date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2013/11/19 | 870 | 3,778 | <issue_start>username_0: I submitted a paper to an Elsevier journal which is now in 'Submitted to Journal status'. Now I want to remove it to improve the write up, though the content is good. I don't want it to be rejected after waiting for 7 months which would be a lot of time wasted. I would rather remove it now and improve it myself or with the help of editing services. Should I email editor to remove it? I am worried because the reasons for withdrawals mentioned on their website are serious and I don't want to give that impression when my reasons is just to improve the manuscript.
When you feel your paper does not have high chances to get accepted, do you keep on working on it during the review and re-submit to a different journal when it gets rejected eventually? Or remove it immediately, work on it and submit again.<issue_comment>username_1: *“When you feel your paper do not have high chances to get accepted”*… then I suggest you **don't submit it for publication in the first place!**
It has happened that I have submitted a work which I continued to work on improving, but it was definitely in some very specific cases, where
1. the improvement in question was nice but absolutely not crucial to the paper,
2. had no impact an any of the conclusions of the paper,
3. I was not sure the improvement would actually work.
Basically, something like submitting the paper while continuing to tinker on Figure 2, thinking without adding or removing any data there might be a better way to present it, but it required getting a new software license and learning how to use it. Or submitting a paper while thinking that “hey, this is totally publishable, but if I continue running the simulation while the paper is submitted, maybe I can get the curve on Figure 3 with a little bit less noise”. But **nothing as extensive as changing the text.**
---
*What should you do now?* — Well, if you think reworking on the paper can in a significant way improve its chances of being accepted, I suggest you withdraw it from consideration. If you submitted not too long ago, the editor and referees might not even have wasted much time on it yet. So **write to the editor, *apologetically* explaining that you've realized you made a mistake in submitting your paper too early, and would like to withdraw it**. It's not a very nice thing to do, but I still believe it's in your interest.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Just to check: the changes you want to make don't affect the results of the paper, you just want to write it more clearly?
If the paper has already been under review for 7 months, they at least think it's good enough not to reject immediately, and the referee(s) have probably spent a fair amount of time looking at it. If you withdraw it now, you will have to start the whole process over when you resubmit.
I would probably do one of two things:
* Wait until you get a decision from the journal. There's a good chance the decision will be "accept with revisions". Then you can include your changes along with those suggested by the referee. Include a list of all the changes you made, so that the referee knows what to look at. Of course, if it's rejected, then you can make your changes before submitting to a new journal.
* Make your changes now, and quickly. Then contact the editor, saying something like: "Upon rereading the manuscript, I think its clarity would be improved by changing such and such. Would you be willing to consider this updated submission, and pass it along to the referees?" Again, include a list of the changes you have made.
In either case, it would help to minimize the amount you change: revise what you have to, but don't gratuitously make changes that aren't really necessary.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/11/19 | 677 | 2,865 | <issue_start>username_0: I've started a PhD position at a university in the US, but I'd like to travel during my time there. What's the easiest way to do something like that? Are there fellowships or grants available for students who want to study abroad for a semester or year, and if so, how can I find them? Or, is studying abroad typically a process that is dependent on who my advisor knows in foreign countries?
If it helps to answer this question, my field is statistics and I'm planning on focusing on spatial statistics.<issue_comment>username_1: It is very dependant on the country you live in. There are plenty of countries whos universities have special programs for students studying abroad. In such programs, you are often in contact with other people from your university / country who study or live near you when you're in another country. They then organise several events to explore the culture there.
(I've attended keynotes about this as I'm thinking of studying abroad myself)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It may depend on who your advisor knows in foreign countries --- or who *you* can get to know in foreign countries.
I've known people who've done this, but my impression is that in grad school it becomes less about "doing a study abroad" and more about doing a "visiting scholar" program at a particular school. That is, you wouldn't seek or find something like "I want to study abroad" or "I want to study in Country X". What you could do is find a particular school, department, or researcher in Country X and arrange to visit their department for a certain length of time. I'm in a department in the US, and we regularly have visiting scholars from a range of countries (e.g., Japan, the Netherlands, Finland, Brazil). We currently have one of our own students on a visiting scholar stay in Germany and another is planning a possible study in Singapore.
The thing is that, like anything else in a PhD program, "studying abroad" can't just be "studying", it has to be connected to your particular research. So you would need to build connections with particular departments.
Also, there can often be opportunities for shorter-term study abroad in the form of "workshops" or the like. These would be more in the range of 2-6 weeks. That's a lot less time abroad, but my impression is it's much more straightforward, because you just apply (instead of having to form specific personal relationships with other researchers). These workshops sometimes have fellowships available to cover some or all of the cost, and even if they don't, it's likely to be easier to get funding from other sources if you can point to a specific "thing" you're using it for (i.e., "I am going to this workshop on these dates to learn about these topics" rather than "I'm going to Country X for a while to hang out").
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/11/19 | 2,006 | 8,600 | <issue_start>username_0: Teaching, research and (academic) publishing are three different pursuits. Our society and its institutions, particularly most universities, enforce links between these in various ways.
People who have great teaching skills can not get teaching positions (at universities) because they aren't good in doing research, and some potentially great researchers experience setbacks in their academic career because they are horrible at teaching, and both can be penalized by failing to or poorly publishing their results.
How did this happen? Who does is benefit? How does intertwining these three requirements benefit the general knowledge and the academic community?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> We miss out on people who would make great teachers because they aren't good at doing research, and some potentially great researchers are left out of academic research because they are horrible at teaching
>
>
>
Dubious. The labour market is so flooded that institutions above the barrier can for "on-going" positions select who they like within the wage's established differentials. For bulk teaching, most Universities are reliant on casual staff who they sweat with the hope of an on-going position. So this statement is, outside of markets with limited labour supply, junk.
As far as the oversupply of labour, the Employers have a very good reason to offer more candidatures for PhD than the required number of future jobs plus a friction load for losses to industry practice. They're "deskilling."
They're also changing the nature of the commodity on offer (check word limits, class sizes, expectations of self-activity over a 30 year scale for undergraduates); and, of course, attempting mechanisation. From what I've seen mechanisation isn't increasing worker productivity, but, rather is more important in breaking down work cultures.
>
> How did this happen?
>
>
>
Proletarianisation, commodification, and capitalism. <NAME>, my friends, Ford & Taylor.
You could suggest that it happened in countries without strong Academic industrial organisation (The United States, for example) due to particularism. But actually we can see the broad effects of this universally across "varieties of captialism" to greater or lesser extents. That it happens in undergraduate teaching and in research, with their different world markets, is indicative that it isn't just particular systems.
>
> Who does it benefit?
>
>
>
It directly benefits the bourgeoisie, as capital flight into newly commodified areas results in a period of primary accumulation, and as secondary accumulation takes off it often has a higher rate of profit. Basically, there's superprofits in Tertiary Education.
It also benefits consumers. Tertiary education is largely a required commodity to consume, see for example Australia's rate of tertiary education uptake. The more important question is why consumption is over biased (given the knowable workforce demands from employers) towards Higher rather than Further or Vocational tertiary education? Here I'd suggest that many, if not most, jobs don't require tertiary education to perform, and instead employers are getting labour discipline benefits. Consumers still gain some measure of benefit from the enjoyment of education, and the possibility of subversively exercising education in their employment anyway. Also, with the massification of higher education many more consumers get to enjoy this commodity in its dissipated "University" form rather than through Workers Educational Associations, Trade Union newspapers, or Party Education. (Personally, comparing the level of discourse in 1940s TU newspapers to contemporary bits of the internet where equivalent age bands try to discuss serious matters, I'll go with the "non-traditional" education system here for superiority.)
Research culture is a side effect of the commodification of undergraduate teaching. In 1987 when Australia commodified undergraduate education (HECS), it also began the audit of research (The "Publications" return portion of the current HERDC report). It has taken 25 years, and changes in the control over production in departments, but effectively HERDC points act as a method of realising research activity, in a similar way that the "Effective Full Time Student Unit" realises as a commodity teaching.
As far as the teaching / research nexus: using publicly available data I'm pretty sure that even in research intensive universities, all research outside of grant funded substantive positions is done as "overtime." Going back to the labour supply and generation of PhDs: the employer inculcates in apprentices the idea that 60 hour weeks are normal, and that the employer should have exclusive use of the employee for teaching and service for the "normal" working week. The natural form of resistance and sabotage to this would be to not publish. The results of not publishing is the guaranteed absence of an on-going position.
Sources: Vestes/AUR; Trade Unionism; long term wage/price series; managerialism & audit culture; Braverman on deskilling & proletarianisation
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Ca. the 17th century, typically research, teaching, and religion were the functions of a European university. For example, when <NAME> wanted to become a professor at Cambridge, he asked the king for a special dispensation to be excused from taking holy orders. He was expected to teach as well as doing research, but was apparently such a bad teacher that he often lectured to an empty room.
During this period publication was not as emphasized as it is today. There were no academic journals in the modern sense. People communicated their results directly to their students, by letters to their peers, and sometimes by writing books. In some fields, such as alchemy, secrecy was the norm.
Presumably the reason that research, teaching, and religion were all linked was that the system evolved from medieval institutions, in which the literate class consisted mostly of monks. Part of their job was to preserve knowledge.
I think the more modern, liberal, and secular model is what's known as the German university model. It dates to the 19th century and was influenced by personalities like <NAME> and <NAME>. I think this was also the era when modern academic journals began to appear, and this was an important, positive development.
Some more modern phenomena in the US are research supported by grants from the central government; land-grant colleges; the delegation of a large amount of undergraduate teaching to part-time faculty; and the creation of community colleges, which have only teaching as their mission, not research.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There are advantages to having the same people do teaching and research. One is that students are being taught by an active researcher in the field, someone who is presumably up to date on the state of the art. They can provide students with meaningful examples that relate to current real-world research problems. Interested students may even get opportunities to do some research, either through a course project or as an extra-curricular activity.
There are also advantages to researchers. In my experience, one of the best ways to really get to understand something is to teach it; it quickly becomes apparent what you know really well and what you don't know so well. Students can also push teachers to look at things a different way, and can help fuel the creativity of researchers. Of course, the researcher has to be careful not to steal a student's brilliant idea for themselves, but rather to include the student in the research process.
That said, I think your comments are valid, and there are some drawbacks to having teaching and research coupled so tightly. As you observed, some people are better at doing research, and some are better at teaching. Universities have found ways to deal with this, such as letting more research-focused professors not have to teach much, and letting good teaching professors teach more. Even so, I had some professors in my undergrad who weren't very good teachers, and I think the reason the university keeps them around is because they are good researchers.
