobody receives formal training in how to supervise a Ph.D. Academia is really still very much in a medieval mode here, where you learn from your master (your own supervisor), potentially work under other masters (changing labs) and then are deemed worthy to have apprentices of your own, who you will treat roughly as your master treated you.
However, if you Google for ["Betreuungsvertrag Promotion"](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=betreuungsvertrag+promotion) or ["Doktoranden-Betreuungsvertrag"](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=doktoranden-betreuungsvertrag), you will find quite a few templates for formal agreements the supervisor needs to sign in some German universities. The key word being "needs to" - this is compulsory for the supervisors.
Unfortunately, these agreements only cover things like regular meetings between the candidate and the supervisor, and that the supervisor will give good advice and in general ensure that the Ph.D. can be attained within *n* years. This is all very nice, and any decent human being should already be doing all that is in there, but it's all rather vague. In addition, I seriously doubt that anything like this would be taken seriously in a potential lawsuit.
Bottom line: the good supervisors already do everything that's in these agreements, and the bad ones won't start once they have signed this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I found something in the U.S.: the AAUP (American Association of University Professors) has a code of ethics. I couldn't find the most recent version, but here is the original text from 1966: <http://www.aaup.org/report/statement-professional-ethics>
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/13
| 756
| 3,145
|
<issue_start>username_0: I applied to several graduate programs and was accepted to my back-up choice. The professor at one of my top choice schools contacted me personally to say that he was interested in my application but had no room for me this year; he suggested applying next year, as "re-applicants" have a good chance of getting accepted on their second attempt.
Though pleased, I mentally dismissed this. I had a tangible acceptance to a school I did want to attend (albeit last choice), and I enrolled in classes. I immersed myself in my new environment, took on a healthy course load with a teaching assistantship, and have received lots of praise for my work and work ethic from my professors and colleagues.
However, with each week I am here, I hear more and more people--students, professors, the head of the department--admit that my program is lacking in many ways. The school offers very few courses in my actual field (a fact they omitted on the school website that boasted what the program had to offer its students). There are two professors in my field, and one is always away. One of them has also been known to cancel classes frequently, a fact that had been addressed to and dismissed by the department. This means that the few opportunities I have to study in my field have decreased. The program is very heavily based on teaching--that is, the teaching as part of my assistantship. Two of the required classes I am taking this semester are teaching-oriented, and while I am happy to teach now, it is not a long-term career goal of mine, and I expressed this to my advisor. It seems, though, that despite what I was made to understand before coming to school, that this program ultimately tailors its candidates for a teaching career.
Ordinarily I would just accept it, as each program has its problems. Yet, I cannot shake the fact that, especially given the last fact, I am going to be geared toward a career I specifically do not want. Add to that the invitation from the professor of one of my top-choice schools, and I find myself wondering if it is unprecedented for a graduate student to switch. I would not be losing any time; if anything, a switch would save time, as the program I am currently in is unusually long, whereas the program I would be entering is comparatively shorter and more compact. Plus, as the assistantship the other school offers is not a teaching-based one, I will be able to take courses in the field of my choice. But before I keep considering, I would like to know if it is even possible.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is possible.
However, consider what others have commented.
I would like to add that in future, the switching of schools might be seen as a red-flag.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Common scenario: a professor is recruited to go work at a different university; s/he takes his or her students along. No one bats an eyelash.
The quicker you can make the change the better; you need not feel at all guilty. It's just not a good fit. Your current school would be a great fit for someone who *wants to teach*. But it's not a good fit for *you*.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/13
| 1,643
| 6,604
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been offered the chance to prepare and deliver 4 undergraduate courses. There are to be forty 15 minute videos per course all to be written and presented by me. It seems they will in the first instance use the video for their current undergraduates but may then roll them out as part of some future MOOC-ish course.
My question is, does anyone with experience of producing this sort of material have any suggestions for how much work it is likely to be? I know how much work preparing a normal lecture course is of course but I don't have a good feeling for how much more work making the video lectures is. Ultimately the university wants me to say how much money I would accept to make the courses.
This [related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/11405/how-are-instructors-compensated-for-teaching-a-massive-open-online-course-mooc?rq=1) from 2013 is sadly without any concrete answers but maybe there is more information available these day?<issue_comment>username_1: I have a couple of strong opinions on this:
1. Just because many MOOCs are built around video does not make them a good idea. See [this article by <NAME>](https://www.class-central.com/report/why-my-mooc-is-not-built-on-video/) for one example. It is hard to use recorded material well, as I've found from my own experience.
2. Preparing high quality videos is a job for an expert. If you don't know enough about producing the material to estimate how long it will take, the answer is *too long*.
I have worked on MOOC-like courses in the past and my experience is that they're considerably more time and resource intensive than standard in-person courses. I also believe that the idea that you'll save time through re-use is generally wrong, if you want good engagement with students. I think there is a lot you can learn about pedagogy, presentation and your field by working on and collaborating with a MOOC, but you've got to put in lots of time - my estimate is that setting up a MOOC style course is more than twice the effort of a standard course, and if you're recording video to a decent standard I'd raise that multiplier considerably.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: How much time it takes depends heavily on how much production support you have. I found that, including editing time, it took between one and two hours to record each 10 minute video for a course. If you're recording that many videos, you'll want to budget in (or make sure the university is providing) hiring someone to handle the production side of it, since that will save you a considerable amount of time.
But even so, it takes *many times* as long to record a video as it does to prepare the corresponding lecture.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to the other useful answers and comments, I must interject that, ... in addition to the point that creation of such stuff will take many times more than is obvious ... there seems to be a tendency of some part of the "university entity" that attempts to exploit the naivete or idealism of (especially young) faculty to create such things. For example, at the point that I realized that I might want to have some control over a similar "intellectual property" that I was solicited to create (on the basis of a popular "live" course I'd given), and inquired about the relevant arrangements, the university honchos simply stopped responding to email. (Wasn't a tragedy, because I was getting tired of the gig in some regards...)
That is, beware of the situation that you accept a modest, one-time payment for creation of courseware that can be used indefinitely. (All the worse if you agree to an obligation of responding to email ... gratis.) Giving up your IP rights to such a thing is at best injudicious... all the worse if you are a temporary hire, terminated after getting the thing going, with modest compensation, while the "univ" can play your video in perpetuity (whether or not the set-up is good for their students).
So: beware. But, still, if you have enthusiasm for doing the thing, and are not too-badly disserving yourself, it would be educational, possibly usefully for your future endeavors. But it'll take all your time, yes.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I haven't run a MOOC, so I cannot comment on how much effort that is. However,having recorded many lectures at the Texas A&M television studio that are available on youtube (see <http://www.math.colostate.edu/~bangerth/videos.html>) I can comment on the effort related to recording:
First, it's an enormous effort if you intend to record and edit videos. Given that you're the expert on the subject, it's likely that editing would fall onto you, and you will have to estimate 2-3 times the length of the videos just for editing -- in your case, that would be 2-3 weeks.
The alternative is to just have a single cut for each video. That's the way I went. Most of the time it goes well, and occasionally you just have to start again from the top. Not all that big a deal -- if you stumble or something goes wrong, you just have to make it into a joke and move on, all while on camera.
Second, if you can't edit, you have to get it right. That means that by and large your slides have to be meticulous, and you need to know exactly what you want to say. My estimate is that it takes you 4-6 times the length of the lecture to get to the point where everything is in place, both on the slides and in your head. So, preparing 40 hours of lectures will take you 4-6 weeks of preparation. This is much more than a regular course because for a regular course you can fill in gaps from your background knowledge as you stand on the whiteboard, and you can read off the faces of your students whether you need to go into more detail or not. No such luxury when in front of a camera -- it has to be complete, and at the right level, on first take.
Third, there is of course also the time you actually stand in the studio. I've found that I record for maybe 3 hours a day, but certainly no more -- it's tiring to talk to yourself for longer. So I got 3, sometimes 4 lectures (at 30-45 minutes each) in per day, at most. But there's breaks between recording, time to set up, time to break everything down again, so you may spend 50% more time in the studio than just the time to record. A total of 1.5 weeks in your case.
All in all, it's a lot of work to record a semester's worth of material in the studio, even if (as in my case) you have fantastic studio staff doing all of the recording and production work.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/13
| 653
| 2,928
|
<issue_start>username_0: Review papers are long papers gathering the results of various researches and have many conclusions. When I want to address an issue or a conclusion about something should I repeatedly cite a Review paper and use points in that paper or I'd better find important papers on that topic and cite them?<issue_comment>username_1: Both. You cite a) the overview papers when referring to the suggested area and the comparison between the different methods and then you b) cite the original paper (when a method was introduced) when you refer to that individual method.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to username_1' answer. Refer to the review paper for the over-arching conclusions drawn in that paper. If you need to refer to results emanating from an individual paper, you should refer to that particular paper. Remember that you should cite the source and you should avoid citing work through others. The purpose of a review paper varies but usually involve summarizing, synthesizing and finding new structure or gaps in knowledge from a large body of literature. These are the "conclusions" from such a paper which you should cite. It is also common to cite reviews as good sources for literature on a particular topic.
As with any research there is no guarantee all material used in a review paper is well represented, mistakes or misrepresentations occur. It is therefore necessary to go back to original works if you cite material that is key to your own paper.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I want to add to the other answers that, it happens sometimes that researchers read the review papers and not the original papers that are referred to in the review papers; but when they want to cite the content in their papers, they cite the original papers which they have never read.
The point is that, you should cite exactly the source you read. If you are reading that content from a review paper, you should cite that review paper. If you are reading the original paper, cite that original paper. Look at this example:
1. In case you only have read the review paper, not the original one:
>
> In the review paper we read that the method x is perfectly applied to examine that [...][1]
>
>
>
2. In case that you read the review paper and then read the original paper:
>
> In the review paper we read that the method x is perfectly applied to examine that [...][1]. It is clearly indicated in the original paper [2] that the method x only discusses parts of the instances of the experience including; instance a, instance b and instance c [2].
>
>
>
In my opinion, review papers are not always so precise and it happens that some content is misunderstood or wrongly copied in quotation and rephrasing in the review papers; so, if you find some content interesting, go to the references of the review paper and try to find and read the original papers as well.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/09/13
| 773
| 3,097
|
<issue_start>username_0: Cultural heritage may have influenced views on life, consciousness, etc. Does it mean that bioethics is different in different countries? And does it mean that e.g. in Israel (Jewish culture) it is possible to carry out experiments forbidden in India (Hindu culture)?
More generally: How do bioethics vary in different countries?<issue_comment>username_1: It does not, since the fundamental ethical desideratum is whether the research subject understands what you are doing to them, and can freely decide whether to participate. It would not be unethical per se to have Jewish subjects eat pork, as long as they understand that is what they would be doing, and have the capacity to make a decision (e.g. comprehend the language, have adult mental capacity, are not coerced). There could be a factual interaction between local law and ethical considerations, for example participation in a particular experiment in a certain country could, by law, threaten the well-being of the subject because of oppressive laws in that country, in which case the case could be covered under the rubric of excessive risk, but the relevant consideration isn't religious or cultural differences, it is what the local laws and related risks are.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer to your question is yes, there are differences in local laws related to bioethical concerns in different countries (and even different states in the same country).
For example, consider the difference in local laws related to stem cell research. According to [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws) (I don't know how up-to-date this is):
>
> These laws have been the source of much controversy and vary significantly by country. In the European Union, stem cell research using the human embryo is permitted in Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Greece, Britain, Denmark and the Netherlands; however, it is illegal in Germany, Austria, Ireland, Italy, and Portugal. The issue has similarly divided the United States, with several states enforcing a complete ban and others giving financial support. Elsewhere, Japan, India, Iran, Israel, South Korea, China, and Australia are supportive. However, New Zealand, most of Africa (except South Africa), and most of South America (except Brazil) are restrictive.
>
>
>
More broadly, the [International Compilation of Human Research Standards](http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/international/intlcompilation/intlcompilation.html) (compiled by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) lists relevant laws and guidelines on human subjects research around the world.
Regarding
>
> does it mean that e.g. in Israel (Jewish culture) it is possible to carry out experiments forbidden in India (Hindu culture)?
>
>
>
Civic and legislative systems are highly complex, as are the degrees and the ways in which they are affected by cultural and religious influences.
So reducing Israel to "Jewish culture" and India to "Hindu culture" is not a particularly useful way to reason about what is permissible in each country.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/14
| 438
| 2,040
|
<issue_start>username_0: My PhD supervisor, who was from an external organisation, got my PhD started with initial ideas and guidance, but wasn't an expert in the topic, thus my PhD research has been mainly self directed. About a year ago my supervisor retired, and has justifiably been off travelling and working on other things.
I'm at the late stage where I am writing up the thesis and have two papers almost ready to submit. However, I would dearly like someone to read over the work and check it, as it has quite a bit of mathematics.
How should I approach publication?
* Find another supervisor, even at this late stage, and collaborate with them.
* Approach an expert in the specific area and ask if they will review the papers before submission. Is this an unusual request?
* Submit the papers to journals and trust the review process will identify any errors.<issue_comment>username_1: I think it might be too late to find a new supervisor. Additionally, finding a new supervisor would take time and this would delay the submission of your paper. You can definitely write to an expert in the field explaining your problem and asking if they would have time to go over your paper. You can also write to your retired supervisor and ask if he knows of anyone who would be willing to review your paper. If you do not find anyone, you will have to submit to a journal and wait for the reviewer comments. There is a likelihood that your paper might be rejected, but you will definitely gain from the reviewer comments. Additionally, there are professional peer reviewing services, which would of course, be an added expense. But some of them are pretty good and are accepted by certain journals.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your university should have a policy in what happens if a supervisor retires or otherwise becomes unavailable. At this stage it may not produce the ideal outcome, but you should explore it. It sounds as though somebody, either your supervisor or your institution, is not doing their job.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/14
| 1,018
| 4,470
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am a student.
I received a request for a letter of recommendation to a professor for some award. *I know for a fact that my letter will be directly used in the application for the award*. [I have since graduated from this institution.] I haven't interacted with this particular person in about 3-4 years, and feel that I couldn't write the *strongest* one, since my interactions with this person were not much outside of classwork (two classes).
It looks like someone else is requesting these letters; how do I politely reject the request? I am particularly not interested in burning any bridges, since I may consider getting a career in academia in the future, but I haven't asked this particular professor for any recommendations (nor do I plan to do so in the future).
**Update**: I have decided to write the letter. Appreciate all of the feedback here.<issue_comment>username_1: You should write the letter. Most likely an administrator wants to know what you think of the professor's teaching. Having taken two classes with the professor, you may know better than anyone else how the professor teaches.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The most polite way to decline, in this case, is to just not respond at all. As a student, you have no obligation to write letters for faculty members. So, if you don't want to write a letter, simply do not respond to the request. It is common for people to request letters from former students for awards or tenure applications, but it is also common for students to not respond, so nobody will think it is unusual. They are unlikely to harass you if you don't respond.
On the other hand, if you have anything you'd like to recount about the professor, you should consider responding. Even if you do not feel you could write the strongest letter, for many situations the mere presence of student responses is considered. Having had two classes with the professor, you can likely say something about his or her teaching, interaction with students, etc. I can say that I was very flattered by the fact that students did choose to respond when letters were requested for me in the past. But the decision is yours, of course.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: If you want to decline to write, then it would be reasonable to reply to the person who requested the letter, saying something like: "My interactions with Professor X were three to four years ago and involved very little interaction with him beyond attendance at two of his classes. So I do not consider myself to be in a position to provide useful information for award Y."
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It's possible that you're not in a position to judge whether your letter would be the *strongest* one. Perhaps they are specifically looking for a letter from a student who's taken classes for him, and they don't have all that many good options to choose from.
I would suggest that you write back that you are not sure that you would be the best person to write such a letter of recommendations [because of the reasons you described here], but that if they would still like you to write one, you would be happy to write a supportive letter. (Of course this answer assumes you liked the classes you took from him and that you would indeed write a positive letter!)
In summary: try to give a good idea of what kind of letter you would be writing, and let them decide if it's the kind of letter they would like to include in their application.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: It's entirely possible that you were picked *because* you had only a class or two with this professor. Sometimes that's how things work.
I was once helping to run an evaluation for a professor who was up for tenure. This is a MAJOR deal which takes months of effort; your whole publication record is carefully examined, as are all of your course evaluations, etc. Letters of evaluation are solicited from other professionals in the field, from co-workers, from students, etc. We went through class enrollment records and deliberately picked more than one kind of student: some who had worked very closely with the professor, and some who had had only a class or two with him.
One student wrote back and said, "I don't think I'm the right person to write this evaluation, because I had only one class with Dr. Smith." We had to write back and explain: no, dear, that's actually exactly why we picked you.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/14
| 353
| 1,503
|
<issue_start>username_0: My situation is that I want to work with Prof. A, but in the advertisement another professor (B) is the contact person. Now, I need write an email to send my CV and research statement to the contact person. What shall I write in the email? I will write in the email I want to work in the institution and my previous research activity very briefly (The institution does not want the cover letter, so the email will serve as my cover letter). Then the problem is: Shall I simply write "Dear Prof. B,..."? If so, I worry that Prof. B would think I want to work with him. But if not, I would write "Dear Prof. A", which sounds weird because the email is sent to Prof. B.
What shall I do in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: It's simple: follow the instructions. If the contact email address is of prof. B, then you should address him in the greeting.
Do not make assumptions such as prof. B is recruiting postdoc for prof. A, or at least you should not bring this assumption to your conversation with prof. B, even if your assumption is correct. Many people may take it as disrespect.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You should write the application in the form requested. Send the first contact to Prof. B since he is the one to whom the instructions direct you to send the materials. If you know Prof. A otherwise or know someone else who does, you might also try contacting A outside the explicit process to find out about working with them directly.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/14
| 2,082
| 8,765
|
<issue_start>username_0: The chair person of my poster session has told each participant to make an one-slide presentation with one minute maximum speaking time (known as *poster blitz* or *poster madness*).
I am wondering what to keep on the slide and what to say in one minute? Is it Okay, if I speak my abstract only along with a figure? Could you please suggest me if there is any other good way of presentation?<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, in these "madness" sessions (that's what they're usually called on the conferences I'm familiar with), the one minute is more of an upper limit rather than a rough guideline. As such, your abstract may already be too long.
The main purpose of the one-minute-presentation is to serve as an appetizer for people to come and see your poster. Thus, while it serves a similar purpose as an abstract, an abstract should rather be more descriptive and matter-of-fact, whereas such a teaser presentation can easily be more on the "mystery" side, posing a question without answering how you solved it just yet.
A useful idea might be to pick an impressive graphic from your poster (one that makes the audience want to learn more), briefly describe your topic and give some hints, though not a full description, of the solution you present.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer from me will be: less than you think.
With only a minute, and it is a tickling challenge, you need a very good slide that sticks in peoples mind. You obviously cannot have an introductory slide with name and title etc since this will only flash by anyway; so make sure your name and affiliation (logo) is on the slide somewhere and can be seen so you are remembered. Then think about what is the most important point of your work (that you wish to present). Start out by concluding what you have found, this could (should) also be the title of the slide. What is then necessary to understand what you have done to reach the conclusion in just very few sentences.
The illustration(s) you chose is key to the presentation and should, as mentioned, capture the audience interest and help underpin your way to the conclusion. Do a search on "assertion evidence slides" and you will find several sources that can be of assistance to accomplish what I have outlined.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Is it Okay, if I speak my abstract only along with a figure?