Some universities are moving more toward the model you describe, hiring full-time lecturers to teach some (especially first- and second-year) courses. This is a contentious issue in academics, and you're certainly not the only person who thinks research and teaching should be decoupled.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/19 | 521 | 2,150 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm looking for advice on presenting the research publications of my group on our webpage. Most groups seem to go with a simple publication list, sorted by year and maybe publication type. But there are also more elaborate implementations up to browseable publication directories (e.g., <http://www.math.rutgers.edu/~sontag/papers.html> ). What would be your recommendation for creating an online presence for research publications that is
* informative and useful for readers,
* visually pleasant, and
* easy to maintain for us?
I'd also be interested in links to websites that you see as role models for this issue.<issue_comment>username_1: My dreamed interface puts on the left a list of topics, a list of authors and possibly some other list (venue, maybe). Clicking on them filters the papers that appear on the right.
The papers on the right are in a table that can be sorted by year or title (or possibly something else, number of cites to that paper maybe). On each row there are two icons, one is a PDF icon that leads to the PDF file, the other one is a TeX icon that leads to a GIT repository with the TeX source.
All this can be done (for instance) in Javascript with the data coming from a JSON file that would be the only thing you would need to update to maintain this, so it's quite maintainable. This is my dream. Reality is very far from it, but it may serve as inspiration to you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: You could use [BibBase.org](http://bibbase.org). It's a free web service that I created with the aim to solve the problem you describe. I was originally motivated by the third point (easy to maintain). As input you can use a bibtex file, Zotero, or Mendeley, and unlike bib2html you don't need to rerun any program after making changes to your input. Visitors can resort by different criteria (author, year, keyword, number of downloads, type), get the bibtex source entry (even when not using bibtex as input), and subscribe to an RSS. Here is an example: <http://www.isi.edu/integration/karma/#publication>
*(Disclaimer: I'm the creator of BibBase.)*
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/11/20 | 1,061 | 4,801 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm undergraduate who are applying US research program. I have one interest field in which I have read 1 survey and 3 other papers (I know it is not enough). I only have some vague and primitive idea so that I am not sure I will do research in the field in graduate program.
I'm afraid if I write my research interest too specific and there are no professor who has knowledge about or is interested in such field, the admission committee would think my goals do not coincide with their department research interests.
Is it a disadvantage to write research interests too specific?
*It is also possible that what I believe is too specific may be not specific enough for some professor.*<issue_comment>username_1: I am not sure if a statement would be harmful, it will be a question of how well you appear to know the field. You are right in that you have not nearly read enough. It would be better to simply state that you are interested in such and such a field without going into depth, after all being interested is hardly a problem. If you try to get into arguing for why a field is interesting without having a good grasp of the field, you run into the likely situation that instead of primarily showing your interest, you simply expose your lack of knowledge. No-one would expect an undergraduate to have deeper knowledge about a specific research topic but if you try to argue for some field based on very sketchy knowledge, you may come across as naive. I therefore think it is better to simply state fields that you are interested in without going into specifics. If you manage to read up on a field (which would take, likely significant, time) so that you have a perspective, then such a statement would be a definite positive. Coming across as having good general skill (knowledge and abilities) is still the most important aspect.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You should choose either where do you want to go (e.g. research group) or what topic you want to research.
If you choose the group because those guys are really clever and doing very interesting things (whatever they do!), or maybe because they are where you want to live for personal reasons and you don't care about the topic, then find out what kind of interests they have (specially what do they need to cover with new people) and be specific on that. You can ask them, everybody likes getting new people to work with/for them specially when they need more people and have money to pay them. If they don't have money and don't need people, and possibly are saturated of work and cannot supervise/advise more students, then probably you should search for a different place (and repeat the process in this paragraph).
If you choose the topic then you should see which are the best groups to work on that topic, who is doing interesting things, where they are, choose the research group of your interest and then repeat the process in the previous paragraph. Do this until it works for a research group.
Be aware that working for many hours a day, days a year and years in total is more exhausting if you don't really like the topic of your work. I know it's feasible, and it's even possible to get good results and survive (at least physically and academically, your soul may be crushed), but certainly it's more advisable to do this after finding a topic you love.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It's not uncommon for people to do a project entirely different from what they wrote about during the application process, so it's not necessarily a bad thing to write in detail about a project that would interest you. It's good to let the faculty know that you can sketch out one or more coherent, interesting, and potentially fundable/publishable ideas for a project that would be appropriate and manageable during your time in the department.
If you want to talk specifically about what you're interested in (and I encourage this), great - but get to know the specialties of faculty members before applying. You should be choosing the schools based on faculty, after all.
I think you're spot on about being too specific about a project causing a problem when there are no faculty on staff who specialize in that area. To be honest, it's in your best interest to not apply somewhere if there are few or no professors that specialize in what you're interested in. It becomes difficult not only for the student who may receive little help, but also for the advisor, and the result could be a poor working relationship.
Your letter of intent is one of the most important parts of your application package. If you don't talk specifically about a project you'd be interested in, then make sure what you do talk about is worthwhile and not simply filler.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/20 | 5,311 | 21,239 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a year and a half into a PhD at a top university in the Uk. Doing some good work but not enjoying academia and I think this is more than second year blues. I have quite a bad advisor which doesn't help, for example I've already had my work stolen by a collaborator and my supervisor is reluctant to rock the boat or say anything.
My PhD is in applied Math and computational physics and I have access to London. My current plan is to leave with an Mphil and find a job in the city - trouble is I don't know what I want to do.
I would like a career that uses my mathematical and programming abilities and is more commercial, i.e. not all technical. A career that I can go places with - but has a good work life balance. I've always wanted to be a professor, but the reality of academia has really put a pin in that, I can't stand it, I hate the politics, I hate the way I'm treated by my supervisors, the university staff and colleges, I hate the academic culture here where I'm expected to let my research take over life and that just by considering other opportunities, I'm not worthy of academia - I came TOP of my class, I worked incredibly hard, I feel I deserve more respect than what I get as a grad student.
So I've been looking around and a few careers have caught my eye - though I want something with a better work-life balance.
Has anyone themselves quit a PhD? Were you happier?<issue_comment>username_1: I have my PhD in Computer Science so it's not a 1:1 comparison, but it's probably close enough.
First, know that being a grad student has it's perks, but overall, you haven't really promoted yourself much in the eyes of your supervisor by getting an undergraduate degree. You're still going to be viewed with the title of "student" until you graduate. This is unfortunate, but it's how I've found most of the world works. You should know that once you graduate, the situation does improve quickly. There will always be people who will look down on you (in any industry or education level), but for the most part, it's not so bad.
Second, remember that getting a PhD doesn't really close that many doors. There will be some companies that don't want to hire a PhD because of your title, but you can usually find a job outside of academia with a PhD. I have friends with PhDs that have gone to Google, Amazon, etc. and do jobs that they could have been able to do with a Masters degree. However, by having the PhD, they can now go back to academia if they choose to do so.
Third, at least make sure you come out of the experience with something. Those I know that abandoned ship midway through at least made sure they received their Masters degree before leaving. Otherwise, you're definitely limiting your options later. You can get lots of jobs with a Bachelor's degree, but it gets harder and harder to be promoted without more advanced degrees.
Lastly, if politics is not your thing, you're probably right that working in a university setting won't be what you want. It's going to be a very political job for most of your career compared to some of the other options.
The big question you have to answer is, what are your goals? Do you want to make more money? Don't work in academia. Do you want to have more control over your work? Then research is probably going to be more in line with what you want. Also remember, universities aren't the only places that do research. There are also companies and government labs in most countries where you can do research.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Part of finding out what you want to do is trial and error. If you want to do investment banking, do some investing yourself; it's never been easier to participate in a market. It might not be investment banking itself, but an individual portfolio you've created, using your mathematical knowledge would go somewhere in an interview with a financial institution, and you have London, so there's no shortage of investment banks. That career path has zero work life balance, however, if done professionally. If you want to maintain some liberty you'd need to be investing your own money your own way. This is much easier because you have much less paperwork and regulatory overhead as an individual investor than a member of an investment bank. If you don't like it, you can take a few years and make a fortune making others' fortunes and move on to something else. Having a few million affords great liberty.
I too wanted to be a professor in the States, but seeing the grim realities of the academy made me realize that I wouldn't be able to deal with the extra nonsense that goes along with it. If all I had to do was teach and research, I would dedicate my life to it. But we all know that's maybe 20% on a good day of what academics actually do. But almost all careers have this kind of extra stuff to deal with in one way or another, so don't look to avoid it just by escaping the academy. I'm in the humanities, so ymmv, but I know there's a lot of similarity.
You won't avoid these petty politics you hate outside the academy, at least not completely. It's not as if academics alone have petty fights and engage in office politics. But I do know that there is less of it outside the ivory tower. One of my mentors told me "tempers run so hot because the stakes are so low," which I found out later is called Sayre's law, and it indicates a truism about human nature; we are acutely aware of our insignificance, if only subconsciously, and fight it.
The academy fosters a tunnel-vision. It becomes impossible to imagine life outside, or that other career paths are just (and more) legitimate, or that there are other ways to make a living other than competing for an ever-diminishing piece of the grant funding. Academics tend to think in zero-sum thoughts so outside-the-box ideas, such as other careers are difficult for them to process. The institutional thinking engenders feelings of shame and fear for leaving, or even considering other options, because why would anyone want to do anything else, this is the life of the mind, the highest life!? But you can look past all that since the early-relationship glow has worn off the ivory tower.
I think you've already discerned that the academy isn't for you. You can be happy doing just about anything you find fulfillment in. If it's making million dollar trades, or laying brick it doesn't really matter. You just know its certainly not research proposals and bitter backstabbing academics who don't appreciate your contribution to the institution, yet depend on you for their status. You can work hard without an advanced degree and climb the ladder just as well. With at least a 4 year degree you'll never hit any glass ceilings anyway. I speak as an American. I know you folks across the pond have more stake in social status, so it might be slightly different over there.
But to specifically answer your other question: No one who quit a PhD ever felt bad for quitting a PhD. They usually just feel bad for not quitting sooner, or for going in the first place. They regret the lost years filled with stress and low income, and not the missed opportunity for a very, very, low chance of a tenured position.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: As someone who left a PhD program, I would suggest:
* Trying to stick it out for a bit longer and see if your outlook changes if this is a field you truly have an intellectual passion for and your own intellectual development is reward enough for you.
It will be extremely hard if not impossible to go back to the PhD route once you leave. Even if you never use the PhD it will still be a significant accomplishment that you can feel proud of.
* Seeking out a new advisor/mentor. Try to cultivate some supportive relationships.
I think the idea that academia is much worse an atmosphere than another occupation is misguided, as others have said.
When all else fails, try spite as motivation.
You were TOP of your class?
You don't feel respected?
Well, to quote Troy McClure, "Get confident, stupid!"
Go be the mathsiest mathematician you can be.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I have strong urge to respond to user9590's comment: *No one who quit a PhD ever felt bad for quitting a PhD.* Well, **I do.** I always feel bad after I quit PhD. Although I had good personal reasons to do so, I always regret my decision. I missed everything in academia: the professors, the classroom, the research, the teaching, even the campus. After I retired from industry, I had to choose a place to live. Do you know the street name of my current address? *Academia Road !*
The reasons you're thinking about leaving academia:
*I hate the politics* - Do you believe there is no politics in industry?
*I hate the way I'm treated by my supervisors, the university staff and colleges* - Do you believe your managers, the human resources and the company in industry will treat you very well?
*I hate the academic culture here where I'm expected to let my research take over life*, - Would you love the industry culture to let making money take over life?
*I feel I deserve more respect than what I get as a grad student.*. - Do you feel you deserve more respect than what you'll get as an employee of an industry company?
If your answers to the above questions are all positive, industry is your place. In particular, please run to industry if you love to make money. Otherwise, please reconsider quitting PhD. Good Luck!
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_5: I also have left my PhD. Well, it was more of a situation like [this](http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1652) to be honest.
The problem with it? I really liked research, the issue was that my objectives/field were not matching the ones of the supervisor: I was (and still am) for a more practical/engineer approach while the supervisor wanted a more theoretical/pure mathematical one.
The end result was me leaving the PhD after 1 year and a half from its beginning.
Am I happier now? Well, you can be sure of that, I found another PhD with an approach I like and I am having a ton of fun doing it.
My suggestion? Try to understand the real reason for which you feel that leaving the PhD would be a good idea. You say:
>
> 1. I would like a career that uses my mathematical and programming
> abilities and is more commercial, i.e. not all technical.
> 2. A career
> that I can go places with - but has a good work life balance. [...]
> 3. I hate the politics, I
> hate the way I'm treated by my supervisors, the university staff and
> colleges, I hate the academic culture here where I'm expected to let
> my research take over life and that just by considering other
> opportunities,
> 4. I'm not worthy of academia -
> 5. I came TOP of my class, I
> worked incredibly hard, I feel I deserve more respect than what I get
> as a grad student.
>
>
>
1. I am not sure I understand your contraposition of commercial and technical. IF you program a commercial product, isn't that a technical task?
2. Well, I would not expect too much, the perfect job does not exist, you'll always have to accept some kind of trade-off.
3. Expect all of that in any and all workplaces you'll ever go
4. pardon? you feel you're too good or not good enough? Personally, I think you're making a mistake either way
5. Life isn't fair, live with it. ["I deserve"? you're from the US, right?]
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: 1. The world is a big place and full of millions of opportunities for whatever work life balance "floats your boat".
2. You (like 99.99% of us) want to be happy (and right now NEED to be happIER).
3. Life is short.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I would suggest you to wait for a couple of months to see how will it go AND look for another PhD. You've mentioned you are in top university, I don't see major problems for another top university to accept you for PhD.
On the other hand, you are lucky. A lot of people are dreaming to do PhD and study in top university. I don't even have a chance to do PhD but I would love to do it. Doind Taught Masters now, it's harder than bachelors and MRes, so enjoy your time. Talk to someone you are in good relations with at university, they might figure out something for you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Don't do it.
Having quit a PhD myself, I can attest to the weight of conscience quitting can be. You will make more money, but you will see it all seep away toward bills you now don't have. And, ironically, those bills are not remotely associated with anything "fun" or "cool" or "enjoyable". Nope. They are rent, they are student debt, they are car payments—and you know, having done computational physics, that a new car does not bring fulfillment. And living in the city? You will seep money from your pores for housing that is so substandard, you would be better off as a poor man in a rural area.
And for this what do you get? Well. I don't know. Maybe you will do well. I didn't. Two and a half years into this stupid experiment, I have not a penny in the bank, I have a broken-down car, and I guess I should be happy to be able to pay rent and meet my obligatory student loan payments. Yay!
But no sense of doing something meaningful or big. No sense of moving toward something bigger, even if far down the line. I am stagnated, in a job that brings me little joy, and which allows be only to pay my bills and live day to day.
Do what you want. Others will cry to you how bad a PhD is. I am telling you otherwise. If you're going to get screwed, I'd rather get screwed in academia, where at least you get to feel like a) you do something meaningful, and b) you are moving toward something greater.
You will quit your PhD. I have no doubt. I've been there, and when you start questioning yourself this way, you already know what you will do, even if you're not sure of it. You will quit. Just know that you will wish you could go back.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: Drop out now!
I am just about to submit after 5 years of PhD - and I have hated every minute of it. I also thought about quitting after the first year, but talked myself out of it. I am a mature age student and had worked for many years before I started the PhD. My reasons for starting the PhD in the first place were that I was a bit bored with my job and wanted to extend myself - not good reasons! Also my expectations of what a PhD was and the reality of a PhD did not match up very well. I thought I should have been discussing big ideas with my supervisors, but our meetings were generally about my style of writing - should I use bullet points or not, how should the tables be formatted, I hadn't led the reader enough (read repeated myself often enough).
At the start of this year I was lucky enough to get a tenure track job at a good university. I know I'm really lucky to be here, but I absolutely hate it. I thought I should at least apply for an academic job to see if I could get a job, and then I thought, well... I should at least try it out for a year. Even now in my head I'm telling myself - it will be better next year.
I feel like I've just drifting along waiting to see if things improve for the past 5 years. I really regret leaving my last job. If I had my time again, I would have quit after the first year and I would probably be doing something I really enjoy now! I feel stuck.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: First of all, the level of happiness has nothing to do with the fact that you are a PhD student and not, it only has to do with the value between expectations versus reality and the way we see and the perception of reality. There are many things in life more important that a PhD, for example family, friends, having a moral conduct, being health, enjoy life as it is, but also having and obtaining the theoretical skills to ask questions and answer a few about the universe I think it would worth it. If you don't like what you are doing, it is expected to change something. If you plan not to quit PhD, you can also approach new fields and change the field without any problem. I have a friend who has changed his supervisor once at one year, with no major problems. Although I wouldn't recommend to change to often, try to find what would make you feel good with yourself. Also, in fact you don't need a supervisor to ask big questions in any field of study. I have a friend who has worked on PhD topic and in his spare time has approached a new exotic field and has published in leading journals without any guidance or supervision. At the end, the only advice I can give would be not to give any advice.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: The only thing that will make you happier is to figure out what makes you happy in the first place. I doubt that it is the PhD itself, because if you are not happy then you are hardly going to be happy doing anything.
I think the decision you make is not going to be anywhere near as important as what you do after you make the decision. So if you are going to quit, then try to make the most of the situation by starting on your next career or challenge early, and if you decide to stick with it, then get through to the end and you'll make the most of having completed it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: I quit a top program in psychology halfway through my second year due to theoretical disagreements with the professors. Some of the difficulties I faced afterwards included awkwardly saying goodbye to classmates, resolving the identity crisis that comes with losing the status of a doctoral student, dealing with family reactions, feelings of failure and regret, confusion about my future, and most of all, getting a job.
My advice to finding a good job afterwards:
1) go to a community (not your college) career center for help with your resume. No matter how many resume examples you read online, it’s very hard to turn a long academic CV into a concise industry-friendly resume that’s 1-2 pages MAX, and shows clear work experience/skills.
2) make sure you withdraw completely from the program and are removed from the school’s website before applying to your new dream job. I was still on my school’s website as a doctoral student and I was formally on a leave of absence, which was discordant with the “withdrew in good standing” statement on my resume. This created suspicion that I was just on a break from my program and probably contributed to being turned down.
3) if you’re switching research areas (which is common if you did research on a social issue that is only studied in academia), make sure you research this new area extensively and come up with clear (even if not entirely factual) reasons why you want to switch research interests and you’re passionate about this new field.
4) I found that most research coordinator openings for outside candidates are entry level, and although they were interested in me, I was overqualified. You can’t really avoid this problem, but it can still be useful to interview for entry-level positions since you can get a better sense of what jobs are out there, and they might pass your resume onto to someone else or decide to make a new position to fit you in.
5) the hardest problem was what to tell the interviewers about why I left. The first 5 jobs I interviewed with asked me why I left my PhD program as one of the first interview questions. I wasn’t emotionally ready to reasons, so I made up a variety of excuses, from financial strain, to change of interests. These reasons were not convincing, and led to jobs turning me down.
I think this problem was especially bad in my situation because I was in a very prestigious program, I left halfway through the year without finishing a masters, and I was applying to full-time research jobs in psychology that were often stepping stones for others to get into psychology PhD programs (so it was strange that I was going backwards). Indeed, one interviewer asked “people would kill to get into your school, why did you leave?” and then stared at me skeptically as I tried to explain. I would recommend, if you can, get a master’s degree before you leave. A master’s in psychology is not as useful as other degrees, but it looks way better on a resume, shows some accomplishment, and is much easier to explain. Otherwise, have a brief (2-3 sentence) explanation that’s convincing and doesn’t lead to tears.
Where I’m at now:
After 3 difficult months of interviews, I was offered a really great position. It was also the only position in which the interviewer (my new boss) didn’t ask me why I left my PhD. I have no idea why he didn’t ask, but I just assume it’s because he’s the BEST PERSON EVER. Anyway, I love my job. I make in the upper 30’s, which isn’t my dream salary, but it’s much more than I would make in grad school. I enjoy the work and find it very interesting, and I use a lot of the skills I learned in grad school. I also love the work/life balance that actually leaves room for healthy relationships and free time to have fun. I have no idea what my future career will look like, but I’m much happier with my life now than I was when I attempted a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/20 | 941 | 3,551 | <issue_start>username_0: Does anyone know if there is a tool that takes a paper (pdf) and is able to produce a directed graph of the citations, and if possible take the papers that are cited and use the citations of those papers and include it in the graph. So it is easy to see what is an important paper, and what I've missed and so on.