>
>
>
No, because usually your abstract is (usually) containing very condensed information and uses a sentence structure that is most suited for written language. If you just read your abstract, most people in the audience will have a hard time to follow you and not remember the essentials. You can easily test this by having random abstracts read to you.
>
> Could you please suggest me if there is any other good way of presentation?
>
>
>
This depends a little bit on the diversity of your audience or at least the part of it that you want to come to your poster:
* If your audience is rather diverse and needs some background information to understand what your poster is about, then this is as far as you can go. Think about the minimal information required to understand what your poster is about and talk about this. A similar approach is to just explain your poster’s title.
Leave out everything that is not essential. This usually includes your results. Rather use the latter as a teaser (“come to my poster, if you want to know more”).
Use a schematic graphics or similar as support, but be very careful with plots, as you usually do not have the time to even explain the axes or what you are actually plotting. Most graphics on your poster are probably not suited for this.
* If your audience does not need background information to appreciate your work, you can convey a little bit more. You may be able to show a central plot, say why somebody should be interested in your work or what is novel. But in general, the above applies: Do not plan to present anything unnecessary.
Whatever you do, rehearse your presentation a few times and stop the time. Do not do any of the following:
* use more than one slide;
* cram content on this slide;
* say your name or poster title (if the chair already said it);
* talk about your university, collaborators or similar (I once attended a poster session, where somebody used up his entire time for just this).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I've seen this before and it can work very well.
**Your only task in the one minute slot is to convince people that they should come and see your poster.** Say what you've been doing and why it's interesting. You could use your abstract as a starting point but don't just read it out. Keep the slide really simple with the paper title and authors and a single, striking figure.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: It may be better to start from your elevator pitch, rather than the abstract. If you don't have an elevator pitch, prepare that first.
The term "elevator pitch" comes from a scenario in which you happen to be in an elevator, or other situation allowing for a very short interaction, with somebody you want to influence. What do you say? The objective is not to deliver full details, but to get them interested enough to extend the interaction. See the [Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_pitch), or [Forbes article](http://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2013/02/04/the-perfect-elevator-pitch-to-land-a-job/).
The poster-at-conference version of the elevator pitch scenario is you find yourself in the elevator with an important professor in your field. You have less than a minute elevator ride to explain your research in such a way as to get the professor sufficiently interested to visit your poster.
Poster madness is just a very big elevator containing most conference participants who are likely to visit posters. It may be easier to think in terms of talking to one person first.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Recently I went to a conference and one of the speakers of the 1 min presentation did wrote an [ode](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ode) to tomography. She showed up, recited a fantastic poem, and sat down.
Needless to say that she got an special prize for it.
My point: Just go there and show what you done, in the less "boring", less verbose way. Make it easy to understand, and show a fantastic picture on it, because ultimately your goal is not to present your work, but to convince the audience to go talk to you later!
Don't explain it, sell it!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Find a question that is likely to grab the attention of many in your audience, because it is somehow relevant to them. Ask that question (e.g. *Have you ever wondered if/how ...*). Then explain in a few sentences how your work addresses that question.
Be *very* general and *very* succinct. You can sketch a very broad idea of what you're trying to do, but that isn't the top priority. It is more important to introduce the subject in words that an interested person will understand without prior introduction than it is to cover your work in any detail or to use terms and concepts that you use yourself while doing the work. It is also far more important to explain why your work addresses the question than to explain the work itself.
Your goal will not be not to explain your work, but to get people asking questions to themselves about your work, which you can then answer *after* the presentation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Just to complement several good answers, someone very wise once told me that you should **always** be prepared to explain what you are doing, in **any** amount of time.
She demonstrated that by giving surprise tours of her lab to visiting professors, where each "student" would have a few seconds to explain the gist of the work. If the work was interesting to the professor, you would have more time, even a "real" meeting.
In practice, start by trying to summarize what you do in one short sentence. Then a couple more, and go on... I find that is easier to go top-down than bottom-up, but either way works fine...
Also, never assume the person is familiar with your vocabulary/terms. Keep it simple at first, getting technical down the way...
I know it sound weird, but once you get used to idea, it is easy and works...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: 1 minute isn't a lot of time. I'd recommend having 1 key point you want to get across. And then include points to support that key message.
Here's an article and video on [elevator pitches](http://careersidekick.com/best-elevator-pitch/)... explaining why it's important to be laser-focused in any speech where you only have 1-2 minutes.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/14
| 1,414
| 6,271
|
<issue_start>username_0: It can be difficult to sort through feedback on a paper/chapter when you have feedback from multiple collaborators. Sometimes collaborators might have a conflicting point of view, or making all of the improvements suggested by each would make the paper far too large.
What are some strategies on working through this feedback efficiently? Should you fully address each collaborator's comments one by one, attempt to merge all the comments together before editing the manuscript, or take some sort of hybrid approach?<issue_comment>username_1: It's a tricky question and I think the best strategy will ultimately vary from person to person. Nevertheless I have two concrete suggestions that has helped me a lot throughout the writing phases of my manuscripts and thesis.
1. Get feedback in "rounds" instead of "continuously". When you have a version of the text on which you want feedback, send that to all involved parties at once. That prevents people commenting on each others suggestions and making a mess out of everything in the markup.
Once you have feedback from multiple people, you can iteratively go through the feedback and add/ignore the changes on the master document. This is rather contradictory to the accept/reject change function on MS Word, but in my experience that's not really sustainable when you have a lot of cooks making a single soup.
After the "round" is done, remove most (if not all) markup from people, have a new version of the document with whatever else you want to add/remove. If more feedback is needed have a new round.
2. If there are co-authors who are more superior to you in the academic ladder and you are concerned about how to handle any contradictory/problematic comments, define one of your superiors to be the "alpha" and ask that persons help to try and settle disputes. It should be relatively easy in some fields where the last author usually has the ultimate responsibility for the project.
Alternatively, if you have a supervisor/mentor who's gonna be a co-author but not the last; you can try to reason with that person to settle disputes. I have ended up in that situation where one of our co-authors decided to contradict with her own comments from before, and had these endless iterations of comments and changes. When I couldn't take it anymore, I talked to my supervisor and which point he took over the reigns and defined a new, final version prior to submission on which he asked all co-authors to have their final remarks.
It might appear as a bit totalitarian solution, but at that point the alternative was me completely dropping the project based on this one co-authors unexplainable and unbearable behavior.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While your question seems to be on-topic, since it is formulated in the context of academic activities, I doubt that there exist any domain-specific strategies beyond *general* ones to handle feedback from people (or, generalizing, *processing information streams*) via *analysis* and *synthesis*.
Having said that, I think that there are various possibilities in dealing with feedback from multiple people, but they all stem from general main problem of *handling conflicting requirements* (obvious edge cases of integrating non-conflicting requirements are rather trivial and are solved by merging information, based on all feedback, provided each piece increases the value of the target artifact).
The above-mentioned possibilities and corresponding strategies IMHO can be based on different *perspectives*, from philosophical (i.e., [thesis, antithesis, synthesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thesis,_antithesis,_synthesis)) and other high-level approaches (i.e., [Collaborative Information Synthesis](https://www.asis.org/awards/Collaborative_Information_Synthesis_1.pdf)) to the ones, based on business practices (i.e., business [requirements analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requirements_analysis), including *impact*, *scenario* and *stakeholders* analysis) and software engineering practices (i.e., [trade-off analysis](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=566845)) to more technical, such as [multiple-criteria decision analysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple-criteria_decision_analysis) (the latter approach is likely an overkill for handling traditional academic feedback, but included here for completeness; plus, it might be used for creating automated feedback systems).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I got privileged to work with some collaborators (some of them, I didn't get chance to meet personally). I got some good quick results instead of waiting for next round. Here is one strategic plan as suggested by one of my superior collaborators:
1. Keep all the conversation in a single thread.
2. After getting response from one of the team (it is obvious that all the team members are busy with their academic work, they are really helpful to make your paper one level up), start working on it. Now, there is an issue how to deal with title of the manuscript. I followed V.round-name.iteration, thus it would be like V.2.1.
3. Update all members when you have finished your task. Highlight the updated section or text. If you have something to say, comment it on the thread or in the manuscript clearly. Make your own identity while commenting.
4. If you have any ambiguity, then discuss with all the team member very preciously. You may be curious to know that why other team members are not responding! They are listening, they will respond when they feel that their time has come to make it another level up.
5. A good collaboration does not always mean to write the whole work in hand by the all team members, you have to take charge of that, a simple comment from a experienced person can be helpful to get you paper accepted.
6. If you have any contradictory statement made by others, then try to digest it, if not, then send them to decide what to do. But do not send as it is, make some own comments, then only the team will realize that you are working instead of just paper published.
7. Do not wait for receiving response from all members. That will kill your time. Work with the response received from atleast one of the individual.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/14
| 795
| 3,647
|
<issue_start>username_0: As a guest editor of an international journal, I was supposed to handle the review process of submitted articles. Two of the reviewers do not respond even after sending couple of reminders. I had clearly mentioned about their availability and timely review process at the beginning. I aware that the reviewers are often very busy with their academic overload. Thus, it is very common about the delay. However, from editor's point of view, it has to be make sure about timely review process. So, it is ethically right to ignore the reviewers and search/assign new set of reviewers?
I have also found that some reviewers do not respond after the 2nd time submissions for a paper suggested for resubmission. Thus I have faced the similar issues with different prospect.<issue_comment>username_1: I would say that it is only right to search for new reviewers if ones you have assigned fail to produce. Even if the persons have agreed to do reviews in advance as seems to be the case. You should of course inform the non-responsive reviewers that you no longer need their reviews so that they do not waste time by providing reviews that are not necessary.
Your priority is to get manuscripts through (or rejected) in a timely fashion, not to wait for non-responsive reviewers. How much time you give non-responsive reviewers is a question of judgement based on the alloted time between submission and expected final revised version (possibly involving, at least in fields I know, two rounds of revisions).
That people do not want to re-review manuscripts is not uncommon. It is up to the reviewer to say whether he or she is interested in doing so. In most electronic submission systems reviewers providing a review are asked if they wish to re-review if that becomes necessary so it is a standard issue.
So, if you think your reviewers are non-responsive look for others and kindly tell the first reviewers their service is no longer needed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I disagree slightly with username_1's answer, which says that you should only search for new reviewers if the ones that you have assigned fail to produce. In my experience, there is a decent chance that at least one of your reviewers will fail to produce a review in a timely fashion, so it is better to plan in advance.
As such, I strongly recommend recruiting slightly more reviewers than are needed for a paper to receive proper review. For example, if a journal requires three reviewers, then you can recruit four. Invite even more than that initially, since it is virtually certain some of the reviewers you initially invite will decline or fail to respond. If, by some chance, all of the reviewers return in a timely fashion, then it's generally not a problem for the authors to get some extra feedback.
Further, never tell a reviewer that you don't need their services until you've got enough reviews to make a decision on a paper. I've had the experience where a newly recruited reviewer fails while a long-delayed reviewer eventually actually turns up with a review. If you dismiss the "presumed failed" reviewer before you've got sufficient reviews in hand, you cut off the possibility of such nice surprises.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My feeling is always that the review process needs to be enhanced. You should, for example, set an "accept the review request" deadline, e.g. three days. If no response is given, it should be assumed that the review request is ignored/refused and you should set out to find new reviewers.
This way, you both get the timely response and avoid wasting the referee's time.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/14
| 753
| 3,125
|
<issue_start>username_0: **Context:**
Very big math conferences are often structured in the following way: there are key note speakers, but also sections on more specific topics, as well as satellite workshops on quite narrow subjects. This question is about the second type of talk. Due to the size of such conferences, the talks maybe rather short (20min, 30min).
Such sections (Algebra, Topology, Geometry, Probability theory, etc.) are still very broad. The organizers might make an effort to group similar talks together within different daily sessions, but it should be taken into account that many conference participants will follow all daily sessions of one section.
**Question:**
>
> How to approach such a *short* talk?
>
>
> How to find a good balance between bringing the own results across to the broader audience without having to spend all of the talk explaining background, and saying something interesting to experts?
>
>
>
It seems find that in a typical 1h seminar talk it is easier to provide something for everybody: listeners who have not seen the basic constructions of the topic, and experts of the field.<issue_comment>username_1: Be sure to focus on YOUR work. Compress the background information to only that which DIRECTLY connects to your work.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: The advice is the same as for any talk, only moreso: **Think of your talk as an advertisement** -- your goal is to get people interested enough so they will look up and read your paper (or, in this case, invite you to their seminar to talk about it in more detail). Specifically:
* **Assume *no one* in the audience is an expert on your topic.** (Seriously. It's hard to underestimate how much everybody else knows about something you spent years studying.)
* The most important question to address is **why should the audience care about your work?** This question needs to be answered by slide 2 at the latest, and it doesn't hurt to remind them on the last slide as well. This is easy if you solve a long-standing open problem, but anything in the direction "if you have such-and-such a problem, my result will help you" will do. (If you really cannot come up with something, at least tell them why *you* care about the work -- presumably, *some* aspect of it was fascinating enough to make you finish it.)
* **Skip the details.** Honestly, if in doubt, leave it out. Focus on a few core ideas, and try to get them across as plainly as possible. If your main result needs two slides of assumptions or notations before you can state it, see if you can find a more specific (non-trivial) setting where it will fit on one slide. Don't try to give a blow-by-blow proof, but stick with two or three high-level bullet points ("Proof uses Galerkin approximation, compensated compactness, and the embedding of X into Y").
(Also, since this is such an old question, you probably already went to the very big meeting. What did you hope to get out of hearing those talks? In hindsight, which ones did you take the most away from? Keep this in mind when preparing the next talk.)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/14
| 1,300
| 5,054
|
<issue_start>username_0: Starting around 2012, <NAME> had [much to say](https://gowers.wordpress.com/category/elsevier/) about the practices of Elsevier. Very roughly speaking, he argued that Elsevier made research articles expensive to access and profited heavily from the volunteer work of peer reviewers. Sympathetic individuals established a website called "[The Cost of Knowledge](http://thecostofknowledge.com/)", which hosts the electronic signatures of over 15,000 academics who have agreed to boycott Elsevier to some degree.
Things are relatively quiet now compared to the flurry of activity that followed Gowers' series of posts. The most recent information I can find is [<NAME>'s letter of resignation](https://gowers.wordpress.com/2013/05/27/elsevier-journals-has-anything-changed/) from the editorial board of Elsevier's "Journal of Number Theory", which was posted to Gowers' blog in May of 2013. In it, Martin writes (emphasis mine):
>
> As far as I can tell, Elsevier’s responses to our concerns ended up being limited to a **slight easing off of support for legislation limiting access to our research**, together with a **nominal reduction in individual journal prices**. Regarding the latter, however, Elsevier’s **“bundling” practice remains in place**, making individual journals’ prices essentially irrelevant. Their (aggressively defended) **lack of pricing transparency** from one institution to another also speaks volumes, in my mind, to the limits of their desire to seriously address our pricing concerns.
>
>
>
My feeling is that not much has changed in the past two years, particularly since I would expect to hear an update from Gowers if any major victories had been won.
Can anyone provide more up-to-date information about Elsevier's pricing, bundling, and access practices?<issue_comment>username_1: In short the current situation is pretty much the same. The peer-review process remains voluntary. What is scandalous is that Elsevier finically profits from this voluntary investment of time but academia does not. Not that academics should profit personally, however some of this should be fed back into the academic community in some way if large sums continue to be charged for access to [journals](http://cdn.elsevier.com/promis_misc/j.custom97.pdf). Although in fairness to Elsevier, there are costs in hosting massive amounts of the academic knowledge.
Access to articles is changing, they are allowing some sharing on personal blogs or [sites](http://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-updates-its-policies-perspectives-and-services-on-article-sharing) (some interesting discussion in the comment section of this reference). Although researchers were doing it on closed university networks anyway, but this new approach allows researchers to share more widely. For instance if you have a list of references on your university profile page you will be able to link them to a pdf of the article. However as one commentator mentioned, there is an embargo period before this sharing can occur, these period [varies](http://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/78476/external-embargo-list.pdf), for instance [cognition](http://www.elsevier.com/journals/cognition/0010-0277/open-access-options) and [Neuroscience](http://www.elsevier.com/journals/neuroscience/0306-4522/open-access-options) have 12 month embargo on new articles. Whilst the [Lancet](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/the-lancet/) is does not open access for personal posting at all.
So did it work? I would say it has been a successful start. And these embargo periods make it fair as Elsevier need to make some profit out of the facilities and services they provide. However as noted in the comments below, the articles are not automatically made available for free on the elsevier network (if at all). I hope these reference are useful to you.
Almost forgot the pricing list for [2015](http://www.elsevier.com/books-and-journals/journal-pricing/print-price-list) and Elsevier's general info about pricing. As far as I know these price lists are for individuals not universities or libraries, which is probably discounted depending on the quantity or services being purchased.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: (converted from a comment on request).
I don't think much has changed about pricing, but Elsevier has made open access all the content of their journals in mathematics after a 48 month embargo ([source](https://www.elsevier.com/physical-sciences/mathematics/open-letters-to-the-mathematics-community)). This was a very appreciated move: mathematicians often rely on old articles for their research, so 4 years isn't too long to wait (for some), for this discipline. It is also a shrewd move from Elsevier, since it pleases their audience but doesn't cut into their main source of income, which are yearly subscription access deals with university libraries.
Maybe this will encourage academics from other fields to consider a similar protest to obtain the same boon...
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/14
| 1,873
| 7,923
|
<issue_start>username_0: My professor reuses old tests. I have no idea why she told us this, but she did. In class today I noticed someone reviewing last years test, with the answers circled, on their computer in google drive, along with several other tests for this course that have not occurred yet. The test is in two days, and I know that this person will most likely have the answers memorized so it will be impossible to prove anything unethical is happening during the exam to a proctors perspective. Not only does this student have the exams, though, but many others. Apparently fraternities hold onto these and share them amongst each other.
When posting about this on Yik Yak, and my irritation with this, I received many yaks back threatening me should I turn people in, saying they would find me and hurt me. I have no reason to believe anyone knows what class I noticed the cheating in, or who I am, but this has me unsettled.
I have been studying and will continue to study for this test, and I find it infuriating that others don't need to bother with studying at all. I work hard for everything, and I do not want to get screwed over for this. The tests are curved so that the mean score for every test is a C+, and a large group of students who score well through cheating will undermine those who did not cheat on the curve.
What do I do?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you should report it, although given the threats against you and other related concerns of retribution or ostracism, it may be understandable if you choose not to. Certainly reporting it would benefit you personally by allowing your work to be evaluated fairly compared to that of others, similarly benefit other honest and hardworking students in your class, benefit your institution's academic reputation, and benefit your own conscience. I feel there is a strong case for reporting.
As for how, there are various means, each with their own pros and cons depending on how involved you want to get in this story, how much certainty you want to have that you can remain anonymous, and how much time it would take for your complaint to be acted upon.
For the most rapid response (which seems important given that the exam is in two days' time), I would draft a polite email to the instructor, along the lines of:
>
> Dear Professor ExamRecycler,
>
>
> I am writing to express my concerns that some students in our
> class have been memorizing solutions to your class exam from last
> year after you indicated that you plan to give the same exam to our
> class. I saw some students doing this and have suspicions that the
> phenomenon could be a lot more widespread. As an honest student who
> studies hard, I think I have a right to expect that my performance be
> graded based on a comparison with the true performance of other
> students, rather than a fake performance attained through dishonest
> means. I would greatly appreciate it if on Wednesday you can give us an
> original exam that does an honest job of testing our knowledge.