An example I hardcoded:
<issue_comment>username_1: I'm also on a saga to look for this tool, hopefully the answers in this thread can end all the search. Here is what I know.
There used to be a software called [RefViz](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1082952/) that does what you exactly want. It was released by Thomson at a price of about US$295. Unfortunately, the response wasn't too good and it seems the product has been discontinued for more than five years. I used to use this software quite often to generate some themes from the literature pool. Since it was discontinued I have moved away from this type of relational analysis.
Instem has another product [OmniViz](https://web.archive.org/web/20150222114228/http://www.instem.com/solutions/omniviz.html), which remains in the market. OmniViz is like RefViz on steroids, and is much more capable. The price is also higher, reaching about US$1000 for an educational copy. Apart from literature relation, it can also be applied to genomics and that perhaps explains the high price. Instem has also produced a text-specific version of Omniviz, [Txtviz](https://web.archive.org/web/20160207201724/http://www.txtviz.com/) that is designed specifically to support people wading through large volumes of textual documents to find specific themes and areas of interest.
If you're tight on budget, try Google "citation map software" and you should be able to find other cheaper alternatives, like [SciMAT](https://sci2s.ugr.es/scimat/download.html), which is free.
Thomson has also hosted an online [citation map](http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/citmap/), which does not hook up to your literature library, but if you click on any indexed article on Web of Science, you can get a network consisted of the cited and citing articles. If you'd like to see how much impact a certain article has, it's a good tool as well.
A more rudimentary way is to make the network yourself using mind mapping software. I have been using the brainstorming function in [Qiqqa](http://www.qiqqa.com/) and it's not too shabby as a thought generator.
Last but not least, I'd also like to advocate for a large piece of A3 size paper, a good black or sepia felt tip pen, a box of color pencil, and some fun attitude to draw your own. I got the most out of this method, to be honest. When using the online tool or software I feel I am just producing a thing, but when I use my hands to make a network of articles that I feel important, I am also thinking. I guess person-to-person it's different.
Just remember whatever software we use, the relevance is based on algorithm. It's just like data mining, there will be false positives and negatives. Be mindful when analyzing the so-called literature gaps that the software found, sometimes it could be a gap, sometimes it could just be a void and does not deserve attention. Strong discretion along the process is necessary.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can visualize second order citation trees using this tool : <https://www.citationtree.org/>
It uses data from CrossRef.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/20 | 916 | 3,510 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a Master's student currently applying for PhD programs. I've seen conflicting advice about including coursework on my CV.
I'm wondering whether it's ever helpful to have relevant coursework listed. In my case, for example, I'm applying to programs that are more computation-based than my current program, and I'd like to show the CS course that I took while here.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm also on a saga to look for this tool, hopefully the answers in this thread can end all the search. Here is what I know.
There used to be a software called [RefViz](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1082952/) that does what you exactly want. It was released by Thomson at a price of about US$295. Unfortunately, the response wasn't too good and it seems the product has been discontinued for more than five years. I used to use this software quite often to generate some themes from the literature pool. Since it was discontinued I have moved away from this type of relational analysis.
Instem has another product [OmniViz](https://web.archive.org/web/20150222114228/http://www.instem.com/solutions/omniviz.html), which remains in the market. OmniViz is like RefViz on steroids, and is much more capable. The price is also higher, reaching about US$1000 for an educational copy. Apart from literature relation, it can also be applied to genomics and that perhaps explains the high price. Instem has also produced a text-specific version of Omniviz, [Txtviz](https://web.archive.org/web/20160207201724/http://www.txtviz.com/) that is designed specifically to support people wading through large volumes of textual documents to find specific themes and areas of interest.
If you're tight on budget, try Google "citation map software" and you should be able to find other cheaper alternatives, like [SciMAT](https://sci2s.ugr.es/scimat/download.html), which is free.
Thomson has also hosted an online [citation map](http://wokinfo.com/products_tools/multidisciplinary/webofscience/citmap/), which does not hook up to your literature library, but if you click on any indexed article on Web of Science, you can get a network consisted of the cited and citing articles. If you'd like to see how much impact a certain article has, it's a good tool as well.
A more rudimentary way is to make the network yourself using mind mapping software. I have been using the brainstorming function in [Qiqqa](http://www.qiqqa.com/) and it's not too shabby as a thought generator.
Last but not least, I'd also like to advocate for a large piece of A3 size paper, a good black or sepia felt tip pen, a box of color pencil, and some fun attitude to draw your own. I got the most out of this method, to be honest. When using the online tool or software I feel I am just producing a thing, but when I use my hands to make a network of articles that I feel important, I am also thinking. I guess person-to-person it's different.
Just remember whatever software we use, the relevance is based on algorithm. It's just like data mining, there will be false positives and negatives. Be mindful when analyzing the so-called literature gaps that the software found, sometimes it could be a gap, sometimes it could just be a void and does not deserve attention. Strong discretion along the process is necessary.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can visualize second order citation trees using this tool : <https://www.citationtree.org/>
It uses data from CrossRef.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/21 | 1,303 | 5,545 | <issue_start>username_0: I currently work as an Aerospace Engineer for the Department of Defense for nearly 6 years now, and I have a PhD in Aerospace Engineering from a top-10 university in the United States. I am seriously thinking of doing a 2nd PhD in Computer Science, because I want to eventually own an Algorithmic Energy Trading Firm and need to become an expert in Machine Learning algorithms.
As of now, I am working on a few journal papers to publish and I am not going to have any problems getting strong letters of recommendation from my employer and professors on campus. I ought to be able to get a letter from the Dean of my college as well. So, I am thinking of a second PhD in Computer Science because I really want to immerse myself in Machine Learning and figured a PhD was the way to go.
Question for everyone: Would it be a challenge for me to acquire entrance into a top 5 school in Computer Science for a PhD?
I ought to mention that my PhD research was in Computational Fluid Dynamics, Turbulent Flow and I had to develop my numerical solver and turbulence models in Object-Oriented C++.<issue_comment>username_1: A major part of doing a PhD is learning how to do research and handle working on problems which sit on the edge of what is known. You've done that already. Doing it a second time is unnecessary, expensive and time consuming.
If you've been doing aerospace engineering then you almost certainly have the necessary calculus under your belt already. And if you have a PhD you can teach yourself stuff. Buy a few good textbooks - I recommend "Pattern recognition and Machine Learning" by <NAME>; "Information Theory, Inference and learning Algorithms" by <NAME> (this one is free to download on the author's website because he's nice like that). Look up material universities and other insitutions put online - e.g. <https://www.coursera.org/course/ml> is a free course, whose description sounds like it covers a lot of the necessary basics. A lot of machine learning conferences make their proceedings available for free - ICML and NIPS I think both do this, and the work is good quality.
Start getting up to speed on all this stuff. If it still interests you and you want to go the academic route, go looking for postdoc positions and then try to find a couple of talented people you can form a startup company with.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you should study Machine learning by yourself instead of going for a second PhD, which is a huge task! You can learn a lot about any subject by yourself specially when you already have a PhD that proves you can do research by yourself. There are free online lectures from MIT almost about anything related to AI, including Bayesian inference and machine learning. I don't know what your needs are specifically but I suggest you try to research by yourself first and then decide if you need more.
I will give you a personal experience that may or may not be relevant to you, so don't laugh. It seems your interests are similar to mine if not exactly the same (according to your last paragraph c++,turbulence,CFD..). I presume you frequent CFD-online too? Anyway I recently got a PhD in CFD related engineering field, but before that I was very interested in artificial intelligence. So I have acquired a lot of knowledge about it by myself as to even write a top-10 computer chess program that can beat almost any human. Computer chess is not really AI but there are other games like GO where many machine learning / data mining techniques are used to write the best programs. I have been doing this as a hobby, but anyone can learn anything programming/AI related, and you don't necessarily need a degree in Computer Science even for AI.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You gain nothing from doing a second PhD in a professional capacity. If you want to do some type of algo trading work the best thing to do is get a job in the algo trading world. Given your background they are likely to hire you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: You do *not* need to be an expert in machine learning to own an Algorithmic Energy Trading Firm. If you had a choice between (i) going as a junior researcher to an existing firm right now, or (ii) spending 3-5 years in a machine learning PhD; well, (i) will take you much faster to your end goal.
It is also not just about machine learning. You also need to be good at signal processing, econometrics, object oriented programming, have great domain knowledge, big data experience, linux programming skills, scientific programming ability (R,Matlab), scripting experience, etc. The best way to get good at all areas at the same time is just to go into a firm right now.
What is most important is research experience. It matters far less what type of research you did (as long as it was heavily quantitative) than the fact that you actually have good research experience.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I received my PhD in Mathematics 40+ years ago and considered getting a second PhD in Computer Science. Spoke to a professor at a University about my plans and the advice he gave me "You have a PhD from an excellent University. Take a sabbatical come here for a year, publish a few papers and join the club". Ultimately I went into the medical instrumentation industry where I have been for the last 31 years and I am now planning to semi retire and start my own business.
My advice to you, *why bother with the second PhD*. **Get more focused on your goal**.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/11/21 | 487 | 2,085 | <issue_start>username_0: I have interned in two companies while I was conducting my undergraduate studies, one of the internships was unpaid and the other covered transportation expenses.
My question should I mention in my CV that these internships were unpaid or voluntary?
And does this issue make a difference in the eyes of the graduate admissions committee?
The nature of the internships is related to my undergraduate studies (general computer skills), but not very related to my research topic I want to peruse.<issue_comment>username_1: Whether you were paid or unpaid is a matter of compensation, which is not something a reviewing committee would care about. All that's important is that your credentials were strong enough to earn you the internship. Whether you were paid or not is irrelevant to the strength of your credentials.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To me it's *very* relevant. "*It's not about the money. It's about sending a message.*" What message? you may ask. It's not the same that some guys are willing to pay you as some guys accepting your free work, the difference is huge. Also, it's not the same committing to your work to the extent of working voluntarily for free when compared of working for a salary, which most of the people do much more gladly.
However, **I would not mention that**, again because "*It's not about the money. It's about sending a message.*" And in this case whatever the message is, you don't want to send it. This is not going to be used in your favor, and it can be perceived negatively (in either of both cases). Therefore it is some information not to tell (unless you are explicitly asked) so that people reading the CV can focus on whatever you want them to focus, which will be your skills as the best possible candidate (on any plausible universe!).