> I also know that there are many other honest students like me in the class and
> I'm sure they would all share my sentiments about this.
>
>
> By the way, thanks for a great semester! I really enjoyed your course and
> learned a lot.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> [your name]
>
>
>
You can make some small variations to the email depending on how much you trust the professor to follow up on your request (and how receptive she would be to the shameless flattery at the end...). For example, if you feel she is not likely to bother preparing an original exam despite your request, cc'ing the email to her department chair could greatly increase the chances that she would comply. Alternatively, you can indicate as diplomatically as possible that you are considering complaining to your university's Student Judicial Affairs office, etc.
Another possibility, if you really don't trust the professor to take kindly to the request, is to go directly to the department chair (or undergraduate program chair or advisor), or to Student Judicial Affairs. Note that this would likely mean a delay in getting the problem addressed, so in particular it's unlikely that anything would get done before your exam on Wednesday.
There is also the question of whether you want to expose the names of the students who you believe are cheating. I don't have good advice to offer about that. Note that they can reasonably claim that looking over old exams is not cheating but a form of studying. It is really your professor who is behaving somewhat unethically by reusing the same exam and openly declaring that fact. In my institution, the Code of Academic Conduct explicitly says that faculty have a responsibility to "Use examination formats that discourage academic misconduct". As a member of my institution's Campus Judicial Board, I attended hearings for students accused of misconduct, and on more than one occasion felt that the faculty had been negligent of that responsibility and therefore bore part of the blame for what happened. I have an impression that this may be the case in your situation as well.
Finally, although you didn't ask about this, I must say I am very strongly bothered and concerned by the fact that you received threats (of what sounds like physical violence or other serious harm) on Yik Yak. This behavior is much more disturbing and egregious than the cheating, and if I were you I would immediately report it to Student Judicial Affairs or another unit on campus that could provide you counseling about keeping yourself safe, protection if needed, and who would be strongly motivated to seek out the people who threatened you and take disciplinary action against them. Such behavior has no place on a university campus and must absolutely not be tolerated.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The professor is free to decide to reuse questions from previous exams. It's a bit sloppy, but it's her business. She can't forbid students from learning the answers by heart, she would have no ways of enforcing this rule.
It would be unethical only if the previous tests were obtained by stealing them or any other dishonest way. If it's previous students making them available, it's just students investing efforts in a dubious way.
My answer is that you should suck up your furor, try to make the best learning out of the content (why not use these previous exams as an exercise?), and ace the exam your way. You will be much happier with yourself on the longer haul than those who will just have the quick thrill with the (false) impression of "gaming the system".
Also, don't take any more of her courses, and maybe mention in the teacher evaluation that you think the exam is not efficiently testing for understanding.
As a side note, people who succeed by learning answers by heart are only tricking themselves. They invest time and money in an education but don't take advantage of the learning. I think it's idiotic.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This practice is, unfortunately, extremely common in my institution. I do not report it, nor I ever will, because I know the professors are extremely aware of the fact that the students often study by previous tests.
Since they have never taken any action against it, and do not bother with making new tests or even telling us not to read older exams, I then assume that they *want* us to study by old tests. I have talked to a few about this and they *have confirmed it.*
I study Law and one of the most effective ways of getting a good grade on the bar exams is studying older exams. The professors tell me that, in reusing a pool of questions, they are preparing us for our reality.
I know some are just lazy, but others have made me study hundreds of questions, because they reuse questions, but not whole tests.
Based on this, I do not report such occurrences.
Upvotes: -1
|
2015/09/14
| 1,448
| 5,856
|
<issue_start>username_0: **EDIT: Apparently, the longer version below is somewhat off-topic due to the number of personal, non-generalisable factors involved in the decision it describes. I do however believe that the main question of whether a good post-doc can outweigh a "bad" or "modest" PhD is highly general both in its nature (trends in hiring and successful curricula do exist in academia) and interest for current, past and prospective grad students. For this reason, I would sincerely appreciate if fellow users could discriminate between the main question in itself and the additional, somewhat optional description of my personal situation given hereafter before flagging the message as off-topic.**
Detailed, horrendously long version below for those brave enough to face a wall of text:
I recently graduated with highest honours from a good, albeit not tier 1 UK university. Like many science students, my dearest (and pretty much only) wish is to become an independent researcher in a good university, preferably in the US. Unfortunately, today's academic market being in the atrocious state we know, entertaining the hope of becoming a PI without a stellar curriculum appears suicidal. And judging from the CV of most of the tenure or tenure-track academics in the top 30 universities, the crucial point in an academic's career appears to be grad school, as over 95% of those I checked hold PhDs from a top-ranked institution in their field. This trend seems even stronger among the younger generation, as pretty much every cases of faculty coming from "lesser" institutions (e.g. U. Delaware or Ann Harbor) have been appointed in the late 80s or earlier, while most recently-filled positions went to CHYMPS alumni. The most terrifying point being that even in mid- or lower-ranked universities, the vast majority of professors also comes from top grad schools.
I have been offered a fully-funded PhD scholarship at a Russel Group University. The subject is exciting, and I was first very happy with this offer. Unfortunately, although the uni ranks 3rd or 4th nationwide as a whole, the department in which I would enroll in very poorly ranked (in the 50 - 75 worldwide bracket at best) and has an abysmal placement record for PhD students. Worst: the project is a coin toss, and has about the same probability of yielding very high-impact results as of yielding nothing at all. However, due to a number of factors (source of the funding, network the research group is a part of, subject of the PhD project), even a moderately successful outcome could position me for a series of very prestigious post-doctoral fellowships, that would take me to leading US universities.
Which leads - finally - to my question: Is it completely insane to contemplate declining this scholarship in order to apply to higher ranked departments? This option would obviously force me to take a gap year (which I could use, to be honest) to get back in synch with the applications calendar. Considering my academic record (3 degrees all obtained with high honours, 4.0 GPA, 2.5 years of research experience, 2 published papers in 5+ impact factor journals, and industrial experience through the potential gap year), I believe I have a decent shot at high ranking programmes both in the US and the UK. This is, however, a big gamble, as I would have absolutely no assurance of finding another PhD of equal or higher quality when taking my decision.
Currently, my decision hangs from the title-question: let's say I take the studentship and (big *if* here, I know) manage to secure a high-end postdoc position; would that postdoc offset the modest ranking of my grad school and give me a decent shot a tenure-track positions in the US?<issue_comment>username_1: A rule of thumb I have often heard from other academics in the U.S. (and I admit I myself have applied when looking over faculty applications), is that a good applicant should have spent *some* time at a top institution. It does not much matter whether that time was as a graduate student or a post-doc. (Undergraduate doesn't really count though.) So you probably stand a reasonable chance.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To my perception, the *later* you manage to "hit" a high-status place, the better, actually, because the standard pattern is a slight-but-steady ever-lesser-status trend. That is, typically, and statistically so if only for reasons of the available positions of various sorts, one's PhD institution is probably (and on the average, certainly) the highest-status place one will ever be. In particular, one corollary is that high-status post-docs are *not* typical sequels to high-status PhDs (even though a reason, if no other, is that there aren't as many such positions!)
On the other hand, a higher-status post-doc than PhD assures nothing. A momentary "surprise improvement", with no permanent "advantage".
The more genuine advantage is that, in the best-case scenarios, the high status is due to good, energetic, communicative, stimulating people who will help you do better for the rest of your life than if you'd been in the company of lethargic, disinterested people... though "status" is imperfectly correlated...
And, further, it does require considerable effort on your part to benefit from the potential of the environment... so it is just as easy to fail/languish in a high-status environment as in a low-status one... Perhaps easier, since things are more intimidating, no easy triumphs, etc. Almost to the point of being misleading. (Hence, the desire of some to be big fish in small ponds, etc.)
So, actually, I'd recommend accepting some risks to be in a more intense environment. If that intensity is attached to status, ok, good, that's a cosmetic virtue that will help you get peoples' attention (on hiring committees) subsequently.
Upvotes: 4
|
2015/09/14
| 916
| 3,786
|
<issue_start>username_0: It is still relatively uncommon for social scientists to share data or code as a part of the peer review process. I feel that this practice runs contrary to notions of replicability and reproducibility and have a desire to voice opposition to instances in which manuscripts are submitted without data and code.
Where, however, is such opposition appropriately expressed?
I am specifically curious about whether or not it is appropriate to refuse to review an article in the absence of code or data.
UPDATE
I'm going to watch this for a couple of days to see what surfaces. FYI I cross-posted this to <NAME>elman (<http://andrewgelman.com/2015/09/14/its-not-so-easy-to-share-data-and-code-and-there-are-lots-of-bureaucrats-who-spend-their-time-making-it-even-more-difficult/>) for those who are interested in seeing his response and the response of his followers...<issue_comment>username_1: I would suggest first spending a little bit of time reflecting to yourself on *why* you want to see sharing of code and data, and *which* code and data you would want to be shared. Is it more ideological in nature ("information wants to be free"), or at its root is it a belief more about scientific ethics and efficacy?
I am almost certain that you do *not* actually want all data and code to be shared. For example, you probably do not want identifying information about subjects to be shared. Likewise, you probably do not care too much about little bits of utility code that don't have anything much to do with the science. Where do you draw your boundaries and why?
The reason I would suggest doing that, is that you will then be in a good position, as a reviewer, to persuasively argue for the inclusion of code and/or data for objective reasons that the editor and author are more likely to agree with, even if their personal preferences are different. I don't think you'll have much effect by refusing to review (unless you can get a lot of colleagues to exert pressure along with you), but I think you may make much more difference by refusing to accept poorly justified conclusions in the absence of result and method information to support them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Strategically, you might consider that you'll probably have much more impact if you become the editor of a journal. That way you'll be involved in setting editorial policy, and more importantly, enforcing that policy. Refusing to review papers will not help you become editor.
This presumes that you care enough about this issue that you want to spent the time and effort that comes with being a journal editor. But there are more reasons for becoming an editor then just this one issue, so I would at least consider it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a very UK specific answer.
The UK Research Councils have [principles on open data](http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/datapolicy/) and [policies on open access](http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/research/openaccess/policy/). In the most recent clarification this [also covers software](http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/epsrc-research-data-policy-and-software). In essence, RCUK funded research should have the data and software essential for reproducibility released before publication.
My approach to this is that
* when refereeing UK grant proposals I always check that the grant explicitly mentions they're following these policies, and if they don't explicitly say *how*, I raise that as a question;
* when refereeing papers that cite support from RCUK grants I always query if I can't find the software/data that allows them to follow these policies.
In both cases I expect the impact to depend heavily on the preferences of the panel/editor (I don't think I've seen much as yet).
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/14
| 2,497
| 9,837
|
<issue_start>username_0: I teach physics at a community college in California. A series of female students have told me about sexual harassment by the same tenured male math instructor. Two such incidents went like this.
one incident:
"Professor, I'm having trouble with my homework. Could you give me some help?"
"Sure, let's go have drinks and talk about it."
another incident:
"Professor, can I come to your office hours for help?"
"Sure. You know, my office is soundproof."
I reported the problem to the vice president who handles Title IX. She told me she needed the students to file formal complaints. In one of these incidents, the student was still enrolled in the guy's class. The VP said they could transfer her to another math class to protect her from retribution. I gave the students this information and suggested that they file complaints. A year later, it turns out that they haven't.
I suspect that almost no students at my school know how to go about reporting sexual harassment by a professor, and that almost none know that any measures could be taken to prevent retribution. My school is about to institute a mandatory online orientation, which will cover sexual harassment, but it treats sexual harassment as a general phenomenon and doesn't deal with any of the specific concerns, such as retribution, that arise when it's teacher-on-student harassment. I tried to convince the VP that we should do better outreach on this specific type of sexual harassment, e.g., with posters, including information about how students can be shielded against retribution. This seemed to make her very uncomfortable. I suspect that such a thing would upset interest groups such as the teachers' union.
A related aspect of the problem is that this is a community college, and it's a commuter school, so many students have weak ties to the institution and do not think of themselves primarily as students. The psychology is probably very different from what you see at elite four-year schools where you see [this kind of thing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mattress_Performance_%28Carry_That_Weight%29).
How do schools create an environment in which students can and do report teacher-student sexual harassment? Are there best practices at other schools (possibly schools similar to mine) that should be emulated?<issue_comment>username_1: Put up a modern-day "complaint box" online for anonymous but moderated complaints. (You can delete anything that's spam.)
Display the collected results on the site.
The site should also explain students' rights and colleges' legal obligations, with links.
Include instructions for making a formal complaint.
Put flyers on bulletin boards to direct students to the site.
Your target audience is the whole student body at your community college.
You can pay $10 extra per year for privacy on the url, so that it cannot be traced to you.
Students will become indignant when they see how widespread the problem is. This will help them gain courage.
The administrator must be forced into action by student activism.
Find some women's organizations on campus to ally with. They can help get the word out about the site.
Don't tell *anyone* you are the creator and the maintainer of the site.
Compare your college's policy and practice with those of a sampling of other community colleges. Here's a randomly chosen example: <http://www.mc3.edu/about-us/misconduct>
This reading will help you get a clearer idea of what needs to happen (form a task force? define a policy? designate an administrator to receive complaints? etc.).
Once there are some effective anonymous complaints on the site, and you have a clear set of demands, it's time to create a petition. You can do this with a google form.
Ideally the petition would be launched by a campus organization, not by you as an individual. But you can do any or all of the legwork. You can go with the organization's representatives to present the petition and signatures to a top banana.
Include some quotes from the Clarence Thomas - Anita Hill story. You've got to get people fired up!
---
Edit:
After reading [How to Protect Students from Sexual Harassment: A Primer for Schools (pdf)](http://www.nwlc.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/Final%20SH%20Fact%20Sheet-Schools.pdf), from the [National Women's Law Center](http://www.nwlc.org/) (mentioned at the end of the answer written by @username_2 -- thank you!), I now think you may be able to use this document to pressure your college to do more than it has been doing. Here are some excerpts:
>
> In addition to but not in lieu of a formal grievance procedure, you
> may want to facilitate informal actions in less serious cases of
> sexual harassment by providing a mediation process or by speaking
> directly to the accused harasser. Remember, however, that your
> obligation is to do what is necessary to stop the harassment, prevent
> its recurrence and effectively address its impact on the victim; if
> informal steps are insufficient to resolve the problem, you must take
> additional action.
>
>
> Posters about the [anti-discrimination] policy and sexual harassment
> should be placed in hallways, locker rooms, classrooms,
> administrators’ offices, student activity areas, or other public
> places.
>
>
> Once your school has notice of possible sexual harassment of students
> –– whether carried out by employees, other students, or third parties
> –– you should take immediate and appropriate steps to investigate or
> otherwise determine what occurred, regardless of whether the student
> who was harassed decides to file a formal complaint.
>
>
> A student who has been targeted by harassment should not have not to
> change his/her activities or move out of his/her classes in order to
> avoid further harassment. Follow up with the student to make certain
> the harassment has stopped and that no retaliation has occurred.
>
>
> [To ensure that its anti-discrimination policy is effective, the
> school might conduct a survey of students, teachers, staff and
> parents.]
>
>
> A description or summary of the policy, with names of persons to
> contact for more information, should be included in all major school
> publications such as handbooks, course catalogs, or orientation
> materials.
>
>
>
If you feel you've hit a brick wall with the person in charge of implementing the school's anti-discrimination policy, it might be time for a petition, built around the NWLC document, and a meeting with a higher college authority.
I hope you can find a couple of allies. I get the impression your college could do with some sort of oversight committee of teachers, students and parents.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I refer you to the [Student Conduct Administration & Title IX:
Gold Standard Practices for Resolution of Allegations
of Sexual Misconduct on College Campuses](https://web.archive.org/web/20180119172433/http://www.theasca.org/whitepaper) report from the Association for Student Conduct Administration. While this report is specifically about responding to complaints about student-on-student sexual harassment, many of the "best practices" described there apply more generally.
Some specifics from that document:
* To better understand the climate on your campus, there is a list of "Questions to Ask Your Campus" on page 19 of the document mentioned above. These questions may help you identify the problems and a way forward for *your* specific college. (There is no one-size-fits all resolution to this problem.)
* Find out if it is possible (e.g. for your Office of Institutional Research, if you have one) to conduct campus-wide climate surveys to understand whether existing efforts to inform students of sexual harassment policies and procedures are effective. If (as you suspect) they are not, this survey will serve as a baseline against which to judge the effectiveness of changes in how you present and disseminate these policies.
* How comprehensible are your policies to your student body? Would your students feel the need to involve a attorney or a parent in order to understand the policies and procedures related to filing a sexual harassment claim?
* Make it easy to report sexual harassment. A campus should have several avenues through which students can report (phone, in-person, email, and online form, for example).
To reduce the barrier to making a "formal complaint," make the student's first interaction as simple as possible:
>
> For example, if the first conversation includes something like, “You’re not going to want to go before a hearing board of three
> older faculty members that you might later have as instructors and discuss intimate details of your sex life,” that student is not likely to file a formal complaint.
>
>
>
* Help students understand that even if they are not prepared to make a formal complaint, they can still get some relief from the situation (with "supportive measures" as they are known in Title IX). For example, in your scenario, the student should be allowed to change classes (and she should understand that she can transfer to another class) even if she is not ready to proceed with a formal complaint.
* According to the [April 2014 Q&A Guidance on Title IX](http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf) from the OCR, the school's written Title IX grievance procedures should explicitly include "sources of counseling, advocacy, and support" for students. Does your school's policies include these? Are they adequate?
Another useful document is [How to Protect Students from Sexual Harassment: A Primer for Schools](https://web.archive.org/web/20220121014702/http://nwlc.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/Final%20SH%20Fact%20Sheet-Schools.pdf), from the National Women's Law Center.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/15
| 1,259
| 5,354
|
<issue_start>username_0: When leaving with my PhD I left a sizable amount of unpublished work, most of which was 95% or better complete. After several attempts over the past 2 years to find out his plans for publishing I all but gave up. Then tonight a google notification told me they were adding a pub on google scholar. It was my work (that I had written a manuscript in 2012) with someone else as a first author. I'm on the paper but was never informed or reviewed a manuscript. Im concerned because I still have presumably 3 more papers pending that could turn out the same way.
I would like to see 3 things happen.
* Reordering of authorship or at least an unbiased remediation/explanation of the current.
* Access to the submission process (including establishing agreed upon authorship requirements) or at least advanced notice should some other work be published in the future.
* I would love (but most likely won’t get) acknowledgment/censure by the institution, as this is not the first time the PI has acted dishonestly in this regard, and likely not the last.
I am looking for advice on who to contact, and how to approach the situation such that my claim is heard.
To clarify a few points: In my field it is customary for the author who contributed most both experimentally and conceptually to be listed first, followed by other contributing authors in roughly descending order of involvement. Lastly the PI (the Principle Investigator who oversees the work, funds the lab, the major professor involved, ect) is listed.
This order is largely taken into account when assessing a researchers body of work, as it is not common for papers in the field to have a breakdown of contributions by author in the text like in some other related fields.
Also common in the field is the ownership of the scholarship by the institution. This work was written up and published in my thesis. Additionally I prepared and formatted, and made available to the PI a manuscript for journal publication. Unfortunately, I cannot publish without the PI's approval, and I thought he was unable to publish without my approval.<issue_comment>username_1: It is a difficult situation, and the course of action may depend on many things we do not know (e.g. the influence of the PI, your current situation and dependency from him – do you need letters of recommendation, or did you leave academia –, how much factual evidence you can provide for your part on the works, etc.).