Then you can play the card of: "I'm committed" (thus expensive) or "I'm expensive" (thus expensive) or whatever card you may want, either to get the job, a better salary, more responsibilities, a plant in the window or whatever.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/21 | 927 | 4,025 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a researcher in computer science. I am used to publish papers on computer science problem resolution (machine learning, optimization, disabilities, pattern recognition...).
In recent work, we needed to create a specialized software incorporating many complex technologies. This software is used to conduct other researches on which we already publish.
We are wondering if we can publish on how the software helps to solve our problem and on how we designed it with multiples technologies. A careful debate on the possibilities, choices and architecture would be incorporated.
The problem is this is the first time we would publish such article and we don't know where to publish. We are seeking good scientific journals (if possible with an impact factor) accepting such papers. If you know one, can you tell me?<issue_comment>username_1: If the software system is targeted for a research problem that is deep, recognized by the community, requires complex architecture and design, and from which a wide community can benefit from, then system conferences could be a good match.
I'll give you an example. Symbolic execution is a widely used and researched technique in software verification. People from Stanford developed Klee, a symbolic execution engine that aims to be highly practical and scalable. Making
such a system required taking care of quite some details. They published paper
on OSDI, and I believe they received best paper award. [Klee paper](http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~cristic/papers/klee-osdi-08.pdf).
Other than that, there might be conferences in your particular area that care
about building systems for the problems you mentioned, but I guess you already took a look into that. Hope this helps.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think there's enough information in this question to give a yes or no answer of whether this is publishable. It might depend upon factors like: what problem it solves, whether the problem is novel, whether the problem is important, how novel the solution is, how useful this will be to others, how effectively you can evaluate your solution.
So, instead of giving a yes or no answer, let me instead suggest a process you could use to form an answer on your own. I would suggest that you talk to your colleagues in your area and ask them the same question. They will have the domain knowledge and will be in the best position to judge the contribution of your particular work. Take a few minutes to sit down for coffee with them and get their advice. Personally, I've always found this to be an incredibly valuable exercise.
I can't tell you *where* to publish it, as that is highly domain-specific: it'll depend very heavily on your field, the area of research, and the nature of your contribution (which you haven't told us). In general, if you are thinking of publishing somewhere that you are not familiar with and where you are an outsider, it will be especially important for you to make sure that you learn the related work and the values and culture of that community.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The [Association for Computing Machinery](http://www.acm.org/index.html) has at least two journals with the word "software" in the title:
* [Transactions on Mathematical Software](http://toms.acm.org/)
* [Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology](http://tosem.acm.org/)
I don't know much about the latter, but the former publishes mathematical software packages.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: The Open Channel Foundation publishes software created by academics. They have published one of my software programs that I created for research.
<http://www.openchannelfoundation.org/>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: The [Journal of Open Source Software](https://joss.theoj.org/) is a good place to start. I believe it was created in 2018.
[This article](https://www.software.ac.uk/which-journals-should-i-publish-my-software) links a lot of journals that may be applicable.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/22 | 2,165 | 9,347 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate in the UC system. I sometimes encounter situations where professors or TA's make errors, or there are inaccuracies in the material. These situations tend to be quite awkward for both the student and the TA or professor.
It is painful for me not to speak up, but there is a fear, possibly exaggerated, that this could lead to resentment by the TA, or professor, or even future unfair treatment.
The most frequent response by senior students is that the professor is always right, and you should never attempt to argue with the professor. Confronting a professor about a misconception could end up being detrimental to the student in the long run.
**What should a student do (and how?) when a teacher makes an error or gives inaccurate information or material?** Is there any reasonable way to anonymously point out mistakes?<issue_comment>username_1: Falsities is a strong word--be very sure that the teaching is actually inaccurate before confronting your professor. And if you feel that you MUST say something, it is best handled in an area less public than a lecture hall. Also, a professor is far more likely to admit to having been mistaken if you approach them with the attitude of trying to understand their viewpoint and/or teaching, rather than trying to point out where they are mistaken. You may discover that you have misunderstood, and the professor is actually correct. On the other hand, your humble, 'trying-to-learn' question may impel the professor to take a second look, and discover where s/he has been inaccurate or mistaken.
I don't believe that there are many (if any) professors who will deliberately teach falsehoods to their students, especially in a course where, as you say, the material is of a technical nature and mistakes easily provable. So when you approach your professor, do so with an intent to discover where YOU are mistaken. You may both learn something.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think your fears may be exaggerated. I can't think of a professor I've ever met who I think would be offended by having a mistake (politely) pointed out, much less retaliate.
Accusing anyone flat-out of being wrong, or worse yet, lying, will certainly make them defensive; and if it turns out they were right, it will be more embarrassing for you. So I don't suggest thinking of it as "confronting" the professor. What I would suggest instead is to approach the question as something that you don't understand. "Hi Professor Smith, in class today you said X. But I'm confused, because I thought that Y." Listen to her response. Be open to the possibility that you are mistaken, or have misunderstood what she said, but if your doubts aren't cleared up, figure out what part still seems wrong to you, and ask about that. "I still don't understand; what about...?" Stay calm and polite. If you find you are getting worked up (or she is), take a break. "Let me think about that, and if I still have questions I'll come back later." Hopefully in the end, everyone agrees on where the truth lies, and nobody feels too embarrassed.
If you think she's simply misspoken about something in class, or written something incorrectly on the board, point it out right away: "Is that X supposed to be a Y?" If there's something deeper, it may be better to discuss it in office hours or by email; I know that when I'm teaching, if I think I may have a serious mistake, I get flustered and it throws off my rhythm. I'd rather have time to think about it offline, and then correct the error in the next class.
I think the other comments saying "Be sure you are right!!!" are excessive. It's not a bad idea to try to think carefully about your question; if you can clear it up yourself, you'll learn better. But don't hesitate to talk to the professor. Even if it's you that's confused, part of my job as a professor is to clear that up. And if it turns out I'm wrong, of course I want to know.
Your suggestion of having some sort of middleman to anonymously forward queries strikes me as a bit extreme. Again, I think you may be more intimidated by your professor than is really warranted. It may help to try to get to know your professors better: early in the course, make it a habit to drop by their office hours. Ask some trivial questions if you like. "Are we going to study Z next week?" Then later, if you have more substantive questions or concerns, you'll feel more comfortable approaching them.
Anonymity seems unnecessary and perhaps counterproductive. If you come to me with something you don't understand, and I'm able to clear it up, I won't think less of you; instead, I'll be pleased that you now understand it better. And if it turns out I was wrong, I won't resent you; I'll be impressed that you understand the issue deeply enough to spot the error, and grateful that you brought it up. But if you're really timid, you could consider sending an email from an anonymous account. ("I'm sending this anonymously because I'm embarrassed that it may be a silly question." Either way she'll probably assure you that it isn't.)
One final comment: If you have mentors suggesting that professors are never wrong, find better mentors! I agree that it is not pleasant to *argue* with anyone, but that doesn't mean you can't discuss your question and try to sort it out.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I suppose there are some insecure professors who resent having mistakes pointed out, but in my experience they are relatively rare. I'm impressed when a student catches a mistake, and I'm happy to learn they were paying close attention. I'm certainly not alone in having this reaction, and I'd say it's a pretty standard response.
Of course, it depends on how you raise the issue: if you act like you are pained by the falsehood, or you question the professor's competence, then it's easy to cause offense. Instead, it's safer to take a neutral tone, with an understanding attitude (based on the fact that it's difficult to teach a semester-long course without ever misspeaking).
For some errors, you should mention them as soon as you detect them. For example, if your professor drops a sign in a calculation, then the earlier it gets corrected, the better. No reasonable person could take offense at having this pointed out, so the only danger is being too eager to point out mistakes and inadvertently complaining about correct calculations. That would be annoying if done frequently.
Sometimes it's hard to tell whether a statement is an error or an intentional simplification or approximation. For example, if someone does a calculation using Newtonian gravity, then it's almost certainly unhelpful to interrupt to complain that general relativity would be more accurate. If you can imagine that the statement might be deliberate, then it's probably better to raise the issue outside of class. It's helpful to phrase it in the form of a question: "I was wondering why we neglected relativistic effects. Do they matter at the scale we're working with? Do you know of any good books where I could read about these corrections?"
Sometimes you just have to understand that the discipline in question is based on an approach you don't like. For example, you might complain that your biology professor is always talking about evolution, or that your philosophy professor doesn't use an Ayn Rand-approved definition of freedom, or that your economics professor studies models that assume people are rational utility maximizers. You should definitely not start a conversation by saying "Why are you teaching this nonsense? Surely you know it's all wrong." It's reasonable to ask foundational questions about the field and why the standard approaches have become standard, and you might learn something interesting (for example, that behavioral economics exists). But you should approach the issue respectfully, with the goal of improving your own understanding rather than condemning the field itself.
In your particular case, I'd try to handle things delicately. The fact that you frequently run into these situations makes me wonder whether you are taking a very literal approach to truth, and perhaps counting many models or simplifying assumptions as outright falsehoods. There's nothing wrong with that philosophically, but approximations are a fact of life. If you start complaining whenever anything falls short of the literal and exact truth, then you won't be happy anywhere outside of pure mathematics. Furthermore, when you talk about how painful you find falsehoods taught in class, I wonder whether you make that pain apparent when asking questions. I certainly don't want to discourage you from challenging falsehoods or from asking questions, since both activities are crucial parts of academia. However, it's worth making sure your strong feelings aren't playing an unproductive role in your interactions with professors.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: There is a difference between having a discussion and having an argument. Once you know the difference you then need to be able to recognize when the two parties appear to have a different view of which applies.Once you know that you need to know how to change the situation to one of agreement. Once you know that your question will not bother you.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/22 | 883 | 3,655 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently reviewing a paper, which is definitely not suitable for the journal where it was submitted (high impact, topics should be interesting for a broad audience). The content is not new and in this current state not sufficient for publication at all.
I would now recommend rejection with reference to some literature which covers the same results.
I would suggest some more detailed experiments for the authors, to quantify their results and then submit it to a journal with a more narrow focus.
Here my questions: Is it ok, if I write a precise journal, like
>
> I recommend to submit a revised manuscript to Journal XYZ, which is
> more focused on the authors' topic.
>
>
>
or should I write;
>
> I recommend to submit a revised manuscript to another journal, which
> is more focused on the authors' topic.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I think it's okay for you to make recommendation to the author as a reviewer although you don't absolutely have to do it.