Here are various approaches which seem possible, but any of them may be impractical or dangerous depending on the unknowns mentioned above.
* Contact the PI to sort the situation out; it is better not to corner her, but to let her an honorable way out or probably nothing good will happen.
* Contact the university or department to notify the misconduct. It might be better to only do that after contacting the PI, but it really depend on the history.
* Contact an ethic committee if one exists in your field (e.g. an ethic committee for publications, including misattribution of authorship, has been set for maths by the EMS).
* Contact the editor-in-chief of the journal the paper is published in, and notify her that you should be first author (providing evidence) and that you were not asked for permission to publish the work.
Be aware that any of the above move may turn out to be explosive; it is difficult to say more given the limited amount of information. So let me end with probably the most important advice:
**Seek guidance by a senior researcher you know and can trust with your case.** You will be able to discuss the specifics of your situation, and someone ready to back you up is of utmost importance in this kind of situation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Why didn't you write it up? So you are not the first author, but which order do you come in, second? I think the best thing to do is just to move on and do some other amazing work. I have witnessed how some nasty people work, they never change and you can't change them. The best you can do is to run away. This is not being a coward, it's just time saving.
Here are some very general authorship rules - most health related journals including very good ones such as the BMJ use these as guidelines. Your PI has obviously broken most, e.g. you weren't asked for approval in the final draft:
<http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Is there a member (or several members) of your thesis committee that you feel you can trust? If so, I would contact them to get their confidential feedback. You need to prepare a document that explicitly demonstrates which portions of the manuscript were your work:
1. Find the draft that you originally wrote.
2. Highlight all of the text that is a direct quote from your draft or your thesis.
3. Highlight all of the figures that you personally made.
You should be able to definitively back up any assertions that you make. Document everything. Then get feedback from unbiased, knowledgeable 3rd parties. Allow them to decide whether you should be listed as first author, co-first author, second author, or middle author. A co-primary authorship--if warranted-- might prove to be an elegant solution that doesn't offend anyone.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/15
| 719
| 3,157
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am organizing a weekly seminar (at specific day of every week) at our department. We will have 12 talks for the next coming semester. We have a list of n potential people for these talks (suggested by seminar committee). It is clear that not every people on this list can actually deliver a talk (for time restrain or personal reasons), so n should be larger than 12.
The invitation is done by sending an email to the potential persons, asking if he/she is interested to give a talk. We don't necessarily have a phone number of these people.
What is the best approach to propose the date of seminars to the interested people by email?
If I list all the available 12 dates to the first person who replies positively, he/she may not quickly select the desired date and asking to answer quickly may be sometimes uncomfortable. If I have his/her phone number I immediately call him/her for fixing the date, but some people don't like to share their personal phone numbers, also office public phone numbers are not always working (once I almost spent the whole working day to call someone at his office but nobody was there). Also while I am waiting for someone to select his date, it is difficult to propose the same dates to another person as both may select the same date.<issue_comment>username_1: * Send an invitation to your top 12 candidates. List all 12 dates to all candidates. Ask everyone to reply whether they can and want to come at all, and to indicate their first, second and third choice of dates.
Track answers. Any date that is chosen by exactly one person as his first choice is blocked. Clear any conflicts in first choices among the people involved, using second and third choices.
After one week, remind those that haven't replied yet.
* One week later, assume those that haven't replied after the reminder will not reply at all. Assume that k people will come. Send out invitations to your next 12-k candidates, shortening the list of potential dates by those that have already been blocked.
* Iterate until all dates have been filled.
* Expect people to cancel at short notice. Have someone local as a backup speaker (yourself?).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Use an online shared platform and first come first served. Possibly, the simplest and least hassle is doodle: they just fill in their name and click on their preferred available date.
Or you can share a spreadsheet (Google Docs, or your favourite provider) with the calendar. Same protocol, they fill in their name, and leave a field for their talk title. This is what we do in our department for the internal research talks.
I think it is good to have this done on the spot and with minimal intervention on your part. If you ask them to give you several options, wait a week for everybody to respond, find the optimal arrangement, email them back with their final date, (and maybe you take a couple of days to do it because of other priorities)... they may have already been booked and you have to start all over again. If you were particularly interested in some top busy person to give a talk, send them the form first.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/15
| 486
| 2,074
|
<issue_start>username_0: In some seminar classes, one student presents a paper selected from top conferences or journals with the help of slides. Usually, there is a lot of discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of the papers. The plots or figures are usually not prepared from scratch for the slides, but are copied from the paper by taking screenshots. But is it legal or even ethical to publish these slides online?<issue_comment>username_1: It is almost certainly a copyright violation in the US. It's probably also defensible via a fair use argument (in court!). I think that the odds of getting sued or DMCA takedown noticed are pretty low, but I still wouldn't encourage the practice of uploading the property of others to the Internet without their permission. That's a reasonably big ethics issue for me. The easiest thing to do might be to use a placeholder figure "See Figure 2 page 6", or similar, in the uploaded material. You might also try asking the publisher for reproduction permissions. They all have a process, and it ought to be free and easy for purposes of commentary.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If said slides are available publicly e.g. from the author's homepage, there is no problem (but you must credit properly, which I assume is done anyway if this is part of a seminar class).
If the slides are published e.g. as add-ons to the paper on the conference webpage, and are behind a paywall there, presumably your school has permission to access them, so placing copies (or linking to them, which might be preferable) from a page *private* to the seminar at the school should be legal (you might need to check the precise conditions). If the page for the seminar is open to the public, it is obviously a no-no.
In any case, *I am not a lawyer*, and even if I was, *I don't have enough details on the specific case* to be able to give any advise. Legal advise can only be given by a lawyer retained by you, in full knowledge of the case. Details we as laymen consider irrelevant might make all the difference legally.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/15
| 1,214
| 5,221
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper and I have a table outlining the percentage change of results in different conditions. For example:
Condition A: 5%
Condition B: -7%
Essentially, I want to show that Condition A saw an increase with my method and Condition B saw a decrease. However, my adviser recommended against negative percentages, saying a percentage should always be positive. What is a proper way to format this?<issue_comment>username_1: A decrease certainly is a negative percentage, I fail to see your advisor's point. Perhaps you should ask for clarification, and what the preferred way to describe such results is in your specific field.
Please consider that what you get here is the random opinions of people with *no* stake in your work, which probably have at most a tenuous knowledge of your area, and, most important, know nothing about the preferences of your advisor or the conventions in your research group.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your advisor appears to have a very unusual perspective. To quote conventional wisdom, in the form of [the Wikipedia article on percentages](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentage):
>
> While percentage values are often between 0 and 100 there is no restriction and one may, for example, refer to 111% or −35%.
>
>
>
I think that the first thing you need to do is find out more about *why* your advisor objects, so that you can decide whether they can be persuaded or whether you should look for a workaround instead. If you need to do a workaround, you can simply divide by 100 and call it something like "fraction change of results" instead, i.e. +0.05, -0.07
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I suspect that your advisor doesn't have much experience with financial markets; there you learn very quickly what negative percentages mean. Jokes aside - I think it's technically correct to write negative percentages to describe changes. It should however be clear what the reference is (the value from which the difference is taken: is it the previous value in a time series, or the initial value...?). This ambiguity (and the value used for the normalization) makes the data prone to misunderstandings.
Therefore I tend to share the opinion of your advisor, as I think that it may be more illustrative to have figures with well-defined limits between 100% and 0% to display percentages as a function of time or number of measurements, rather than their changes in percent. Printing the changes is similar to plotting the derivative of a function. If those changes are expressed in percent values, things are even more complicated - that is similar to taking the derivative of the logarithm of the function. While your data may contain all the relevant information, I suspect that the representation that you have chosen is less intuitive to understand than the function itself (in this case: the percentage in absolute terms).
To give you an example: a change of -50% could be a decline from 60% to 30% as it may be a change from 4% to 2%. The implications and the statistical significance of these two cases could be very different, and by plotting the values rather than the relative differences the situation becomes much clearer.
Long story short: I think that your representation is probably scientifically correct, but I believe that there are good reasons to present the data the way your advisor suggests.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You can definitely convert all delta numbers to be positive (see below). However, as others said, it is somewhat unusual for treatment effects data. Perhaps, your advisor has some specific reasons for that recommendation - it is better to *clarify* this issue with the advisor.
Should you decide to follow your advisor's recommendation on that, you can perform conversion by choosing a different *anchor point (baseline)*, which should **make sense** in the context of your study (if it does not, I would try to politely argue with this recommendation). However, in any case, you would still need to provide the *rationale* for that decision in your paper.
If your advisor's rationale for positive only percentage values is purely aesthetic, then there is an easy solution to this "problem", especially since you're asking about table format. Just add an "Effect" (or similarly named) column to the table. For original negative delta values, simply indicate that by placing word "Decrease" (or "Negative") into the corresponding cell, while placing the *absolute value* of the delta into the corresponding column. The effect in the results can also be indicated in writeup, such as "... increased by five percent" and "... decreased by seven percent".
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I don't necessarily know that I agree with your advisor's perspective, but the way you could do this is having "baseline" be 100%, and the changes between method A and method B being deviations from 100%.
So for example, rather than 5% and -7% you'd have 105% and 93%. This, to me, seems *entirely* stylistic in many cases, however may be consistent with things in your field. For example, relative risks in epidemiology implicitly use a scale somewhat like this.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/15
| 3,128
| 13,289
|
<issue_start>username_0: In a multiple-choice test evaluation, normally (as far as I know) the wrong answers are penalized, but blank answers not.
This makes some students afraid to answer given questions, prefering to leave them blank, even if they can more or less guess the correct answer.
On the other hand, it can also happen that students intentionally do not study a part of the contents, since they know that a lack of knowledge of that part will not be penalized.
So, taking into account these two circumstances, would the global results of a test improve if the teacher announces penalty for blank answers?<issue_comment>username_1: First, in my experience in Brazilian institutions, penalizing a wrong answer *is not common.* Actually, this practice is extremely rare here, an in my entire life I only took part in a handful of such tests.
One of these was an entrance exam for an university. It was *mostly* a True/False exam, with a few questions with five options each. Getting one wrong would nullify one of your correct ones, but leaving it blank would give you no penalty. Although I do not have the statistics here, back then it was visible and documented that this format lowered the grades, and it actually turned the exam into a psychological test of sorts. You were not so much answering to the best of your abilities as you were fighting against your own insecurities.
The majority of the academic community of that city was opposed to this format, because it was evident that the students that got the higher grades were not the ones who "knew the most," but the ones who had a balance between knowing the answers and having confidence.
My belief is that this adds an unnecessary layer of complexity to the examination. And this, statistically, led to worse results, as far as my experience goes.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Usually the system goes like this: Good answer = get some points, no answer = no points, wrong answer = negative points.
Note that by this system, students who don't study a part of the material do get penalized by not getting any points, is just that the penalty is not as big as by guessing the wrong answer.
I do believe that this system works well as it is and would be wrong to penalize blank answers. The catch is that the system has to be designed in such a way that the expected value for random guessing should be lower than the expected value for no answers.
**Here is why I think why negative blanks would be wrong:**
In theory, the goal of the tests is to test what the students know and what they don't know. By encouraging them to leave blanks when they don't know the answer it becomes clear even to them what they do not know and what they know.
Also, by forcing them to answer at random the grade of average and weak students becomes more a measure of luck than of knowledge. A weak student who guesses by luck 7 out of 12 answers will get more points than a student who doesn't know 6 answers but misses all 6 of them.
And if you think that this is not relevant, ask yourself the following question: would you trust your doctor if he passed his classes by guessing the answers? Would you trust him if he diagnoses by randomly guessing?
**P.S.** Just to clarify, the answer to your question depends by what you understand by "improved test results". For me the relevance of a test is to test the actual knowledge of the students, and a test result is good if there is a strong correlation between the knowledge and the result. In this sense, the test results would definitely not improve.
If by test results you understand the average score, then the scores would improve. But then, instead of doing this just give each student 100%, that would be the best test ever right? But then, the score of the "best test ever" would be completely irrelevant, and most likely useless (especially in the cases where the score is used for ranking i.e. admission, scholarships,..)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I think the accepted answer by username_2 is basically right, but I'd just add that answering the question requires deciding what one means by improving the global results of a test.
Grading policies imply academic priorities. Penalizing blank answers more than wrong answers implies that saying anything at all, right or wrong, is preferable to silence. I cannot think of a situation where this is an appropriate lesson.
(The converse---that it is better to know that you don't know than to put down a wild guess---is a defensible position, and some tests are graded with this policy.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The answer really depends on what you want to measure, and can even vary from one question to another.
On the one hand, we should take seriously the answers pointing out that negative points for wrong answers penalize insecure students, among which minorities and women are over-represented because of the bias of our societies, which is an important problem.
On the other hand, we also have to take seriously the fact that if guessing provides a better average score than only answering the questions one *knows* the answer to, the test encourages guessing randomly, which is usually a bad idea. That said, there are several ways to accommodate this issue.
Here are a few possible grading scheme, each of which can be useful in some situation and terrible in others. You can use a different scheme for each question in some cases, but it should then be clear how each one is graded.
* **+1 for a right answer, 0 for a blank, -1/(n-1) for a wrong anwser** (where n is the number of proposed answers, assuming exactly one is right). This is certainly the most standard scheme among those giving the same average to no answer and random guessing. Note that a student able to rule out even only one answer gets a positive average by randomly guessing among the others (which can be considered a bug or a feature).
* **+1 for a right answer, -1 for a blank, -3 for a wrong answer** (or other variations). For a true/false question, this gives the same average score to not answering and guessing. This is a very harsh scheme, designed for questions whose answer must be known to the student (e.g. recognizing a paracetamol intoxication for a pharmacologist, or know what a plea bargain is for a wannabe attorney, you see my point). It basically achieves the same thing as the standard scheme with a higher passing bar, but makes clear that the question is a core one.
* **+1 for a right answer, 0 for a blank, very small or no penalty for a wrong answer**. This makes random guessing scoring above zero in average; it can be used in several situations: for difficult questions on non-mandatory parts of the curriculum; when there is a wrong answer which is very often believed to be true by students (so that most of them will do worse than a random-guessing monkey, a compelling point to make if you have the opportunity to debrief the test), or when the passing bar is high enough that random guessing still needs to be improved by true knowledge in order to have a decent probability to pass.
* **Zero points for wrong answers and partial credit for blank answers**, possibly starting from a negative total. This is basically the same as any of the above, depending on the weights, except that psychologically it may lower the pressure on insecure students. I confess I did not use it, and have no research to cite, so this is merely a tentative idea. More generally, there is always a bunch of formally different grading schemes which do absolutely the same thing, but may be perceived differently. Use this possibility if it feels useful, you have very little to loose.
* **Many proposed answers, with possibly no one or several of them right, and 0 credit for anything but exactly the right one ticked**. This gives a small positive average to random guessing, but so small it does not matter. If n answers are proposed, there are 2^n possibilities, so for example if you take 8 proposed answer and really randomly draw for each of them if it will be true or false (then choosing the answer accordingly), the average score of a random guesser will be 1/256 partial credit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I personally feel that's just adding insult to injury. If someone doesn't know the answer, they're missing out on the points for it anyways, why compound that? I'd focus more on overall test structure, and weighting certain questions. Odds are if you're even considering this, you're not much of a multiple choice test giver anyways, and those would be the only case I can think of where docking for not guessing could be justified because odds of success are so much higher as it is.
That being said, writing a short test with a handful of questions forcing a student to write a paragraph explaining a concept is all you truly need to weed out those who care and deserve to succeed from those who do not. If you weight those questions (5-20 points a piece), anyone who did not study will fail, and those who had to attempt to write a few vague sentences to get any of the possible points and a desperate shot at passing will do the "walk of shame" out of your class knowing you'll see through their poorly thought out response, and if they care about their education, this will motivate them to try harder next time. If they don't, well, that's an entirely different problem.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> Goodhart's law is named after the economist who originated it, Charles
> Goodhart. Its most popular formulation is: **"When a measure becomes a
> target, it ceases to be a good measure."** ([Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law))
>
>
>
I would argue that looking at test scores in this way ("would the global results of a test improve if the teacher announces penalty for blank answers?") is fundamentally backwards.
As others have pointed out, an essential question is "What are tests good for?", and what they *should* be for is clarifying to both student and teacher what has been learned, and what needs improvement. In this regard it would be better to have data about what the *student knows they don't know*, versus what the *student has broken knowledge about*.
The proposal to penalize blanks essentially corrupts this. It removes the possibility of another channel of information (via "no answer" responses). Now wrong responses may be either unknown or broken knowledge, and you can't distinguish between them.
Traditionally in expert testing (as others have pointed out), the *opposite* approach was taken, wherein wrong answer were penalized more severely than blank answers for just this purpose. For example, [here's the traditional scoring system for the SAT](http://www.math.com/students/kaplan/sat_intro/guess2.htm). However: While that has been used throughout the existence of the SAT to this point, College Board has announced they will stop using that with the 2016 SAT ([link](http://www.dallasnews.com/news/local-news/20140305-no-penalty-for-wrong-answers-in-new-sat-test-and-essay-becomes-optional.ece)), as the general trend to make everything easier -- and yes, inflate scores -- continues.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I disagree with the top answer; it is not evidence-based, as in fact [the evidence shows](https://wappp.hks.harvard.edu/files/wappp/files/gender_differences_in_willingness_to_guess.pdf) that penalizing wrong answers harms students who are underconfident, and in particular this statistically affects women more often than men.
>
> Usually the system goes like this: Good answer = get some points, no answer = no points, wrong answer = negative points.
>
>
> ... I do believe that this system works well as it is and would be wrong to penalize wrongblank answers. The catch is that the system has to be designed in such a way that the expected value for random guessing should be lower than the expected value for no answers.
>
>
>
It's not just about expected value. The problem is that when you penalize wrong answers, you require a student to not just be good at figuring out the answer; they also have to be good at *figuring out how likely their own answer is to be correct*, which is not what you really want to be testing. You are testing students both on their knowledge, and on whether their confidence matches their knowledge.
In light of this perspective, let me then answer your question with a perhaps unpopular opinion:
>
> So, taking into account these two circumstances, would the global results of a test improve if the teacher announces penalty for blank answers?
>
>
>
Although I don't think it has a huge impact over simply scoring blank answers the same as incorrect answers, I think this would be a reasonable idea. When there is no penalty for guessing, teachers usually stress that students should answer all questions, even if it's just a guess. This would be a way of further incentivizing that rational behavior, and thus ensuring that students are judged on the merits of their answers, rather than on their confidence.
Since it is an unconventional testing scheme, my guess is that there is no research explicitly investigating this type of test scoring system.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/15
| 524
| 2,516
|
<issue_start>username_0: I graduated this past May with my master's in a physical science. Since then, my thesis has been uploaded online by my university, with my copyright on the thesis. I was interested in publishing the results from my thesis in a scientific journal, but with this copyright, is that even possible now? What are the rules when it comes to this sort of thing?<issue_comment>username_1: The rules are: These days, in most countries, everything is copyrighted from the moment you write it; you don't need to explicitly "claim" copyright (though making it formal puts you in a better position to protest if someone uses it without permission). So you're in exactly the same position as anyone else who is considering publishing.
The publisher will either have you sign something giving them permission to publish, or will have some such agreement as part of the submission process. Read that carefully to make sure you're happy with it. If it claims more than you want to relinquish, try to negotiate changes before proceeding; if you can't, you'll have to decide whether to go looking for another publication venue.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Generally, the agreement that you sign with a journal publisher is not just to allow publication, but rather to transfer ownership of the copyright to the publisher. After that point you don't own the copyright and can't publish the material your self except under the terms of the copyright transfer agreement. Some agreements are quite liberal while others are more strict.
However, most journal publishers specifically allow for the publication of papers that are substantially similar to parts of "published" MS theses and PhD dissertations- under this system you can still make copies of your thesis or dissertation freely available online. Furthermore many publishers are OK with theses or dissertations that basically consist of chapters that were previously published as papers in their journals. A few publishers (for example I believe that this was an issue with the American Chemical Society although they've updated their policy) have not allowed these practices.
In short, copyright is most likely not going to be an issue in publishing research papers based on your thesis.
Another issue that you didn't discuss in your question is rewriting the thesis material to fit into the short form of a journal article. Thesis chapters usually need to be significantly shortened for journal publication.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/15
| 589
| 2,202
|
<issue_start>username_0: Say I have a quotation that is written at the top of my page something like this:
>
> Abook
>
>
> `<NAME> was always an odd fellow, but when the neighbors discovered his secret, everything changed. (p. 12)`
>
>
>
Then, in my paragraph, I reference the quotation like this:
>
> In Abook, it says that <NAME>'s life changed irreversibly after "the neighbors discovered his secret". This shows that .......
>
>
>
To be fully correct and not even have to worry about plagiarism and incorrect citations, do I have to include:
>
> (Abook Leauthor p. 12)
>
>
>
or something like that? Can I legitimately get away with not adding the inline citations after every quotation, even though it is obvious what I'm citing? Does this apply in general when it is fairly obvious where the quotation came from?
Thanks a lot in advance. All responses are greatly appreciated!<issue_comment>username_1: I'd look for some form of "short citation" format in whatever style you are using. E.g. the first time around give the full citation, and later on the short one. Another technique would be to cite once, and then just go "As Leauthor says, ...", or even just try to keep all this together. If it is a long discussion, you might even dedicate a (sub)section to this, using sectioning to have it hang together.
In LaTeX/BibTeX I use the plain citation style, which gives a unintrusive [42] only. But that is major surgery...
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should cite every source of *information* not just text within a publishable content.
Just rephrasing the sentence from the book doesn't mean you didn't refer the book. If the content you referred is included in the book, then you must cite the relevant book too.
Another word of advice: Citing a material doesn't permit you to reproduce its content *as it is* in the original source. So, in general you ought to rephrase all of information you cite. Exceptions are for equations and quotations.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are in MLA format, it should always be cited. You would have to cite it as
(Author Last Name pg.#)
for example,
(<NAME>)
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/16
| 1,188
| 4,960
|
<issue_start>username_0: I received a paper back with a verdict of minor revisions on August 30th. Both the letter from the editor and the scholarone submission system states 'minor-revision.'
I've read the reviewers' comments very carefully, and everything is, as the editor states, a minor revision. Nothing requires me to re-analyse the data, or engage with new work. Rather, most revisions are of a small nature, such as fixing up some grammar and clarity errors, ensuring consistency with terminology, and further developing a couple of sections (drawing out the analysis a bit more, being more specific about methodology). This would at most, take a week or two, and then an additional few weeks to get a peer to proofread for me one more time before submission.
However, I've been given until February, 2016 to complete them! For a minor revision that seems like a lengthy amount of time. So now, I'm unsure as to whether they've just given me a lengthy timeline because the journal itself articulates a 6 month turnaround time for peer-review (it took about 5 for this article), or if the revisions are meant to be more substantial.
I read this [What is a reasonable time to resubmit revised papers after they have been peer reviewed?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20984/what-is-a-reasonable-time-to-resubmit-revised-papers-after-they-have-been-peer-r) but didn't find it helpful.
Is it common in some fields to be given 6 months for a minor revision outcome that will only take a few weeks? I'm concerned that I should be making substantial revisions despite the letters indicating otherwise due to the time-frame provided.
My field: Social science<issue_comment>username_1: Generally Not. But it depends on the journal. You can check the review process of the journal itself. Other reasons could be:
1. Editor might have notied a large amount of minor corrections,
particularly the language. This may need a native check.
2. The publication frequency may be bi-annualy or may be the slot is
not available in next six months.
But in any case, you can submit the manuscript at any time once you finished it, no matter whether it is within 1 month or 2 months or 5 months.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect that what happened is that the editor used a web form to notify you of his/her decision, and to send the referee reports. 6 months is probably a default in the software which the editor did not bother to change. The only thing it is likely to indicate is that the editor sees no need to rush you, and is happy to receive your paper when you're ready.
It's certainly a good idea to finish your revisions much more promptly, and it will likely result in your paper being accepted sooner.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: This isn't a bad thing - if you can make the changes in a few weeks then nothing is stopping you from submitting sooner. But, let's consider why you might actually need six months. Hypothetically, and plucking numbers out of thin air:
* the decision has come back in the middle of conference season. You're travelling, and preparing for trips, for a month
* when you get home after a month of being mostly away, you have a huge amount of catching up to do, other deadlines to meet, and research to get underway again
* after three weeks of firefighting, you get time to tackle non-urgent things such as these revisions.
* making the changes takes you two weeks. At this point, nine weeks have elapsed.
* now you send the revised manuscript to your co-authors. One of them responds quickly, but one is a senior professor who is notorious for being difficult to get feedback from, and another is out of office on leave for two weeks.
* after three weeks of waiting and one week of chasing, you get some comments from coauthors. Thirteen weeks have elapsed. If you're lucky, you can submit at this point....
So that's eaten up over three months. Getting to six seems far fetched, but... Never complain about being given time :-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I'm in a different field (biology), and for us those limits are an UPPER bound to the time frame you have to fix them, and is often quite standard. It protects the journal/editors from having to further consider a submission if the authors take an unduly amount of time to implement requested changes. Nothing, for an editor, quite like getting an revision a year or two after the changes were requested.
If you can get the revisions done in days or weeks, so much the better!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, it is quite normal and common. Six months is no doubt the system default for any kind of revision, whether major or minor. There is not a different deadline for a major or a minor revision. So, there is nothing unusual about that.
Of course, you probably want to do the minor revision as soon as possible and not luxuriously use your full six months. But that is another matter.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/16
| 615
| 2,764
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing a (blind) review of a paper for a Journal in the engineering field. The manuscript seems okay so far but relies to a large extent on a unpublished paper, cited as *Miller et al. forthcoming*. That publication was not submitted along with the manuscript. The author seems to be involved in that publication, but is not co-authoring it. Since no journal or publisher is given, I am assuming that the manuscript is under preparation and to be submitted to a Journal.
Furthermore, there is no summary of the central data and results e. g. in the supporting information. That makes it hard to follow some of the assumptions and conclusions.
1. How should I proceed?
2. And does this in principle justify a rejection of the paper?<issue_comment>username_1: Every matter in a paper should be verifiable, including the references. All results should be supported by relevant explanation with sufficient detail.
Instead of rejecting the paper straight away, you may initially tell the author of correspondence (through the editor) to provide the unpublished cited materials. The author is to be obliged to provide you the tangible material from which you may assess the credibility of the facts cited.
Bear in mind that all communication between the author and reviewer must go via the editor of the journal.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: If those reference papers are already accepted by some journal, then make comments to provide the summary of those accepted papers.
If those reference papers are just submitted to some journal, then make comments to provide the used results as supplement.
If those reference papers as just cited as forthcoming or next work, then make comments to provide valid / published previous reference.
The overall comment may be like: "I cannot recommend the manuscript to publish at this moment".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't think the paper is ready for publication. Even if you get access to their draft, future readers won't have that benefit.
A few years from now, your favourite paper database will spit a bunch of hits for "Miller et al 2015" (or perhaps 2016, or 2017), but there is no guarantee that the title or the author order will be the same; or that the paper will ever be accepted, for that matter.
I was actually working on the results of an old paper that described an idealised model. They mentioned that it performed well when compared with experimental data, with the details in another forthcoming paper. To the best of my knowledge, that paper was never published, and thus I have no idea how really accurate their model is and under what circumstances without doing a costly analysis myself; rendering the whole paper moot.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/16
| 2,031
| 8,152
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have one question for my masters thesis. If I have *A,* which is also known as *B* or *C,* can I write:
>
> A (also known as B or C)
>
>
>
(or similar) or can I use a foonote like this:
>
> A¹
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
>
> ¹ Also known as B or C
>
>
>
Or more in general: When do I add extra information (like synonyms) between parenthesis, and when do I add them as footnote?<issue_comment>username_1: To a large degree, it all depends on your chosen writing style guide and, perhaps, your institution's and/or advisor's recommendations. Having said that, I would suggest using the following *heuristic (rule of thumb)* to determine potential use of footnotes versus text in parentheses: if information in question is **short**, such as "also known as B or C", it is preferred to use that text in parentheses, otherwise (for a **longer** text) consider one of the two *alternative options*, as follows.
The first alternative option is to use a *footnote*; however, using footnotes is discouraged by major writing style guides (i.e., by [APA Style Guide](https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/04)) or advised to be limited, especially for explanatory, non-bibliographic notes (i.e., by [MLA Style Guide](https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/04)). That aspect is likely to be very field-dependent, therefore, you can consider the second alternative option: simply adding *explanatory sentence(s)* after the text that requires such explanations or clarifications.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: That depends mainly on the citation style required by your publisher, or requested by your supervisor. Some of them are parenthetic (Smith, 2015) some are footnotes (1: Smith, 2015)
On a more particular note, generally Citations refer to the source from which you take your assertion [i.e.: "This is cool" (Smith, 2015)] whereas footnotes just expand a concept without referring to a source [i.e.: "This is cool"1 1: "The term cool varies, but we use it here in its more common meaning"]
Your example is quite vague though, so my answer aims to be general but might not fit to your case.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: This is mostly about the reader's flow. Something that is parenthesized is something you expect the reader to actively read, but you're signalling that it's secondary information. The main drawback to parentheses is that if the text in them becomes too long, the reader has to work very hard to remember the main point you're making. You're essentially talking about a lot of unimportant stuff while you have an unfinished, important sentence going. So make sure you put only short, simple things in parentheses.
If you put something in a footnote, you're signalling that the reader should skip it on first reading and they should only investigate if something is unclear, or if it's a second reading and they need all the details. The drawback to footnotes is that they are often more tantalising than they should be. While the reader should ignore them, they are too curious, and break their concentration to look up the footnote. This pulls them out of the text for something they were supposed to ignore.
On the whole, try to avoid both as much as you can. In your example, ie. *this method is also known as X*, **parentheses should be fine and a footnote is probably overkill**. However, you could also consider finishing your main point first, and moving the parenthesized statement to the end of the paragraph as a full sentence. That way the reader can finish absorbing the primary information unencumbered by details, and gloss over the aka's once the hard work is finished.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Given that people may be searching for B or C, I think using the parenthesis is better. That way a search takes them to the text, also when Google shows the context of the search result, it is more likely to be useful.
Foot notes are also hard to read where you a using a device with a small screen that has issues displaying pages. Text with parenthesis is a lot easier to reformat for different display sizes etc (reading mode on IPhone for example).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Looking at my PhD thesis (a little over 200 pages) I have 11 footnotes. 7 of these could be in parentheses with no rewording, the other 4 need at least a full sentence. Picking a few pages at random I often have 2-3 pieces of extra information in parentheses *per page*. [Parenthetical commas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma#Parenthetical_phrases) aren't so easy to count, but I'd assume there are at least as many as parentheses. Explanatory sentences are also hard to count and too numerous, but can be a good way to inset this information. In fact you may find in proofreading (by you or someone else) that your parentheses get edited into new sentences to avoid run-on sentences.
I think there's a hierarchy:
* parenthetical commas
* parentheses
* footnotes
in order of decreasing relevance to the main flow of the text (*not* decreasing importance).
It could easily be argued that I've used all these options too much but it suggests that (in my writing style at least) footnotes are a last resort. Where I have used them it's generally because I have a line of reasoning in which a point needs to be mentioned for avoidance of doubt, but to mention it inline would break the thread of the argument. That's the aim at least.
Incidentally, because I used a numeric-superscript citation style (a common one in my field, and I had the choice), counting was easier. I chose to use lower case alphabetical footnote keys reset per page (easy in LaTeX) in case I had a lot, and to avoid confusion with numbered footnotes or other uses of (e.g.) asterisks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I just browsed through my dissertation. I use quite a lot of footnotes: I count 45 in 200 pages.
Looking through them, I now find that many contain the words "strictly speaking". These are aimed at pedants such as myself who think they've spotted a mistake or inaccuracy: they explain how to deal with technicalities, why an abuse of notation is justified, etc. As explained in other answers, having these remarks in the main text would distract from the normal flow of reading, and the reader can often do quite well without them.
In your example, I'd use parentheses. I found one similar instance in my dissertation where I actually use both:
>
> ... *chordal* (also ambiguously\* called *triangulated*)...
>
>
>
Here, I used a footnote to describe the other meaning of "triangulated", because it's not really in scope for the text, whereas it is a relevant fact that the term "triangulated" is sometimes also used.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: In mathematics, footnotes aren't very common nowadays (and used to be used for providing references). The differentiation is of course a choice of personal style, but one approach is: treat footnotes like annotations (as if they are written in another voice by another person--say author's comments to the reader). Another is: never use footnotes.1
1(Personally I like footnotes2, but I use them sparingly in academic papers but semi-often in less formal things like online notes.)
2(and parentheses)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Looking through my thesis, I was able to find another use case for footnotes, which has not been mentioned so far. Sometimes I define a concept or a symbol in a way which is slightly different from some other sources. I then include a footnote which describes how the symbol is used elsewhere. This could be important if the reader is trying to compare my result with other results or to follow a chain of citations which use different terminologies.
I think that in this case, including the alternate definition in the main text would be dangerous. For example, saying "we define $X = a + b$ (other sources define $X = a + b + 1$.)"
The reader would get confused between which is my definition and which is the alternate definition. By keeping the alternate in a footnote there is a much stricter separation between these two.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/16
| 623
| 2,558
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am worried that errors in the style of my Statement of Purpose (SOP) will count negatively toward me. By "errors" I mean choosing the wrong font, font size etc. My question: are there general styling guides and possibly word templates for SOP?<issue_comment>username_1: You seem to overvalue "style" and undervalue "content". That's a rookie mistake because it's easy to see for a reader if you've spent too much time on the style and not enough on the content.
My recommendation would be to use some standard style that is neither exciting nor boring and use your time to focus on the content. Certainly expressions like "can easily devataste a good SOP" are entirely unwarranted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In mathematics, it is common for postdocs and graduating Ph.D. students who are applying for jobs to post their job materials on their websites: research statements, teaching statements, and the like. I am guessing this is also typical of other fields, and it gives a sense of what a community thinks an attractively formatted document looks like.
You might want to poke around the Internet and find and imitate some of these. That said, as long as you keep the formatting simple, easy to read, and not distracting, I think that is sufficient.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Statements of Purpose (SOP) are short -- a few hundred words, or 1,000 words at most. Nearly all style guides for simple documents feature serif fonts for the body -- Times Roman, 11pt or 12pt, or equivalent -- and larger sans-serif fonts for headers -- Helvetica 14pt bold, or similar. Single space between lines in a paragraph, and double space between paragraphs.
That is all you need.
Beyond this, please spend all your available time on writing and editing. Aim for the very highest quality writing in English. Aim for an SOP that was written by a native English speaker. For example, you could read your SOP aloud to three native English speakers and have them give you corrections to any word or sentence that did not sound right.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: My friend, do not worry. As long as your SOP's styling makes it easy to read, without distracting the reader from the content of your essay, it will be fine.
It is natural for a person's anxiety level to increase at such a juncture as where you find yourself now. Don't worry about your anxiety... but do try to find some ways to deal with it. Get some exercise every day, and make sure you are eating in a healthy way.
Upvotes: 1
|
2015/09/16
| 1,375
| 6,506
|
<issue_start>username_0: I finished and submitted one paper (journal version) several months ago. My mentor suggested to me to submit a shortened version of the original paper to a conference. The conference version is almost the same as the journal version, except that some detailed mathematical proofs are omitted. But we cross-cited these two papers and told the reviewers of the conference paper that the journal version was under review.
Now both the journal and the conference have accepted my paper. I wonder whether there will be any problem if I choose to publish these two papers in a journal and a conference at the same time.
Furthermore, now I am applying for a PhD degree. If I list these two papers on my resume, will I be regarded as academic dishonest and be rejected?<issue_comment>username_1: The issue of duplicate publication concerning conference and journal versions of similar papers is a difficult one. What is acceptable to do and what not depends highly on the field and maybe even individual venues. Of course it also depends on the degree of overlap between the two papers.
Whenever you plan to reuse some content in another publication, be sure to make the duplicate publication transparent by stating the other paper in the cover letter, and citing it from within the paper. In general, it will be required that the later paper goes beyond the results of the first paper, and it is important to point out how it does that both in the cover letter and the paper itself.
In your case, from the conference's side it's probably fine since you informed the reviewers about the duplicate publication and they obviously had no objections. However, since the journal paper was not yet accepted, you should have at least checked their guidelines on duplicate publication, or better verify with your handling editor that it is fine to submit a shortened conference version. Maybe you can still do that now, and offer the journal editor to withdraw your conference paper if the duplicate publication in that case is against their guidelines.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Concerning the resume question, I'd suggest presenting the papers as one item, e.g.
1. *Fancy Journal Paper*, Journal A (2015) (a conference version has been published in Conf B (2014))
2. *Truly different paper*, Journal B (2016)
or giving the conference version its own item, numbered 1', or anything similar which makes it clear you are not trying to sell twice the same work as CV lines.
As all other advices, this may be more or less compatible with the habits in your field, you should get more specific advice IRL.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Publishing a shorter conference version and a longer journal version of the same article is common practice in at least one discipline I am familiar with (computer science) and maybe in others. So that by itself is not an offense. Keep in mind that conference and journal publications are philosophically different and serve somewhat different purposes:
* Publishing in a conference proceedings is a quick way to get your research published. And of course you also get to attend the conference and speak about your work to people working in your area. Hence in rapidly moving fields this is the standard venue for publishing exciting new research. However, proceedings papers have strict length limitations so one cannot include as many details as in a journal article. And most importantly, the review process for conference publications is faster and usually not as strict as for journal articles. Many people consider conference publications not to be proper peer-reviewed publications, and when citing a result from such a publication one must be aware of a very real possibility that the result has not undergone the fullest scrutiny as to its correctness and may be wrong. (Of course this possibility also exists in journal publications, but to a lesser extent.)
* Publishing in a journal takes a lot longer for the review and publication process, but there are fewer or no space limitations, and the review is a proper peer review that (ideally, though not always in practice) provides strict assurance that the results of your paper have been checked and are correct (or use proper scientific methodology and are likely to be replicable, in experimental sciences).
Because of these differences, in a field like CS one common practice is to submit a short and quick version of your paper to a conference to get the ideas out in front of their intended audience as quickly as possible, and then to follow up later with a longer, more detailed, version of the results, and to submit that to a journal for strict peer-review certification and the accompanying credibility and prestige.