If I were you, I would say,
>
> I recommend to submit a revised manuscript to another journal with more focus on your topic, e.g. Journal XYZ or Journal ABC.
>
>
>
so that the author(s) would have more options.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It's definitely OK to name one or a few journals you would consider more appropriate for this paper. Some web interfaces for reviewers even have that as a built-in option.
One thing I encourage you to do is to use the journal's publication criteria to back up your opinion. These may have been given to you along with the paper, or they can be found on the journal's website. If, for example, the journal *X*'s guidelines say:
>
> Articles should be of high scientific quality, originality, significance, and conceptual novelty that are of interest to the wide and diverse contemporary readership of *X*
>
>
>
then it's good practice, in your recommendation to the editor, to evaluate the manuscript following these criteria. For example, you could say:
>
> The manuscript is technically and methodologically sound, and clearly written. The conclusions are, in large part (minor exceptions noted below), supported by the results. However, it seems to me that this detailed study of knee injuries sustained in wingsuit accidents may not be of interest to many of the reader of *The International Journal of Transportation Research*.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I agree with scaaahu and username_2 but will add the following.
It is not normally the reviewer that makes suggestions like these. If the journal editors have sent the manuscript out for review, it should mean they consider it suitable for publication in "their" journal. It is the editors (in Chief) that makes this decision to maintain a good publication standard. So the fact that you feel this ways about the manuscript might mean the editors have slipped up or they see something in the paper that you do not.
With the above in mind, I still think it is ok to make a comment like this since the journal is also there to serve the community and as part of that you can voice your opinion about issues regarding the journal. So if you want to make such a comment, keep in mind that you do not necessarily know why the manuscript was accepted for review (mistake or not).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Once, when I (as an editor) rejected a paper for a journal that wanted papers to be of broad interest, I recommended a specific, more specialized journal. The author took my advice and sent the paper to that journal, which promptly sent it to me to referee.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/22 | 1,197 | 5,093 | <issue_start>username_0: Currently my literature surveys do not involve trips to the library and I am wondering if I am missing out on something important. What sort of material/knowledge can the library provide that I would miss on google scholar.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Almost none.
------------
I recently wrote a [research survey](http://www.cs.uiuc.edu/~jeffe/pubs/optcycles.html), while on sabbatical at an institution without a physical library, but with extensive electronic subscriptions.
I **never** missed having physical library access, even for papers dating back to the 1840s. (In fact, the historical literature was *more* likely to be freely available than papers from the 1980s.) Occasionally I had to use my home university's VPN to get access to a different subset of the electronic literature, and there were one or two books that I had to download via bittor—sorry, that I had to borrow from colleagues down the hall. Yeah, that's it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Don't assume that a library is a building. Libraries provide the funding and infrastructure that lets you access online journals and databases, just as they used to provide you with hardcopies and card catalogs. If you think that Google scholar provides the same degree of access you are sorely mistaken. And no, I am not a librarian, but I am very grateful that I have access to a good library.
Now, the question of whether libraries should be forced to pay for access to journals is another question.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: My situation is different from username_1's. I had been looking for a couple of old CS books (in automata and switching circuit theory) published in 1960's. I finally found them in an institue library. According to the librarian there, the two books I wanted to borrow had not been checked out for at least two decades.
This is just me. My research area is not very active. I wanted to find info about what was done in those books which were not cited in modern literatures. I knew the existence of the books because I saw them when I was a graduate student in 1970's.
If your research area is modern and active, I guess you don't need to go to the library. Internet would be good enough. By the way, my personal experience is that Google is sometimes better than Google Scholar.
A side note. My feeling of reading books in the library is different from staring at the computer screen.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Most things can be found online, that's for sure. But the main problem is that we tend to stay in "our neighbourhood" because of that: we can only find what we are looking for while searching online resources.
If in another field researchers use a different wording for the same objects, we will never know because it is very hard to browse a large amount of papers very quickly online.
The interest of going in a library is that it is possible to crawl very quickly amongst dozens of papers from other fields, just looking for "oh, this curve looks just like mine" or "wow, but I know this equation". This way, with luck and persistence, it is possible to find new connections and/or new way of thinking about a problem.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Library may allow you to access generally online resources behind the paywall.
In other words, while using printed material instead of online resources does not bring much benefit, some online resources (like scientific journals) are often paid, and you may need a library computer to get access to them. This is one of the reasons why you still may need to go to the library.
Of course, this is university dependent.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Physical sources are more trustful; you can check the authenticity of the information they hold since the author is always named, and so is the house of publication. All what is needed for the entire reference is shown at the beginning of the physical work; whereas, the electronic source is usually not authentic; the author can be unnamed, the house and the year of publication can be dropped, etc. additionally, reading a printed material is safer for the reader's eyes and nerves than reading on screen; the latter is evidently harmful.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: The advantages really depend on:
1. your skills with search engines,
2. the talent of your librarian.
The fact that you are only mentioning Google Scholar may suggest that you may extend your skills to other media. One single person is often affected by biases in his search. A librarian, who has experience, knows a lot of sources (some not public), has experience with many tools and more importantly, can reformulate a question with less domain-related biaises.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: A good library has subscriptions. Even though I am retired and 500 miles away from my universities's library buildings, these subscriptions are invaluable. (I can access them by Internet, of course.)
So: unless you intend to pirate everything you need, your library will be invaluable to you, too.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/22 | 384 | 1,612 | <issue_start>username_0: I have 9 and 10 months old recommendation letters. Can I use these when applying to graduate programs (United States)? Is that okay with the admissions committee?<issue_comment>username_1: To elaborate on <NAME>'s point, this would be a bad idea on several levels:
* It will look bad with the committee. Presumably the letters are dated and people will notice. It will probably not be interpreted charitably.
* Presumably an updated letter will may more good things about you, since it will mention whatever you've been doing for past 10 months. Hopefully you've done *something* worth noting in that time.
* It's also bad form to use letters so long after they are written without contacting the authors. I don't think there are any precise cutoffs for when one transitions from OK to not OK, but I feel like 10 months is pretty firmly in not OK territory. You need to give the letter writers the chance to update their assessment, hopefully for the better.
I don't understand why people being out of town is a problem for contacting them. As Nate says, just send them an email. The ball will be in their court, and they can figure out whether it's practical or not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to other points already made, in most situations *you* do not send the letters yourself, but have the recommenders send the letters *directly*. Sometimes this involves simply uploading the letters to a web site, but this would be done \_by\_the\_recommenders\_, not by you.
Thus, some action will be required by your recommenders.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/11/23 | 708 | 2,671 | <issue_start>username_0: I have the impression that many female scientists, especially after they gave birth to a child, start to develop a research interest in the learning, growing, and developmental behaviors of babies. I got this impression because over time I heard about a couple of female university professors and industry scientists doing research about babies. I personally know **0** male scientist whose research interest is in this area.
I'm wondering whether this trend I see around me is real, and thus wondering: **are women more represented in the subfield of child development (or developmental psychology) than in the broader field of psychology?**
I'm concerned, and intuitively don't like this (possibly imagined) "trend". I think it may encourage some people to think that female scientists just pick up certain research topics and don't want to touch others. I also see this "trend" as a destruction of many years of effort encouraging women in the "hard-core" science and technology.<issue_comment>username_1: Males have historically outnumbered their female counterparts in the field of psychology, but this has changed in recent years. According to [the American Psychological Association](http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun07/changing.aspx)
>
> Psychology, once a man's profession, now attracts mostly women. Data from the 1986 APA report, "The Changing Face of American Psychology," and the National Science Foundation show that the percentage of psychology PhDs awarded to men has fallen from nearly 70 percent in 1975 to less than 30 percent in 2008. (The data do not include PsyD degrees.)
>
>
>
Not only are females over-represented in psychology as a whole, they appear to be even more over-represented in the sub-fields of developmental and child psychology. [This article](http://www.apa.org/gradpsych/2011/01/cover-men.aspx) from the APA states
>
> In developmental and child psychology...female PhD recipients outnumber men by more than five to one.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> Are women overrepresented in the field of child development studies?
>
>
>
No. They have more than 50% representation, yes, but that doesn't equate to overrepresentation in the sense that it should be 50%. Men and women are different. Women are drawn naturally towards certain things that interest them, just as men are.
>
> I think it may encourage some people to think that female scientists
> just pick up certain research topics and don't want to touch others.
>
>
>
They do, just as men do. Why are you so concerned about what other adults willfully choose to do with their lives?
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/23 | 617 | 2,443 | <issue_start>username_0: Most of the textbooks I used during my undergraduate studies (outside north America) are International editions, so what is the difference between a national and an international edition of a book?
For example, I have a book that says
>
> XYZ published this special edition for the benefit of students outside the United States and Canada.
>
>
>
and they don't mention why this international edition is special or what is the benefit!<issue_comment>username_1: **International editions are cheaper**
They are sold cheaper, in English speaking countries (or countries with education in English) outside North America: India, China, etc. The content is equal to that of US/North American versions.
There are two reasons why they are cheaper:
1. because they are printed in cheaper version: paperback instead of hardcover, sometimes black and white
2. because the publisher knows he cannot sell them at their US price anyway, so they are willing to sell them at the price people will buy them (better to sell them cheaply than not at all)
Sources:
* <http://www.thetextbookguru.com/2011/04/20/international-textbook-editions-a-cheaper-alternative-2/>
* <http://www.abebooks.com/books/Textbooks/international-editions.shtml>
* <http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080825164810AAGRN80>
There was also a case about import of international edition textbooks in the US supreme court last year (<http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/thai-student-protected-by-first-sale-supreme-court-rules/>).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Also, some international versions are only to be used outside of the US. Due to them giving a software license for a certain region. (During my Physics / Maths courses, I had to use the international edition so the license was valid in EU universities.)
It can be for a variety of reasons, I think username_1 stated the most important ones.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Sometimes they have been intentionally made incompatible.
I recently came across a textbook whose "international version", though having the same edition number, had different numerical values in all the homework problems! There is no possible pedagogical reason for doing this. It was clearly just intended to make it impossible for a North American student to use the (cheaper) international version, if they are assigned homework problems from the text.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/11/23 | 1,160 | 5,280 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a group of undergraduate students who are best described as 'unprepared' meaning that they were not well prepared for life in university. They are, as a group, under-performers, although there are certainly stars contained within the group. One more point of complexity is that the students are studying in English, which is not their native language.
Reflection is something that has been identified as useful not just for performance while at university but also for encouraging life-long learning for the students. While strong students might take to reflection quite readily, critically analyzing the countless decisions that they have made on any given academic project, unprepared students seem to have a much more difficult time with this.
My question is, are there particularly effective techniques for teaching reflection to unprepared students (or academically weaker students)?<issue_comment>username_1: Almost certainly this is going to be a multi-stage, complicated process, with no simple answer. However, here's something relatively simple to start with, maybe.
I'd suggest starting with collaborative peer-evaluation. Create an assignment which has a peer-evaluation stage (with no reflection on the final grade). The peer-evaluation stage consists of sitting them down and working through each person's output as a group. Ideally, you'll act mostly as guard-rails for the discussion, keeping it on-topic and professional, while providing some initial thoughts.
The goal of the peer-discussion phase is to start getting them to think critically about the output, from both the perspective of a creator and a consumer.
After the discussion stage, then allow them to take the feedback and re-edit their work to improve it, grading only the final result.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm working on a similar question in a different population. I developed a question rubric that they are using to learn analysis. I am hoping this self-questioning becomes ingrained as a metacognitive skill.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I think you might be dealing with not only an ESL but also a cultural problem. I know from experience that some students have been raised their whole academic lives to remember and regurgitate and under no circumstances think. Two suggestions. 1) Learn about their cultures. It will only help. Ask one of your "stars" what challenges they face in the class and what they've done to overcome. 2) Communicate your expectations clearly. "I expect you to think." I find when I say things explicitly like "Don't look at me like a policeman, look at me like a resource" or "The most valuable thing you can do in this class is raise your hand" I get better results. Sounds a bit corny but I'm telling you, it works. And you won't reach all of them, but you'll reach more of them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: When I was an undergraduate, written reflections (also called process notes) were required on many assignments. Learning to write them was part of the orientation. The overall strategy for teaching writing was
* Free write
* Focused free write
* Write essay
* Write reflection
* Faculty feedback
* Revise essay
* Write additional reflection
I think the focused free write is a particularly good tool for helping students reflect on their process. It may be easier to start with reflecting on the revision process because students have a set of faculty comments which they need to answer.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: I have two suggestions.
First, I think it would be helpful for students to see live demonstrations of reflective/critical analysis, compared side-by-side with non-critical (rote, superficial) analysis. As much as possible, the students themselves should be involved in these demonstrations, taking both roles.
(NOTE: I realize that many students are nervous and uncomfortable about going in front of the class and that they fear public embarrassment. But if *everyone* takes a turn, then it's possible to get past the concern that only certain people will be taking the risk, and it will support an ethos of "we are all in this together". A side benefit is that it will boost their skills and confidence in public speaking.)
These demonstrations should be very short. For example, you could give a prompt with only one or two sentences that make an assertion or an inference. Then ask the students to first write an *uncritical* analysis, and then to write a *critical* analysis. Their analysis would only need to be a couple of sentences. Then two students would come to the front, each taking one role but not announcing which role they are taking. They read their analysis to the class. Then you can have a short class discussion where students guess which role they were taking and why these were examples of critical analysis, or not.
The second suggestion is to engage students in Socratic dialogs, either in the class as a whole or with small groups or with students individually. You, as teacher, only ask questions aimed at revealing the basis and justifications in the student's analysis. Students could also do this with each other, either in small groups or in pairs. This could be done as part of homework assignments.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/23 | 424 | 1,893 | <issue_start>username_0: Some academic job posts and grant applications require submitting both a CV and a publication list. I would have thought that it is a standard to put the publication list in the CV, hence it is not necessary to have the publication list again. What is the purpose of requiring both of them?<issue_comment>username_1: A CV is generally a short account of your employment history and skills, often squeezed (or stretched) into 4 pages.
Publication lists can span many many pages. 100 complete publication entries (including technical reports and invited contributions etc etc) could easily span 10 pages.
In short, CV contains the summary from a global perspective, whereas the publication list contains all details of one particular aspect of a person.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: On mathjobs, my workflow when glancing through files from candidates is to look at the publication list instead of the CV. This is for two main reasons:
1. CVs typically frontload a bunch of information which I already have from the mathjobs cover sheet (education, postdoc, advisors, etc).
2. CVs are longer than one page, so finding the publications takes some time. Publication lists have the info I'm looking for right at the beginning.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: CV should be short (never more than 2 pages), while the list of publications can be pretty long. You usually mention some publications in the CV (well, if you have an article in Science, you surely do!), but surely not all of them.
The list of publications is valuable for different reasons: How many collaborators does he have? How many solo publications? What is the variety of topics? etc. CVs and motivation letters are easy-to-manipulate things. You can manipulate your publications, but that is something completely different (and soft-of more dangerous IMHO).
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/24 | 827 | 3,509 | <issue_start>username_0: While writing one's Statement of Purpose for applying to a grad program, should one mention that her spouse is also a grad student in the same university? What are the pro's and con's of that approach - while on one hand, it shows that the candidate is very likely to accept an offer made by the dept, it might also imply that the presence of her spouse is the main reason the applicant wants to get admitted, which might not sit well with the Admissions Committee?<issue_comment>username_1: This really can be a two-edged sword.
*Pros*: You are likely to really come and stay since your spouse is there. You can argue that you know much (positive) about the place through your spouse which has made you select the place.
*Cons*: You may be seen as applying because your spouse is there and not because you think the place is exactly where you want to go and be. In other words, you make a choice out of practical and not academic reasons. (largely what you already stated)
So, first of all, it is no-ones business why you apply to go to a certain place. Of course the people who read your application will evaluate your interest and so anything that strengthens the application is good anything that doesn't can be left out. Although the location of one's spouse should not be grounds for admitting (or not) a person, it is possible people read things into the fact that you did not originally anticipate. If you want to state that you already know the place is good, you may do so by demoting your spouse to a friend. I have to confess I am not at all happy about writing this which seems so negative towards mentioning your relationship but it stems from knowing that you cannot predict how people interpret things and it is therefore better to be neutral and focus on the academic rather than putting up personal reasons for a choice.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Are you attending the same courses? If so, it might seem like you are applying to be with him. If not, then you could state he was really positive about it which made you interested.
Like Peter said, it can go either way.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: username_1's answer is the most comprehensive. I would mention the spouse to your [POI](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59924/what-does-the-term-poi-mean-in-the-context-of-graduate-admissions) during a one-on-one interview / conversation -- but otherwise keep the information private.
The rationale: The only stage at which this information could possible is important is the final rankings. At that point, we do want to know whether the student we are going to make offers to are going to come. If there are two otherwise equally ranked students on the cusp, we'd make the offer to the one we're more sure will come. The POI can make the case then that you would come based on his/her inside knowledge.
Otherwise, that information is (mostly negatively) prejudicial for the reasons that username_1 mentions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: From an HR perspective, you also might want to leave out your marital status to preclude any possibility of discrimination. I am applying to grad schools now and will leave out the fact that I have a husband so that they cannot worry about my hypothetical pregnancy or marital situation affecting the timeliness of completion for the PhD program. Of course those things shouldn't be considered against you...but it's safer to leave them out, I think.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/24 | 419 | 1,788 | <issue_start>username_0: During graduate studies online application submission period, is there any preference given for an applicant if he/she submits his application at the beginning of that period compared with someone who submits his/her application couple of hours before the deadline?
Or as long as the applications are complete there is absolutely no difference!<issue_comment>username_1: Look at all the application rules and guidelines. **Unless the registration/application is specifically described as first-come first-served** (which would be unusual), **the date of submission doesn't matter** as long as the submission is complete before the deadline.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Here's some empirical evidence from my experience - having done three very late applications in the past which all ended with success.
**Short answer**
According to my past experience. No problem applying late - even the last hour.
**Long answer**
*Jobs 2013:* I have made *last hour* applications for two job posts recently, one for Computational Biologist at ICL and one for Bioinformatician at ICL. Both led to interviews followed by acceptance. Remarkably, the Computational Biologist post stated that "it is essential that the post holder has a PhD", which I did not have! I have now started this job.
*MSc Course 2012:* I was the last applicant of the Bioinformatics and Theoretical Systems MSc with CISBIO - most people applied during their BSc e.g. many on the course applied February but I applied in October after finishing my BSc! Not only was I accepted, but I got a scholarship that I did not even apply for! In the interview panel was a chair of BBSRC research grant, who set me up with the scholarship after the interview.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/24 | 473 | 1,975 | <issue_start>username_0: I am planing to apply to study in graduate school, major in *computer science/engineering*. I just took a GRE test, this is my 1st time, and the result is pretty...not so good :(
Most schools, the science or engineering related program, reveals the average or preferred GRE scores for *quantitative* and *verbal* sections for admitted students. But it seems they don't care about the score of *Analytic Writing* section. Really?
To be honest, my writing score really bumped this time. I want to know if there's a preferred score range for this section.<issue_comment>username_1: There's a reason it's not listed--there is no preferred score, it doesn't really matter. I am not an expert, but I feel like the writing score is something that can only hurt you, not something that can help you, at least with respect to science or engineering graduate programs.
More concretely, I can see a very low score preventing you from getting into a program, but I highly doubt the admissions committee saying: "Well, he got a great score on the writing section, that really differentiates him from other applicants; let's admit him."
For a foreign student or non-native speaker, doing well in the writing section probably carries a little more weight than it does for native speakers; nonetheless, I believe that the above still holds.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: According to my experience:
The GRE scores are just initial cut-offs.
Analytical writing usually requires a minimum score of 3 that's it. But this is true for most of the universities there may be some exceptions to the rule obviously.
```
Scores 3 and 2.5
Displays some competence in analytical writing, although the writing is flawed in at least one of the following ways: limited analysis or development; weak organization; weak control of sentence structure or language usage, with errors that often result in vagueness or lack of clarity.
```
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/25 | 539 | 2,300 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm writing a thesis on a financial topic and some important arguments for my research can only be found in reports from investment banks, not scholarly sources. I think it's because the topic is very new but right now I'm not sure how 'respected' a bank report reference is. I'm talking UBS, Citibank,... The topic concerns QE causing distortions in the stock market. **Is it considered acceptable to use a bank report as a source in a thesis?**<issue_comment>username_1: Citing grey literature, such as investment bank reports, isn't unheard of.
There are a few caveats.
* Discuss it with your supervisors early on: they will know the whens and hows of acceptable grey-literature citations.
* It may not be easy to find useful citation metadata such as named authors.