With regards to your question, I think there are two potential pitfalls you need to beware of in your specific situation:
1. It sounds like the journal editors are unaware that you concurrently submitted a short version of the paper to a conference. Since you made the conference submission *after* the journal submission (which is the opposite of the usual order of doing things, as someone else pointed out), there is a possibility that you are violating the journal's submission policy. I suggest making very sure that that is not the case, and if in doubt contacting the journal editors to inform them of what you did and ask if it's okay. There is nothing shameful or dishonorable about making such an inquiry - you are trying to do the right so it makes perfect sense to ask such questions.
2. Even if you verify that with both submissions you did everything by the book and did not break any rules, **NEVER** claim or make a representation in your CV or publication list that the two versions are different publications. That in my opinion would expose you to serious criticism of dishonesty and resume-padding. <NAME>'s answer gives a good explanation of the proper way to cite the two versions by including both in the same entry in your publication list.
The bottom line is that in some areas it is acceptable to publish two versions of the same article, one in a journal and one in a conference proceedings. I should add that in my opinion doing so is also of questionable value, unless you are in a discipline where this is the standard practice for publishing for the reasons I listed above. You will not get, and should not try to get, double credit for publishing the same material twice.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]
|
2015/09/16
| 1,037
| 4,304
|
<issue_start>username_0: I'm a Ph.D. student considering getting business cards printed to facilitate follow-ups after conferences, etc. I am barely in touch with industry but I'm in a field where business cards are common.
My university has a set layout, but we have quite some freedom on what to include. There are some questions on whether we actually need a business card as a graduate student, but here I'm more interested on what to include on them.
I'm thinking at least:
* Name
* Title
* E-mail (as it is the primary form of communication for academics)
* Post address of university
And maybe:
* LinkedIn
* Personal page
I'm hesitant to include:
* Room number (we occasionally switch; updated room number is found on personal page)
* Telephone (same as above; could include cell number)
Not including telephone may be a bit harsh, but I'm curious whether you have some input in these matters. What should be included and what is less important?<issue_comment>username_1: My experience of business cards in academia is that they are mostly just an easier way to share contact information than scribbling it on a napkin.
As such, the only things that are really important are institution, name, title (because everybody will expect it), and sets of preferred contact information.
As such, if you want people calling you, put down your phone number; if you don't want people calling you, don't put it down. Likewise for all of the other standard aspects. You probably *should* have a web page that you want people to visit.
As for social media sites like LinkedIn: I'm rather dubious about them, simply because there are potentially so many. I think one wouldn't be a problem, but the extrapolator in my mind goes to a ridiculous image of somebody handing me a card with their LinkedIn, Twitter, Google+, ResearchGate, Facebook, etc. Don't be that person, or else if I meet you at a conference and you hand me your card, I may have a difficult time avoiding laughter.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The point of a business card is to provide contact details. Even though some people might consider it to be outdated, it still has uses; for instance during the poster sessions some people hang envelopes to which you can drop your card for more information or a pdf of the poster.
As such the absolute essentials are your name and department/university, as well as different ways of contacting you. Mine includes:
* telephone number
* postal address
* email
To that list you could add a homepage **iff** you have one that is *in connection with work*. I think it's rather annoying to find someone's personal homepage with blog posts about irrelevant stuff or wedding photos, when I was trying to reach their slides or publications.
Regarding your comment about phone numbers, I'd say if someone who receives the card today won't be able to reach you from that number in a year or so, then there's no reason to include it. Again, the idea is to give people different ways of contacting you.
Don't be too alarmed about empty space on your card, it's actually quite useful to scribble down your cell number, Skype username or small notes when you are exchanging cards.
Finally, my card has a QR-code in the back that encodes the same information on the card into an electronic business card. So if someone has a smart phone, they can convert the physical card to a contact on their phone/tablet by scanning it.
Hope this helps
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A business card should include some basic information that people can remember you by, as well as your preferred methods of being contacted.
I would recommend:
* Name
* Degree Program
* University
* College/Department
* Mailing Address
* Email
* Phone number
For example:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/iVRLL.jpg)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As you will be giving the card to people that you want to remember you.
I would include a **photo**, name, email address and short list of your **research interests**. If you have a useful webpage about your research include it as well.
There is nothing worse than having lots of cards you have been given and not being able to remember why you were interested in the person.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/16
| 2,077
| 9,273
|
<issue_start>username_0: There seems to be a sort of craze about having as many references as possible. Among the students at my university, it has become common practice to write a passage of text and later figure out if someone else has done something similar and attribute it to them, changing the original text if necessary.
Is this in any way, shape or form appropriate? It seems rather contradictory to me, since you are attributing your own work to other people, even if they came up with it first. The author did not have prior knowledge of this.
I suppose you could simply claim it as your own and note that someone else has come up with it, as well. Is this necessary? It is your own work, after all, even if somebody else came up with something remarkably similar.
Many problems have straight-forward solutions that you can easily come up with. I am asking this now, because I am writing my bachelor's thesis and have come up with some of those straight-forward solutions myself. I just now found, by chance, papers on exactly that subject and, reading them, realise just how similar our approaches are.
What would be the best way to handle situations like these?
Meta: I'm not happy with the title. If you can think of a better one, feel free to edit and remove this notice.<issue_comment>username_1: When producing a publishable piece of work (this includes your bachelor's thesis) it is your responsibility to check whether the methods you've implemented were done so before. If so compare the results and steps of your experiments with the one(s) previously published. Otherwise there is no point reproducing the same matter in theory.
I can understand your claim of attributing your findings to another person. But this cannot be differentiated from plagiarism. It is equally possible to include another's content without citation to claim it as your own. That is what the definition of plagiarism is about.
It is true for many to elaborate on the reference section and reviewers look for this too. This is to prove to the reviewers that enough work has been done to assess your field of application before proposing your own work which may be randomly novel or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Among the students at my university, it has become common practice to write a passage of text and later figure out if someone else has done something similar and attribute it to them
>
>
>
Indeed, that seems to be a constant part of paper writing: A portion of what you have made up has been done by others the same way before. In my opinion, this is often because it is simply impossible to always know all details of previous work (that is by no means always "related" to your own work in its overall topic) by heart, and because it is often more straightforward to just do something oneself rather than dive into the literature that may or may not contain something vaguely similar.
Sometimes, it gets apparent even only afterwards that an aspect of one's work is non-obvious enough to be mentioned elsewhere.
In the end, it is simply a question of benefits vs. drawbacks:
**Drawbacks**
* You do attribute your own work to someone else. Thereby, even though you may have spent some energy to develop or define something, you
+ falsely pretend to have relied on someone else's work
+ misrepresent the effort you may have invested for your work
**Benefits**
* You secure yourself against claims of plagiarism. While you cannot possibly copy anything you do not know, the suspicion that you did actually know some previous work but failed to mention them can arise when certain of your ideas resemble those mentioned in other papers. As such, it is less cumbersome if you just pretend you are replicating someone else's work.
* Usually, the statements subject to this phenomenon do not nearly seem complex enough to warrant the mention as a contribution. Hence, you do not lose much by not mentioning you were the actual source for a specific aspect of your work.
* **Citing in such situations strengthens your work.** While the contribution of the cited aspects would be minor, showing that you build your actual contributions on top of proven practices makes your actual core contribution more convincing.
In particular, the last point is a major benefit compared to the drawback. This is reflected in your observation that some are
>
> changing the original text if necessary
>
>
>
Given that the original ideas are not a significant contribution that needs to be promoted, anyway, replacing them with a possibly better method that is truly taken from another source is fully reasonable and can help to further improve the overall document.
EDIT: To put this answer in relation to [username_3's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/54447/14017): I mainly interpreted the question to refer to the "third branch of possibilities":
* They are writing down original text that they think is novel. Only later, they realize or find out others have done the same (possibly, in a completely different field or context, or with a completely different terminology, so finding the other work is likely a result of pure chance rather than an expected event).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I find it difficult to understand what exactly you say that people are doing, so let me split it into two branches of possibilities that I think you may be saying:
* Perhaps they are writing down background they think they know, but aren't bothering to look up citations while at an early stage of drafting. e.g., I might write in an early draft: "The lower bound on comparison sort is O(n log n) [find citations]", then later go back and fill in the citations, adjusting as necessary. This is entirely reasonable: there is no requirement to write a paper in any particular order, only that the result be scientifically honest and ethical.
* On the other hand, if they are writing original text or results and trying to put the words into somebody else's mouth, that's clearly unethical and also completely inscrutable to me in its motivations. Unless they're trying to follow certain medieval practices where you have to pretend your original thoughts are all just interpretations of the wisdom of the ancients?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I see two issues here:
1. Is it misleading to cite a reference you didn't know about until after your work was done? In particularly, does it misrepresent history by falsely suggesting that this reference influenced your work?
2. Is it unfair if you have to give credit to someone else for something you independently did yourself, without even knowing about their work?
The other to both questions is no.
Citing sources is primarily about assigning credit and indicating where one can find details or more information. It's not about describing your personal influences. In particular, everyone is aware that some references may only have been found after the fact, so nobody will interpret a citation as necessarily indicating direct influence while your work was being carried out.
As for the second issue, academic credit is awarded for making a novel contribution that advances the state of the art, rather than for rediscovering what was already known. Being credited is a form of recognition for telling the world something new, rather than a reward for being clever or having worked hard. (The person who rediscovers something may be just as clever and hard working, but hasn't done as much to increase the world's store of knowledge. Of course, there may be borderline cases, where the original discovery was really obscure or its full generality had not been recognized. I'm talking in broad generalities here.)
If you independently discover something at roughly the same time as someone else, then you can appropriately claim some of the credit for it. However, you can't show up substantially later and expect to share the credit.
>
> I suppose you could simply claim it as your own and note that someone else has come up with it, as well. Is this necessary? It is your own work, after all, even if somebody else came up with something remarkably similar.
>
>
>
There are times when noting that you did it independently could make sense, for example to explain why your approach differs in some ways from what is usually done. However, you should be very careful about how you do this, since it looks bad if you seem to be claiming more credit than you deserve. In most cases it's better not to point out your independent rediscovery.
When you ask "Is this necessary?", are you asking whether you need to include the citation at all? Yes, you almost certainly do. Omitting a citation is allowed only for things that have become common knowledge in your area (e.g., just about nobody cites Newton for the laws of motion) or are so trivial that they aren't worth any credit at all. This citation is evidently not common knowledge, since you didn't know about it. It might in principle be a triviality, but the previous discoverer must have thought it was worth publishing. Declaring it trivial and unworthy of citation is a very risky move, which you should make only if you are confident in your judgment and expertise.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/16
| 379
| 1,719
|
<issue_start>username_0: I try to have any manuscript proofread before submission to an academic journal, where proofreading typically involves checking/fixing the spelling, grammar and overall style in English.
This decision often involves somewhat difficult decisions to make on how best to proceed. Here I am interested in one particular dimension of the problem. How to select someone good to proofread an article for an academic outlet?<issue_comment>username_1: To proofread something, you need somebody who knows about the subject matter. They have to gain something too, doing the work just for "fun" doesn't cut it. So your best bet is a coauthor, a colleague who is willing to swap proofreads with you, someone in the research group (understanding what others are doing should be beneficial), even perhaps your advisor.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: <NAME>'s and username_1's comments are spot-on. Proofreading and copy editing are many a time considered the same thing, but they are not. If you want the content to be corrected or refined, copy editing will do the job. Proofreading is a light kind of edit which deals with spelling, punctuation, local grammar (subject-verb agreement, article usage,etc.) and typographical aspects. A copy editor, on the other hand, will check the global text issues (text organisation), pertinent vocabulary (general and domain specific), sentence construction and others. As username_1 says, someone who knows the subject matter should proofread/copy edit. I do not recommend proofreading your own work as it is likely that you miss your own errors or inconsistencies. The best of writers are surprised by what their editors catch.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/16
| 687
| 2,813
|
<issue_start>username_0: I am the author of a 12-page double-column manuscript submitted to *IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.* Here is the record of the updates within the journal online system, corresponding to the aforementioned manuscript:
1. Submission Finalization: 7th Aug. 2015
2. Under Review: 11th Aug. 2015
3. Awaiting EIC Decision: 16th Sep. 2015
The journal has declared that the authors might expect the result between 8 up to 10 weeks after the submission. But how is it possible to review a 12-page manuscript with a 6-page supplementary material just within one month?
With a full sense of anxiety, I might think that it would be a sinister sign for the early rejection of the manuscript.
Does anybody have any experience with this journal or similar transaction ones, with such very short review-to-result time interval, to evaluate my situation?<issue_comment>username_1: I cannot make any statement about this journal and this may depend somewhat on the field, but so far I never spent more than a day’s work on any review. The main problem why reviews take so long is not that the review itself actually takes that long, but that reviewers need to find time for the review given their numerous other duties.
Therefore it’s entirely possible that a referee reviews a paper within a day – maybe somewhat more, depending on the field – if they have time at hand. This needs not have to do anything with the review being sloppy or the paper being bad; it’s just a question of luck. I know of one example where a paper for Physical Review Letters (a high-level physics journal) went from submission to publication in something around ten days. Also, one of my papers once received a positive review within four days.
If the journal expects the review process to take eight to ten weeks, then a month sounds entirely plausible. It’s not even outstandingly short.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You'd have to ask the journal how they do it.
Think how long *you'd* take to review such a paper on a subject you know intimately. Note that "review" doesn't necessarily mean "read with utmost care, check each statement/proof/program carefully", it will lean more to "check if this seems to make overall sense, has the author shown knowledge of the techniques in use, does this look too simple or is it perhaps something well-known", i.e., is it a worthwhile step forward, plain nonsense, or just a rehash.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know that specific journal but, for instance, the *IEEE Transaction on Instrumentation and Measurements* ask the reviewers to complete their reviews in one month (reviewers can ask for a few weeks' extension). So, typically, you can expect the reviews to arrive within 4-6 weeks, even in case of long papers.
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/16
| 581
| 2,653
|
<issue_start>username_0: For humanities PhDs:
If you find that your research topic has changed such that you no longer are a good fit in your program, is it possible to re-apply and get accepted into the same program at other schools that would be a better fit? Can anyone speak to this experience?<issue_comment>username_1: If your current department is not complaining... stay where you are. Switching departments could set you back.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: When I served on a PhD admissions committee we saw a few candidates like this--people who were in their first or second years at highly regarded programs, but their research statements portrayed more alignment with the faculty in our program. I have two thoughts on this: 1) despite being worldwide, academia feels pretty small in that the professors at your institution might know or know a friend of the professors in the department you are thinking of applying to. Therefore, you should probably have their blessing before applying. It is not uncommon for faculty on admissions committees to reach out to colleagues at the school you are at to find out about you and your research interests. 2) you should probably address the reasons for your switch in a note to the admissions committee or in your personal statement that describes your evolving research interests because people on the admissions committee will likely have questions as to why you feel the need to switch. Admissions committees are trying to find good people to invest in and might be concerned about your ability to make a long-term commitment to the program if you are already switching out of another.
An alternative to switching programs--get a meeting with your POI to strike up a conversation about your latest project. They might be interested in working with you or have students that you could co-author with in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Another thought, might your current department or advisor be willing to allow an external examiner or reader to be on your committee?
Depending on how far away what you want to study is from what you can at your institution, they might be very amenable to helping you do your project within the department in conjunction with other resources.
I know, for instance, that Baylor's Philosophy Department has made provisions of this sort. And I know several other departments where a large part of a project has been guided and checked by an external advisor.
I've also seen changing programs. It can make you an exceptionally strong graduate student and candidate later, but it most definitely will slow your graduation.
Upvotes: 0
|
2015/09/17
| 8,626
| 34,819
|
<issue_start>username_0: I have been working in research in computer science for 3 months in the Czech Republic, and have recently changed fields to major in mathematics, also in the Czech Republic. I'm stuck with bunch of courses I didn't want to study at all.
In my complex number computing class, the lecturer knew I was new. He called me to the front of the class and asked me to solve a task. I'm not very experienced in this field and I was very nervous and made a mistake.
He started to humiliate me in front of all my colleagues. He told me that this field is "not for everybody" and that in math classes there are "only very clever people", apparently targeting the fact I came from a different field. I felt like an idiot standing there and listening to his abuse. The other classmates were laughing at me and I was just standing there and waiting for it to stop.
He then told me to complete the solution. I wanted to solve the task step-by-step to prevent doing any more silly mistakes, but he didn't let me. After I wrote one step (completely correct), the lecturer told me he wants me to do it faster, not in so many steps and made some more "funny" comments. Finally, I solved the task and made a little mistake in notation of result. He pointed it out very loudly, so everybody could hear it.
This experience destroyed the lesson for me completely. I couldn't pay attention for the rest of the class and I was ashamed to talk with anybody. Now I'm terribly afraid of this lecturer, but it's not possible "to change" him, he's the only one for this subject, which is compulsory. I haven't offended the lecturer in any way, I literally had no chance to do it, because I've never saw him before the lesson. I really don't want to abandon this field either. I can't change this branch or else I would lose the whole year.
So, what would you advise that I do to prevent this situation next time?
I'm trying my best to adapt in the new field, but there are a lot of things I'm missing, so it takes a lot of time to learn it and with the research duties it's not really easy, so "just get better" advise would be great, but not achievable in short amount of time.
**Update**
I got a satisfying conclusion. After the exam, I met with the rude professor. To my surprise he told me, that I've surprised him very much with my score from final test and that I was "fighting bravely".
So, he probably really wanted to see if a "non-math" person will be able to withstand the pressure and pass his course.<issue_comment>username_1: There is nothing you can really do to *prevent* this behaviour. You can just *report* it to the university.
There should be a committee dealing with teacher behaviour; things may vary depending on your country and university, so I cannot be more specific. If you have student representatives, contact them.
Describe the abusive behaviour with as many details as you can, refrain from putting your own personal judgement and emotions into the facts, and have a colleague student support you as a witness.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending on university policy, but I would ask to record the lecture for "notes". If he allows it, the recording alone is likely to change his behaviour, and if it doesn't you have proof of how he acts. If he refuses, ask kindly, and only once, ask why if he still refuses drop it. Then move onto other solutions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There is something a bit off about your description of events. You describe that your classmates were laughing *at you* as your instructor verbally abused you. I can't imagine that happening. If things were as mean spirited as you say, I would expect dead silence.
I am wondering if the lecturer was just trying to insert some lighthearted humor and had no malicious intent. Instead of reporting anything to the university, maybe it would be a good idea to politely tell your instructor that you were very embarrassed by the situation (privately, of course). It may be that he had no idea and will be apologetic.
Having said all this, I have to add that public speaking is an important skill. It is worthwhile to develop the confidence to defend your ideas to an audience, and to avoid taking comments too personally. Later in your post you refer to "funny" notes made by your instructor as well as a loud public correction at the end. Remember that everyone is learning in this class and the comments may have been for the benefit of the students who are making the same mistakes (and the last public outcry was probably because **a lot of them** are making that particular error).
Anyway, I'm very sorry you had a bad day. I hope the situation is as I described. If talking to your instructor doesn't go well, then perhaps you should consider reporting the behavior.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_4: Why are you letting this person get the best of you? You say:
>
> he started to humiliate me in front of all my colleagues
>
>
> I was feeling like an idiot standing there and listening to his abusive speech
>
>
> This experience destroyed the lesson for me completely.
>
>
> I was ashamed to talk with anybody.
>
>
>
These are pretty serious reactions, and I can only see them happening if you willingly participate and play his game. At the end of the day, he's just some guy talking about stuff at a blackboard. The title is "PhD", not "his majesty". If he thinks you are stupid, that's his opinion, and he has a right to it - and you have a right to dismiss his opinion as irrelevant.
* Not being good at math is not something to be ashamed of. Plenty of perfectly respectable, even great people are not good at it.
* Not being good at his particular narrow topic is nothing shameful. Nobody is born knowing everything, everybody starts somewhere.
* Not being intelligent (the fact that you were did not know something at the very beginning of the class doesn't even have to do anything with your intelligence, but nevermind) is not something to be ashamed of. The vast majority of people aren't very intelligent by most measures - so what? We don't go around mocking and shaming them, that would be ridiculous.
The way you've described them, his contentions have absolutely no basis. He asked some specialized trivia that you weren't taught, and then tried to act horrified that you didn't know it. It's a ridiculous thing to do, so why'd you take him seriously? Your response should have been, "so what?". "Yeah, I don't know this. *So what?*" "Yeah, I can't solve this problem easily. *So what?*"
It would be one thing if he gave you some homework, and you brazenly refused to put any effort into it, and then came to class complaining you can't solve the problem that the homework was meant to teach you how to solve. But this is just ridiculous. If the student is fulfilling all the duties they've been given, and still failing, the instructor is the one who should feel ashamed.
>
> He told me that this field is "not for everybody" and that in math classes there are "only very clever people"
>
>
>
Well, if he thinks the class is not for you, he should kick you out of the class (as in, officially, through the school's system). He's not doing it, is he? That's because he's full of hot air. The course is literally "for everybody", evidenced by the fact that the school system as supervised by the president of the school has allowed everybody (including you) to register for the course. That's really all there is to it, if he doesn't like it, he can go petition his dean to require a mandatory IQ test to take his course, or whatever it is he wants.
>
> So, what would you advise me to do to prevent this situation next time?
>
>
>
Well, if you really want to take the class (maybe you think the material is worth learning in spite of him, or you are required to by the school administration), I think you have the following options:
* Next time he tries to humiliate you, refuse to be humiliated and act as if you don't even see what's wrong. He will be forced to explain what's so worthy of humiliation, and when he explicitly says it, it will be plain to see how ridiculous and incorrect he is. It won't work, and hopefully he'll stop doing it. Beware, though, as he will probably take this as you challenging his authority, and may try to shout at you or eject you from the class - he *doesn't actually have* that authority, so if you stick to your guns and refuse to comply, he should eventually back off, but it may be difficult not to be suckered into complying if you can't handle people shouting you down.
* Stop going to lectures, and only show up to exams. Independently study the material yourself. In my experience, the vast majority of courses these days are better learned from the textbook anyway, and it sounds like this guy is awful and wouldn't teach you much. The danger is if he somehow builds in required attendance (whether by actually taking attendance or doing daily quizzes or something), or if the course doesn't have a textbook you can study. In that case, you're out of luck.
* Ask to speak with him privately. Firmly and clearly tell him that you disagree with his behavior, you don't appreciate it, and you won't allow it. Don't make excuses like you have in this question (eg. "I'm not from this field so it's hard for me") because you have nothing to excuse, and the excuses would legitimize his attitude. If he tries to take a childish tone with you (eg. by mocking) refuse to participate and speak like an adult. It takes a lot for someone to just say, "fine, I admit I'm being petty and childish, but you know what, I'm not ashamed, and I'm gonna do it anyway!" Even Nixon [couldn't do it](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost/Nixon_%28film%29).
It really comes down to one of two things: Either you force him to admit he is treating you unfairly, at which point he should give up (assuming he is not truly malicious, which most academics are not), or make yourself too difficult to bully by fighting back (in which case it doesn't matter if he is malicious).
You also have the option of going through official channels, but I'm skeptical that for your situation it's likely to precipitate an immediate and perceptible improvement (the old joke about a garbage bin labeled "student complaints box"...). If bureaucracies worked, people wouldn't hate them.
But really, if you want to "prevent this situation next time" - the situation is being in a class with a bad instructor. You don't want it? Don't take classes with bad instructors. It's easier than trying to "fix" the instructor, and eventually questions will be asked about why this one instructor has so much trouble getting people to take his course (maybe even by the instructor himself).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: ### Edit (July 2023):
I just read your question again, a few years later, because someone downvoted my answer ... and now I want to rewrite the whole thing. Instead, I'm going to keep the original as a quote, and put my updated view here.
It's one thing to make one remark that the lecturer might think is witty (but is also quite inappropriate), but it's something else entirely to keep at it, while watching the reaction of the recipient. Completely independent of that, it's also not very smart to keep a student in front of the class after seeing that the student is not able to solve the task in the way they're expected to. Teaching is about learning what you don't yet know, not about filtering out the people who haven't mastered everything yet.
It's also remarkable how easily people may rationalize or even defend such behaviour, particularly if it's something they themselves have to deal with. (...)
To everyone reading this: Please don't be like that. Don't be someone who puts people in such situations, and don't defend the abuse.
To everyone witnessing a scene like this: That's an object lesson in understanding that expertise in one topic does not make someone a better human (actually, it seems to make some people into self-important bullies). The fact that the lecturer was much nicer to the OP afterwards does not make their behaviour any better. If you're only nice to people who meet/exceed your expectations, you're not a nice person.
To everyone subjected to such treatment: Whatever your reaction in the moment, we all react as we do. It's an attack, and that can quickly shut down important parts of your brain. So, the best that most people can muster in the moment is to shut up, maybe even stop listening entirely for a few seconds, let the moment pass and then consider what to do next.
If you *do* manage to hang on to your wits: Try to leave the "victim" spot that the lecturer assigned you to.
There are some ways to do that, but they're hard to get right spontaneously. Some of those are: Asking an unexpected (ideally well-informed) question back (you're the student, and it's their job to explain!), making a return joke ("... I guess lecturing is also not for everyone, either". Haha indeed!), or maybe just stating that that was enough fun for today and sitting back down -- really, anything that demonstrates you're not just going to stand there and receive whatever they decide to hand you. This sort of thing demonstrates confidence, and most potential abusers will naturally stop at that point (or explode with rage, at which point you can sit back and enjoy the show).
A less good alternative is to directly fight back and accuse the person. That escalates the situation further, and you might not want that with a lecturer you still need to live with for half a year or more. It also carries the risk of looking like you're trying to cover incompetence with aggression -- particularly if you lose your temper halfway through your response. However: In some situations punching back is still better than taking a beating.
What to do afterwards?
I think the other answers already cover this to a large extent. Depending on how you feel about the incident, it's often good to talk to someone that you trust and/or who was there, to assure yourself that you're not making stuff up, and to find out what the procedures are for complaints about teaching staff. And then you can form an opinion on whether to file a complaint, confront the person directly, indirectly (i.e. by talking to others in the offender's environment or through your own behaviour), or to let it slide.
Letting things slide is often the "easiest" way (possibly hard on yourself but it avoids having to get up and confront anyone), but it's also the way that allows the offender to rationalize that their behaviour was totally fine because nobody complained. I hate to think that there are a lot of abusive people who continue exactly because most of the recipients of their abuse find it easiest to walk away, grin and bear it, or otherwise not force the issue. Some places have anonymous complaint procedures where the offender is not told who is complaining, in order to make that path easier, but there are of course some limitations to those... so it's not a very straightforward decision.
>
> If, as you say, everyone was laughing, then I don't think he meant to be mean-spirited. Every time I saw someone be humiliated for serious mistakes, there was indeed dead silence, and everyone felt bad for the victim (although mostly no-one says a word...). If people are laughing, it means (in my own sphere!) that the lecturer made a joke.
>
>
>
8(!) years later: That's rubbish. One "joke" may be a clumsy accident, but keeping at it as you describe is not. The guy had a an attitude problem.
>
> Now, does that mean you just got it wrong? No!
> Not at all.
>
>
>
>
> I know a quite a few people (especially in academia) who are just socially inept enough to think something was a good joke when they actually just really hurt somebody.
>
>
>
>
> I can imagine the guy thought he was just poking you a bit. And maybe he has a somewhat-secret, somewhat-ironic dislike of non-mathematicians (who doesn't like to poke fun at "the others"?). All in good humour, of course... (he thinks).
>
>
>
I'd guess he probably really did not think he was doing anything wrong (obviously because *nobody* does something wrong on purpose), but there was a good deal of "that stupid student must be taught a lesson" in there, and that attitude can just fuck right off. Pointing out a deficiency *can* be useful, but embarrassing people is not. The correct behaviour in such a situation (student is at the board, trying to solve a task) is to *not* call students to the front unless they indicate that they can do it and to have a backup plan that avoids embarrassment if they fail.
Generally, if a student doesn't get it, that's the lecturer's fault for not having explained it in a way that works for the student.
>
> In case that wasn't clear: I think it's his fault for not realizing what he did, not yours for feeling humiliated. Last time I asked students a question during a lecture, most of them had no idea, and I think this is the hard reality most lecturers live with. So if you were able to answer correctly, the guy has nothing on you, even if it took you a while.
>
>
>
>
> What you should do? I think you should talk to some of the other students to get their view. Maybe you were easily humiliated because you're more used to success than others? Maybe they thought it was in good spirits (though maybe in bad taste)? Ask them how difficult they thought the problem actually was. Or what they thought the lecturer actually meant to say. What they say will not be "the objective truth", but maybe it'll help you understand better what the episode meant. If it turns out that actually, yes, he thought you were under-performing and wanted to make fun of you for it, by all means go ahead and report it (as others have suggested). But I'd suggest that before you do that, you should not just collect evidence from other witnesses but also try to get more of a perspective of what was going on, because that will help you understand it in your own mind -- which you have to do anyway.
>
>
>
Ugh. I mean: by all means go and get more perspective, and of course understanding the other is valuable -- but bear in mind that "understanding" is not the same as "excusing". It's more a tool to find a lever that you can pull. Something that gives you an idea on how to either push back or improve the situation. It's also really useful to get out of the "offender <--> victim" relation because it can give you confidence, agency, and an element of control that the offender may not have. The better you understand where the other's behaviour is coming from, the easier it becomes to stand your ground, talk back, or otherwise improve matters for yourself and hopefully others.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: A long prelude to my actual answer:
You can see from several of the answers here that you'll have an uphill battle even getting folks to acknowledge the validity of your observations about the situation. This is where bad culture enables this kind of abuse: it doesn't even acknowledge the reality of it.
So, for starters, I will say that I take your observations and descriptions of the event at face value. His actions as you describe them certainly have an overt or pronounced quality to them, so that there really can't be a valid question that what he did was egregiously harmful. Likewise, the students who had mirth at your humiliation were egregiously heartless.
It's possible the man isn't consciously aware just how uselessly destructive his behavior is, but whether he is aware or not, I second one of the comments that his behavior is absolutely not acceptable. I'm talking about objective truth here; I frankly don't care much for casting things in a frame of reference of culture. If culture tolerates this kind of thing, culture itself is objectively bad.
Which leads to my answer: find literature about how to effectively handle abusive behaviors and rotten folks. Learn to be prepared for every kind of awful verbal and emotional muck which people might hurl at you.
S<NAME>'s books are a great start. "The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense" is an excellent starter. Mrs. Elgin stated in that book that academia is too often home to very advanced verbal (and I would say emotional) abuse.
And no, I'm not an expert at handling verbal abuse.
One other thing I've learned is that agreeing with unfair accusations is the best way to put the lie to them. Even when the accusations are ludicrous, agreeing with them shows that you care and have an interest in improving yourself, which makes the whole accusatory nature of the situation moot. It *demonstrates* the futility of nasty accusations where someone clearly gives their best, to the point of acknowledging their shortcomings (or "shortcomings" where the accusations are false). It can also "kill them with kindness," because as a gracious response, it sharply contrasts with the most ungracious behavior of the accuser, who is then compelled to either keep up their cruel game willfully, openly and knowingly (in openly exposed shamelessness), or drop it.
Lastly, I second the suggestion that if you wish to, reporting his abusiveness to his bosses is appropriate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I faced a similar situation in the [XXXXXXX programming language] community. Being a novice I used to make it a point to only answer questions of other novice level people. However one moderator guy kept correcting me (more like nit-picking) and that made me feel like this guy was trying to tell me not to try and answer any questions until I became an expert.
It set me back by a whole year on the forum, as I had to build my startup also and didn't have the interest to go and be an active part of the community. Finally I decided to act on my problem and spoke to the moderator group that I was being attacked by this guy. Nothing much happened, but the net effect of this is that I was able to communicate my feelings and sensitivities to the community.
The problem you are facing is not restricted to your Mathematics teacher alone. There is a lot of arrogance caused by intellectualism today. Those who are in a position of power and influence easily forget that they were novices too.
It is very important that you don't allow that to change your basic person.
And that takes time. For me its taken one whole year.
I can even share one more example from my engineering days, there was this lecturer who used to take COBOL. He had a habit of acting very serious and senior, to cover up for his total lack of knowledge and experience in the subject matter. We were asked to write programs in a notebook and if we get even one period (`.`) wrong, he would NOT ALLOW US TO USE THE COMPUTER. He particularly singled me out for correction, because I was very good at English and communication, which I feel threatened him. Most lecturers in my engineering college were like this person, if you compare their experience and teaching ability. As a result I did not become an expert at COBOL, as I was miffed with the subject and the teacher. I am not suggesting that I did the right thing, but I was a vulnerable, impressionable young kid in a rural engineering college. I completely screwed up in engineering, and from being a top grade student, I just ended up with a first class and absolutely no technical knowledge whatsoever. It then took me two years to start learning JAVA, Swing and EJB from scratch and get a plum job.
The moral of my story is - never give up. RESPECT YOUR SENSITIVITIES AND YOUR LIMITATIONS. They are as much a part of you as your STRENGTHS.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: I'm very sorry to hear about your ordeal with this lecturer. Unfortunately there are lots of lecturers out there who are allowed to do this and get away with it. This is not a professional behaviour and certainly this would not be tolerated in other professions-you can't humiliate your customers/clients and get away with it or humiliate your patients if you're a medical doctor. I think the problem is that some academics don't see themselves as professionals and this reflects on the way they treat their students.
On the brighter side, I think you have to be careful how you react to this situation. You have to try to be in control and try to make friends with other students in class. The fact that you're new to the course means you have to give yourself a good chance and if anything prove that lecturer wrong. Of course, you can always report to the authorities if you feel this would help but sincerely, this may not change him and don't forget he is the one grading you for that course. I hope you resolve this and come out successful in your course.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: This is an excellent lesson for a student. There are a host of people, especially in senior positions, who will bully, ridicule, belittle, or otherwise be obnoxious to you throughout your life. Einstein, Tesla, Hertz, and a host of others have stories of school troubles.
You get to decide how you want to deal with these people. You can become a victim, and waste your time and energy trying to correct them, get revenge on them, change them, etc. why?
Pursue your life goals and your passions. Ignore them, work around them. Let them become speed bumps instead of real obstacles. If you simply marginalize them and carry on with your life, you'll be far better off. Then, when you are a successful and happy adult, you can look back and laugh about the poor mean fools who tried to sabotage you to make themselves feel better about their own inadequacies.
Any teacher who ridicules students isn't a real teacher. They're just weak minded bullies who are bad at their job. The last thing you want to do is allow such fools to drag you into their ridiculous game.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I have witnessed something similar before in the Czech Republic. It is an exception, but it can happen.
Unfortunately, this behaviour is not taken seriously enough in our country. Even if you report it, you may not achieve anything and more people can turn against you. It would be better to find out if something similar was reported before at your faculty and what happened afterward.
If you fear the teacher can revenge if you report it, then at least note it in the student survey. If he is a TA and there are other parallel groups running, you can ask to change the group. That is probably not possible if he is the main lecturer of the subject.
The peers which are worth caring about probably feel sympathetic to you anyway. And they know who is behaving wrong.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: I (unluckily) experienced a very similar situation to yours. I will first describe my own experience, and then my advices to you.
My story
--------
I had a teacher who fancied bullying every students, particularly when they were at the blackboard. Every single mistake was spotted and laughed at, with lots of ad hominem attacks (you did a mistake ? => you are less worthy than a scum ; your writing is not that pretty? Just like your face! ; your answer is correct? Yes but you're wrong because you didn't write it fast enough! ; there's a mistake in the lecture? No, it's just you being too dumb to understand that this mistake is insignificant, even if it's a basic theorem of the field and the mistake change every subsequent results). The thing is that he forced randomly picked students to go the blackboard, so you just had to wait your turn. I spotted his behavior since the first lecture, and I was ashamed that almost every other students were also mocking the student at the blackboard, not realizing that their turn would come. This was a very sad scene, seeing each week a student at the blackboard being bullied and clearly suffering from the situation, while at the previous (and the next!) the same student was laughing with everyone else.
After one lecture where our teacher corrected (with "funny" remarks aloud) group homeworks, I took the opportunity to reply and speak for our group. Even if my collegues agreed with me about the teacher's wrongful behavior, they instantly feared and backed off when the teacher's got upset by me replying. The tipping point was when he started to menace me and our group to make me fail this course, without even evaluating the exam (which is totally illegal in my country).
I will now pass the details, but I tried to reach for the supervisor of the course, which allowed me an interview, but it in fact turned out to be a punitive interrogation for me, and I was (illegally) sanctioned to exclusion from the rest of the lectures. I then appealed to the department director, which (explicitly) tried to shut the case off. In the end, I was still excluded from the last weeks of the course, but we had another examinator for this course's exam to avoid bias in the evaluation, so I had a fair evaluation and I could graduate.
---
My advices
----------
Now on to my advices: **you cannot do, at your level, anything to prevent the bullying from this person**, for several reasons:
1. **it brings him pleasure**, since he clearly has some type of [narcissistic pervert personality](http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/pervers-narcissique.2291977/). Thus, you can become however better you want, even better than him, he would still bully you (and probably more if you threaten his ego by being better).
2. **he has an authority over you**, and a legitimate position. This is a point that currently all other answers are missing. You cannot just reply or defend yourself directly, because he has the authority to shut you up, and even to make you fail the course. He is also probably a respected professor in his university, so even if you go to the supervisors or deans, they will probably side with the professor (it's not a good thing for the university if a professor gets blamed for wrongful behavior, they obviously prefer to blame the student or shut the case off).
3. the university's staff, and even your co-students, **will probably deny everything and not support you**: the staff because of conflicting interests as I explained in point 2, the students because of fear of retaliations and the [just world fallacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis) (the belief that if something bad happens to you, then you necessarily provoked it. This is clearly shown in some other answers here...).
So, what should you do?
First, **you should focus on your goal: graduating**. So, if you can change your course and take another in-place of this one (even if it's a course of lesser interest for you), you should try that, because you will of course not be able to attain your potential in such a setup, and you will probably fail if in addition the professor fancies bullying you in particular (ie, if you're his whipping boy).
If that's not possible, and since he's the only professor for this course, then you have two choices:
* **stay low and just try to follow the course** the best you can. If you can study alone then try that, if you can't because the material in class cannot be found or for whatever reason, try your best to not be affected. I know, that's very hard and impossible to totally be unaffected, but remember that your goal is to graduate. Once you graduate, you're free to never meet this awful person again in your whole life. (Note that this strategy can fail, particularly if you're already his whipping boy, because ignoring his attacks may infuriate his ego and he will bully you even more.)
* **report and request action from the supervisors/deans/directors of your university.** In that case, **you should first try to collect objective information**, because everything will be denied. Written emails, remarks on your homeworks, or even a hidden **voice recorder** to record the bullying when it's taking place. Usually, it's perfectly fine to record a lecture even without asking the teacher, since the lecture is public (ie, you're not talking about your or his private life). However, be sure to not post or share or propagate this audio record to anyone nor anywhere on Internet, because in some countries this can be assimilated to diffamation and punished by law. However, having this kind of proof will allow you to defuse any denying in case things go wrong in your requests (ie, the university trying to blame you and cover the professor) just by citing the transcripts. In my case, this allowed me to get the replacement of my professor for the examination, and thus my graduation. If there's a students association, you can also try to ask them for help and to accompagny you to interviews to defend you (they were a bit useful for me but not that much, they've got a lot to do with bigger matters). Anyway, if you want to choose this path, be aware that this will be even harder on you (the burden of proof will be on you, and you will probably be interrogated like you were the abuser, instead of the victim), and it is also highly costly in time. Remember that your goal is foremost to graduate, not to make the world just and fair.
Lastly, I would like to say that I am deeply sorry for you, [scholar humiliation](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Ffr.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FHumiliation_scolaire&edit-text=&act=url) can deeply affect your trust in academia and thus your whole subsequent career, so I wish you to be able to overcome that bad period and I wish you to have a great career.
---
POST-OP UPDATE
--------------
Congratulations OP for passing. Unfortunately this does not make your "rude" professor’s behavior OK, but at least you won’t have to meet him again.
What you wrote, especially:
>
> I got even my satisfaction in the end - after the exam I met with the rude professor. To my surprise he told me, that I've surprised him very much with my score from final test and that I was "fighting bravely".
>
>
>
Seems to confirm what I suggested: your professor is indeed engaging in bullying rooted in "nobility" of academic field culture, as the sociologist <NAME> identified. Unfortunately, you won’t be the only one to suffer from it: you survived it, other students’ careers may/will not.
But that’s not your problem, but this IS a systemic problem in academia that will have to be tackled eventually by universities administrations.
(For <NAME> reference, see: <NAME>, « L'humiliation des élèves dans l'institution scolaire : contribution à une sociologie des relations maître-élèves », Revue Française de Pédagogie, no 139, avril-mai-juin 2002, p. 31-51.)
Upvotes: 3
|
2015/09/17
| 3,327
| 14,367
|
<issue_start>username_0: Recently I ran across an international postdoctoral opportunity, which seems quite interesting to me. While I would prefer to stay in academia in United States, there are various factors that enable me to consider that opportunity, including potential for work on an interesting and important topic as well as an opportunity to immerse myself in somewhat different cultural, language and, perhaps, academic environment (thanks to my relative freedom from family obligations at the present time).
The problem is that the opportunity is at one of the universities in France, which creates several issues (beyond the obvious one of being accepted). The issues (and corresponding questions) are somewhat specific to my situation, but, at the same time, likely rather common to many people, who are originally from non-Francophone countries. Specifically, I'm concerned about the following.
* How feasible is to consider such an opportunity from the **foreign language** perspective? I am talking about the fact that I practically do not speak French (discounting a very limited number of popular words and phrases)? While English language is considered a *de facto* universal language of science, I expect this aspect of academic environment to vary significantly from country to country (probably much less from university to university, even in major cities).
* Combining that assumption with my, perhaps, incorrect knowledge that English is not as popular second language in France as in some other European countries, such as Sweden, this aspect brings an additional potential *challenge* of **everyday living** in a *foreign language environment*. I am aware of the fascinating approach of learning languages by immersing yourself in different cultural/language environment, but I'm not sure that it is such a good idea under the circumstances, considering that a postdoc position is demanding enough already. Thus, I am curious about the following question: is that a real challenge and to what extent?
* How feasible is to consider such opportunity from the perspective of me being a US citizen without French work visa or similar documents in hand. I realize that, typically, AFAIK, selected international candidates' visa documents are processed by hosting universities. However, the question is this: how significantly the potential burden [financially and time-wise] of **visa processing** and, perhaps, **relocation** negatively impact hiring committees' decisions and, thus, reduce international postdoctoral candidates' chances to be offered a position of interest? I am interested in answers to this question from both general and local (France) perspective.<issue_comment>username_1: Let me answer from a French academic perspective.
Concerning the language inside academia: English is everywhere, and as long as you do not have teaching duties, you should be (mostly) fine; you would have to cope with terrible pronunciation (I had a funny talk with an American, where I admitted putting 'h's in front of many words that don't have them, and he add to tell me that 'h' is precisely said without an 'h' in front) and people talking in French at lunch, probably not much worse. Teaching duty would be an almost sure no-go, as very few courses are taught in English.
Concerning language outside academia: the problem is not so much that English is an unpopular first foreign language, it is that all foreign languages are pretty badly mastered by almost everyone in this country. We are one of the very few countries that would dare appoint a minister of foreign affairs not talking any foreign language, so I guess there is some cultural issue at work. There are English-talking people in quite a number of places (train stations, etc.) nowadays, easing some things up. Basically, you should struggle a bit in everyday life, but it should still be doable.
Concerning the visa issue: I do not think it would harm your chances to get the job, but it will definitely cost you quite some time. France paperwork can be daunting, and I do not think that universities help that much. I mean, ultimately you should get the political help needed for your visa to receive permission, but I am not so sure you would get much help with the paperwork. The bright side is that the visa policy is probably not too harsh to US citizen; I know a mathematician from a BRIC country who, even if there are many very good French math departments, prefers spending a large tuition from his grants to send his masters students studying one year in England, rather than spend 400€ at a French university but have to cope with the whole French visa procedure.
My conclusion is that if the job is interesting, you should apply. Despite all I said, we have a lot of international postdocs in labs (including a fair amount from outside UE), and they seem to survive these inconveniences.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I can't speak to France, and Benoit has done a good job there. However, as a US citizen I did my post-doc in the Netherlands in the early 1990s (more years ago that I can believe).
1. All science was done in English (planning, discussion, papers). All socialization (coffee hour, outside of work) was done in Dutch. So, I learned Dutch - it only seemed proper since I was the outsider. Consider it a bonus of the position to be able to learn another language. I would suggest finding a place to take real language courses. I did an intensive 2-week intro course, than several evening courses. Your fluency in English will be an asset, and you will get to see more of the institutes work through reading drafts. Yes, you have your own work, but it is a great way to get to know everyone.
2. Outside of work, learn and use French. My experience there (I also learned French, partly in Paris, but earlier in my life) is that they appreciate people trying to use French. The Dutch, who were extremely good with languages, often preferred to speak English with me as practice for them, which meant I didn't get to practice my Dutch so much. As you mention, when else will you be able to do this?
3. Visa - this will likely be very dependent on the institute. Where I did my post-doc, they routinely had visitors from all over the place, and had a standing arrangement with the 'foreign police' office responsible for work permits. So, I had appointments made for me that bypassed the long lines to go get my residence/work permit entered in my passport. You mileage may vary. Since foreign scientists and post-docs are pretty normal in the EU, it is unlikely to be a huge uncertainty that you would get the required permits, but your paperwork effort might be higher than mine was.
4. Life. I went into it expecting things to be different. Big things, like the language. What catches you by surprise is all the little things that are just done differently in France, in Europe, just elsewhere. Roll with it, laugh about it, enjoy it. Also, be sure to play tourist on occasion. After the first 6 months (where I traveled around each weekend to some town or other) I settled down into a more 'normal' life with friends and things to do on weekends. In retrospect, I should have done more touring around.
If it is a good group and you think the work would be interesting and productive, really, what do you have to lose?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am a native English speaker from a non-EU country working as a postdoc in the United Kingdom, so I can't address the language difficulties. As a general comment though, a greater cultural difference would make the job more attractive to me, though I would not be able to pursue it because my partner would be unable to work.
In terms of the visa issues and attractiveness of you as a candidate, universities typically expect and want international researchers and are unlikely to hold it against you. They have well established systems to negotiate the visa requirements and often have relocation allowances to assist with costs. Some also prioritise staff accommodation for international visitors, but this is less common and finding out how to find a place to live can be tricky. But there will probably be a postdoc group you could email, or perhaps international student office that could help with some of the day to day practicalities.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I recently did exactly what you were describing. Spent two years in Paris as a postdoc.
1) Not speaking French will be an issue because of collaboration. Some will be very open to working with you, but many others will not. Do not be surprised when group meetings are conducted in French. The more international the lab, the better the experience will likely be. Most of my collaborators and friends ended up coming from other countries outside of France; though they all also spoke French.
2) In a major city like Paris, day to day living is not really an issue. Getting around the city and running basic errands are really not that difficult.
3) Getting the work visa is a non-issue. The host organization will handle this and provide you with the paperwork (though probably not promptly). At some point you will have to visit a French Embassy in the US to file the paperwork in person. You will likely get something called a Scientific Visa which is very permissive in what it allows.
4) Here is the bad news. Bureaucracy is an absolute nightmare in France. If you want to navigate it, you will either have to speak very good French or have a friend willing to help you. This help will require multiple full day commitments, so it is a lot to ask. Once you arrive, you are supposed to apply for a resident permit and are technically not allowed to leave the country until it arrives. Mine took over a year and I know people who have gone 2+ years without receiving one. In the meantime you get a paper stating you are waiting on this permit. It expires every 3 months, so you have to present yourself in person to renew it (actually a renewal usually takes two visits). I never received proof of health insurance. That means I could receive healthcare, but I had to pay full price. From the people I know, this is a very common situation. They will still deduct money from your paycheck every month though.
5) Obtaining an apartment and bank account in France are quite difficult too. It is sort of a Catch-22 situation. Before arriving, I was put in touch with Science Accueil. They help setup foreign scientists with apartments, bank accounts, and things like that. Hopefully you will also have access to something like that.
Living in France as a non-EU citizen is very difficult. I don't regret doing it, but I don't think I would do it again. There are positives though. Your situation may be different, but I received 9 weeks of vacation per year (including holidays). It is easy to travel throughout Europe and that experience is amazing.
Good Luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Some institutes in France function entirely in English. The best way to find out the French/English proportions is to communicate with someone working in that particular place. Ask the department to put you in touch with, perhaps, a fellow foreigner in the department. If none, try a different but related department.
My memories of paperwork for living in France are that I had to apply for the visa in the French embassy by filling out eight copies of my application, *by hand*. (I suppose that has changed by now!) That was the worst part. Standing in line at the Préfecture wasn't too bad -- but I wasn't living in Paris.
You say you are a language enthusiast -- is there some reason why you feel daunted about French in particular?
The main thing to consider, in my opinion, is **whether this particular placement is likely to strengthen, substantially, your publication list.** Keep yourself focused on that question as you are considering your options.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Just for the record, I'd like to address some of the formal issues that were brought up by other answers.
* Catch-22 (it looks like you need an address for almost everything, including finding a place to live). Actually, pretty much in everywhere you can rent an apartment for 1-3 months with little to no paperwork: in an apartment hotel, in a student house, via airbnb, etc. This gives you an address that allows to sort out the arrival formalities (bank account, immigration paperwork, etc).
* Visa and residence permit. From my experience, nowadays as a researcher, you get a 1-year visa in the passport that also acts as a residence permit, after you register with some agency called OFII. After the first year, you get a residence permit card which you then renew every year. For me, the initial registration and renewal would take about 5-6 weeks, and I did not have any travel plans overlap with renewal. But this may depend on where in France you are, and also procedures change with time. While waiting for renewal, you get a temporary document called "Récépissé de ...", which supposedly allows you to travel, but this is risky, because border control officers in other Schengen countries may not consider it a valid document.
* Health insurance. In theory, you are going to almost immediately get a temporary social security number (numéro de sécurité sociale), which should make you eligible to be partially refunded for your medical visits. Later, you get a permanent number and a "Carte Vitale". In practice, insurance agencies (for a non-EU researcher, that will be MGEN I think) may "forget" about the latter two stages, so you'd have to at some point visit their office and remind them to do their job.
* Housing. There's lots of pessimism on the Internet regarding finding a place to live in France. From what I see, at least outside Paris, postdoc salary is enough to find without any problems an apartment for a single person or for a couple without kids. As long as your rent is about 1/3 of your net salary, you're fine. Above that, owners become suspicious, start demanding guarantors, and it does not seem a normal practice that, say, your boss becomes your guarantor.
Overall, my experience is that French bureaucracy is not particularly bad. The rules are not meant to kick you out of the country asap or make your life unreasonably difficult.
Upvotes: 2
|
2015/09/17
| 2,418
| 10,681
|
<issue_start>username_0: In his answer of [Details an applicant should include/exclude in an introductory letter to a prospective grad school adviser?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/254/14341), aeismail says
>
> If the program in question is in the US, for instance, you should probably *never* contact the professor directly until after you've been admitted into the program in question. Since admissions decisions are handled centrally, it's just a waste of time.
>
>
>
Now I'm surprised with this, and I think I'm not the only one. For many times, not only in this site, but also in real-life examples in my university, I have seen that my friends get accepted through contacting professors beforehand, and those professors are helpful and willing to get you through the adcom. Recall it back, they don't go to US, but I don't think US should be an exception.
Why is it an exception? Why do the "admissions decisions are handled centrally", unlike other universities in the world, where the weight of the professors is heavier? Isn't that sorting the applications by score not good as checking their ability directly through interview? And who is the most suitable interviewer, if not the one who will advise you in the future?<issue_comment>username_1: Admission based on the faculty members' propensity is totally on-board in Canada, East Asia and the Europe (especially in the Scandinavia)... Actually, That's due to a variety of reasons; First of all, the professor would gradually guarantee the maximum coherency between his research interests with the applicant's background and his/her researching atmosphere. Furthermore, the funding would considerably be taken into account based on the industrial projects, has which been acquired by the faculty members. So, they are supposed to be noticeably unrestricted to choose the best one for their own projects.
But in US, a multitude of the funding resources are still stemmed from either government or university-driven fellowships. One might contend that the direct influence of the faculty members' to select the admitted applicants would lead to the abuse, in such that they could admit the students, are who not the best among the other applicants within the selection pool. Hence, it is not surprising that the university will sustain its impact on the admissions, until it basically does provide the financial aids to the students.
On the other hand, the number of the applicants, applying into some American universities is often very noticeable; so, an efficient merit-based selection strategy could be realizable just with consideration of such central system of admission. Within recent years, the aforementioned procedure has been changed, gently, and the faculty members' feedback sounds to be effective in selection of the successful applicants in US. However, the existence of the universities, in which the selection is solely according to the faculty members' signal, is undeniable. But In my estimation, exact matching of the US system with the former approach is not, considerably, expected.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is sometimes good to talk to professors if you have something specific and credible to say. If you've written research papers related to individual professors' research interests, by all means write and share them. If your undergraduate advisor thinks you should write your Ph.D. under Professor X, then it's usually a good idea for them to contact Professor X.
It's also usually fine to write a brief message to individual faculty members expressing your interest in the program and the hopes that you will be admitted, *provided you do not ask them for any serious commitment.* As a professor, I am happy to briefly write back to applicants and wish them well.
What I am not willing to do is promise them help with the application process when I don't know how strong their record is. I trust our admissions committee; if an interested student should clearly be admitted, then generally they will be.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Let me answer this question from the perspective of our school. If a school does things differently the answer you're quoting might be very appropriate, but not in our case.
Our admission decisions are made by our department, and essentially everyone is on the admissions committee - we share the load of evaluating applications. So, there could be great benefit of talking to a professor ahead of time. If one faculty member strongly desires a particular candidate, that student will generally get admitted, assuming they meet our qualifications. (Note that, as a small school, we have enough capacity to take more students than we do because we don't get tons of qualified applications. Also, we almost always have TA funding available for qualified students. But this really varies from one university to another.)
So, this establishes that, at some schools, talking to potential advisors ahead of time can be very valuable. The interest of working with a particular advisor can also (and should) go into the personal statement. I read so many personal statements that you can tell are completely generic, with different school names copy and pasted in. So, when someone says something specific about my research area, I take notice, and I think other faculty do too.
The real issue is that I get so many requests from random students to look at their CV. Many of them have very little connection to my work and are probably mass-emailing professors. This should be avoided.
@username_2' answer has the right idea here. A few months ago a student contacted me with a list of publications and a precise statement of interest about my work. We exchanged a few e-mails and I looked at his work. Another student tracked me down after a talk at a conference and talked to me in more detail about the work. These were both appropriate ways to contact me that may benefit the students in the future.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: There are at least two reasons to contact a professor prior to admission. The first reason is to try to increase your chances of being admitted. (This seems to be what the quote in the question is talking about.) This may or may not be a "waste of time" depending on the admissions process in that particular department in that particular school and with that particular professor, so it's very hard to make a blanket statement. However, if you are going contact a professor like this, make sure to do so in a professional manner and be careful not to ask for too much. As the saying goes, "you never get a second chance to make a first impression". If you make a bad impression, you may be sabotaging your chances of being admitted.
The second reason to contact a professor prior to admission is to gather information. For example, is this professor even taking new advisees? If this is the only person at that school that you are interested in working with and they are not taking new students, then maybe you don't even want to apply. Even if the professor is not directly involved in admissions decisions, this can still be a good reason for early contact. But again, do so in a professional manner and avoid making a bad impression.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The answer quoted in your question may be specific to computer science. I cannot speak for that field. In the US in other fields, however -- particularly lab-based sciences -- contacting your potential advisor in advance is nearly essential. Admissions decisions are strongly influenced by the individual faculty who will be advising the admitted students, and if no faculty member advocates for an applicant that applicant almost certainly will not be admitted to the program.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The advice you quote does not apply to all programs. My experience is in regards to PhD psychology programs, particularly in the clinical or developmental area. In the programs I have been familiar with, while the decision is at least nominally at the area level, generally "spots" have been allocated to specific professors (the department or area has allocated them funding to take a new grad student), *or* they have extramural (or other) funding to take on a grad student--so every year, there are specific labs/professors who are taking on student(s). Thus while the area/department as a whole participates in the decision, the professor who is taking on student(s) is probably going to be the most important voice in the decision.
If you submit your application without making contact with the professor to ensure that 1) they are taking students and 2) think your interests/background could potentially be a match, some professors may take it as a sign that you have not adequately done your homework. Conversely, making contact before submitting your application (at least in the programs I'm familiar with) can show your potential advisor that you are prepared, thoughtful, and proactive--provided that how you reach out is appropriate.
Please attend to username_3's advice--don't spam-contact a bunch of faculty. Do your research and make it clear in your contact WHY you hope to work with that individual specifically (e.g. they specialize in the use of a particular research method or technology you would like to learn; they focus on X topic, etc.). Definitely read some of their work before making contact, and write an email that is concise, respectful, and specific.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I am a computer science professor and I agree that this advice is not entirely correct.
It's true that you should *never* spam a whole bunch of professors at random asking them to look at your CV / take you on as a student. At best this is a waste of time, at worst the professor sits on the admissions committee and you make a poor first impression. I'm shocked by how many emails I get per year from students who want to study machine learning. I don't list machine learning as one of my research interests, and I've never published a paper even remotely related to machine learning. Don't waste your time.
On the other hand emailing the professor makes a lot of sense if you have a *legitimate research connection* with them. Perhaps you did some undergraduate research on a topic very similar to one of the prof's papers. Perhaps you met at a workshop and he told you to "get in touch when you graduate." Perhaps one of your mentors knows the prof and offered to introduce you. In these cases I say go for it -- in many institutions, if a prof really wants a student, that will weigh heavily during the admissions process.
Upvotes: 1
|