* Your reviewers / examiners may not be able to accesss the report, and that would be problematic for them, and thus for you.
* You should not build arguments that are grounded only in grey literature. Corroborate with peer-reviewed literature wherever possible, even if it's just corroborating one aspect of the points you're taking from the grey literature.
* Business reports often have some wacky form of encryption that hinders text searching, which can make including them in your literature review somewhat hazardous.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Using a bank report is acceptable unless it appears as though there is some bias present. QE and its impacts are a hot topic so you are likely to find it written quite heavily about in bank reports and the like. However, you must be on guard that what is being written is not really sales literature.
If the statements is "You would be reckless with your finances to ignore the impact of QE so come and let us make your money work for you!" then you might want to avoid it.
Just follow common sense about critical reading and how to evaluate your source reading material. If the source seems credible and the content seems unbiased then there should be no problem citing it.
As EnergyNumbers wrote, it is always better if others have access to the report but even if others do not, that should not stop you from including relevant information. Use the best source material you have, wherever you can find it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/25 | 1,049 | 4,594 | <issue_start>username_0: If a formula appears in the main body of the text, there seems no doubt that punctuation should be given to that formula when necessary. But when a formula appears *displayed* (i.e. solely taking up a line), there seems no consensus on whether punctuation is needed for it. I wonder if there will be any potential ambiguities if punctuation is (or not) included in this case.
This is essentially a question about *functions* of punctuation for displayed formulas. I don't want an answer about *rules* from certain style guide...<issue_comment>username_1: In mathematics there is a near universal consensus that displayed mathematics should not be treated differently from inline mathematics with regards to punctuation. By this I mean that the vast majority of papers on the arXiv follow this convention, most journals will add punctuation according to this principle if it's not already there, and so on.
Thus whenever you're unsure whether or not to include punctuation at the end of a displayed equation, try to replace `\[ ... \]` with `$ ... $` - whatever punctuation mark looks natural when it's inlined should be included also at the end of the displayed equation.
I don't think that texts without punctuation after displayed equations are necessarily *ambiguous*, but then again, a text without punctuation after inlined equations would probably not be ambiguous either. The main purpose of punctuation is after all not to reduce ambiguity but to increase readability and "flow" of the text.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: As a probably-minority opinion, I try to avoid having English-language punctuation juxtaposed to mathematical notation, especially anything complicated, whenever possible. Also, I try to avoid beginning a sentence with mathematical notation, trying, instead, to begin with an obvious English word that is capitalized.
In that vein, I do not put periods or commas at the right edge of displayed purely-formulaic expressions, but have the next line start with a capitalized English word, signifying new-sentence.
My objection to juxtaposition of English-punctuation with formulas is the visual noise, small though it may be. At least my own perception of my own scanning of English+mathematics is that I think of English in a somewhat different manner than I think of the mathematics (apart from small naming-phrases), and everything's easier if the two functions of "comma" and "period" are clearly distinguished.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The reason for including the punctuation is that text with math in it is still text. The reason for leaving it out is that it looks ugly because we're juxtaposing elements of two writing systems in which symbols have completely different meanings. Either possibility can be jarring to the reader.
A good way to deal with these problems is to leave some white space between the equation and the punctuation.
```
The Pythagorean theorem,
A^2+B^2=C^2 ,
has been known since ancient times.
```
In LaTeX, I use a \qquad for this.
In my personal style, I also sometimes end a sentence with a displayed equation set off by a colon, without a period after the equation.
```
Thus from Euclid's five postulates we arrive at our final result,
known as the Pythagorean theorem:
A^2+B^2=C^2
```
Here I feel that the colon acts like a signal on the tracks that tells the train conductor we're nearing the end of the sentence. The construction of the sentence also reinforces the reader's subconscious expectation that the sentence will not continue after the equation. Grammatically, the equation does not function as any part of speech; the style is similar to what one would use in introducing a diagram that was in-line in the body of the text and had no caption or figure number.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Short answer: Yes.
Longer answer: Yes, of course. No matter what is the formatting on the page, the text is *linear*, with the only exceptions being floating objects (figures and tables), which obviously *float*. The fact whether the formula is on display or not should have no implication on the punctuation used.
This issue exactly is not much addressed by Knuth in his [Mathematical writing](http://jmlr.org/reviewing-papers/knuth_mathematical_writing.pdf). Still, him being a profesionnal typographer, a mathematician and an author of many books, his opinion on this (which is clear if you open any of his works) is IMHO quite valuable, being a strong reference for proper punctuation. The linked article is definitely worth reading.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/25 | 2,114 | 9,052 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a post doc in mathematics, and was just sent a request to review a paper. This is the first time it happened to me. I never heard of this journal before, but it is a Springer journal, and upon checking the editorial board it looks like a respectable journal. Also, the paper looks quite interesting, so it appears that I shouldn't worry about it being dubious.
I wonder however, if this is a good time in my career to do such a job. Given that I am a postdoc, constantly in the run for the next job, and probably this will take some of my valuable research time. Is it normal for postdocs to review research papers? Should I accept it? If so, should I mention the fact I review for this journal in my C.V?<issue_comment>username_1: I have served as a referee for various math and related journals since I was a graduate student. I'm a postdoc now, and during this career phase, I have refereed way more papers than I wrote. I put on my CV the names of journals I have served for as a referee. I don't think I have done anything wrong about this. Let's see if I will land on a tenure track job this year!
On a bit more serious note, I think it's normal for a postdoc to referee papers. One of the editors of Nature once said the best referees are postdocs because they're on the cutting edge of research but naive enough to be honest. I don't know if this equally applies to mathematics. But I think the fact that the editorial board you find respectable chose you suggests that you are qualified and needed.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, reviewing papers is an integral part of your job now, and a very beneficial one at that!**
It's true that the first papers you will review will take you quite a bit of time, but it's a sound investment (unless you consider dropping out of academia next month). You'll improve your reading and ability to read between the lines. It will help you gain a wider view of what others are doing in your field, because it will force you to really go through the paper in depth, not just skim over it as we are so often forced to do when a paper is not at the core of our own research.
Moreover, it will give you invaluable experience when you write your next papers, because you will be able to put yourself in the reviewer's shoes! You will see better what could be problematic for a referee in the presentation of your work.
As for whether you should list it on your CV: [yes!](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/3540/2700)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: The other answers have focused on why reviewing papers makes sense to you.
But there’s a second, equally as important facet to it: It’s your **duty** as a researcher to review papers.
Sure, nobody’s contract mentions anything about reviewing papers, and no grant proposal ever allocates resources for it. But, to put it bluntly, that’s a bug in the system (and one, I might add, that badly needs fixing).
Peer review is a fundamental part of how science is done today. And, by design, the people to do it are researchers. It’s simply *required* that researchers perform peer review. Of course we could all just say “eh, let other people worry about this” but I hardly need to explain how conceptually broken and ethically objectionable this concept is.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Do unto others as you would have them do to you.
>
>
>
This sums it up quite nicely. Do you want your papers to be reviewed? Do you want the reviewers to do it properly?
I'm going to assume the answer to both questions is a profound **YES**. From the perspective of science, writing and reviewing are both crucial. As a scientist, it is part of your responsibility to review even if you consider it to be less rewarding.
This does not mean you should accept every review request. Sometimes you may get a request to review a manuscript which you may not be entirely suitable for as a reviewer. If the manuscript is in your field of expertise and there is no conflict of interest you should probably do it, though.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I was referee for various IEEE journals / conferences / proceedings during my PhD studies.
Opportunities:
1. a good opportunity for your CV
2. some benefits from the editor
Duties:
1. if you are member of a community (research is community) you must participate to the community's activities
2. reject the review if the paper doesn't fall in your research field
Suggestions:
1. if you do not feel up to it, you can only evaluate the scientific soundness and point this out to the editor
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Yes, but you should be protective of your time. Here is my algorithm.
We have a duty to review papers, but how many?
==============================================
How many reviews have you consumed?
-----------------------------------
My rule of thumb is that I will serve as a reviewer for each time when someone else was asked to serve as a reviewer for my paper. Therefore, if I have 4 first author papers, and each was reviewed by 3 people, then I have a duty to review 12 papers. When doing these calculations, I will discount my obligation if I had co-first-authors on the paper, but not for minor authors or senior authors. Senior authors are typically occupied with other obligations, such as serving as editors for journals.
Will you benefit from this review?
----------------------------------
Are you interested in the topic? If so, you are getting the first peak at this research, along with an opportunity to get the authors to respond to your questions. Do you respect the editor, and are you happy that she considers you an expert?
Pay attention to how much time you spend on a review
----------------------------------------------------
I have a tendency to spend 5-10 hours on a review (biology), but have been told that 2-6 hours is appropriate. I am trying hard to compress that. The appropriate amount of time may depend on your field. A mathematician colleague of mine said that he spends several days reviewing each paper. This is feasible for him because publications in his field are very rare. Sometimes I spend a lot of time because I am interested in the topic but have not previously bothered to read the background literature, so I read several papers while reviewing the one. This may be a helpful or harmful habit for my career. Refuse to review a paper if it will require background reading that you are not interested in.
Don't review unless you can get it done immediately
---------------------------------------------------
If you can't make time for it in the next few days, then you probably don't have time for it. It's best for everyone if the review is returned to the authors ASAP.
Reject bad papers ASAP
======================
Refuse to review papers with bad abstracts
------------------------------------------
I have reviewed a couple of papers even though they seemed pointless based on the abstract. It turned out that they were indeed pointless. My new policy is to refuse to review any paper with a bad abstract and write to the editor that I do not consider the paper publishable. I have not had the opportunity to do this yet, so I don't know how editors actually respond. However, I think this is a legitimate basis for rejecting a paper. If the abstract accurately reflects the content of the paper, then the paper is indeed pointless. If the abstract fails to describe what is notable about the study, then the paper is poorly written and is not ready for publication. Some journals say that their papers are not to be evaluated based on "impact", but if a paper is as pointless/trivial as the stuff I've seen, it is not worth the effort of reviewing it, and therefore it is not publishable.
Try to identify a fatal error quickly; if you find it, stop reviewing
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobody benefits from detailed nit-picking on a paper that is not going to be published anyway.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: There are already several good answers, but I will add one from a pure mathematician point of view, because this question is very dependent on the field (or at least, fundamental maths are outliers given the time needed to deeply review a paper: from a few hours for a clearly flawed paper to *years* in some cases).
Reviewing is part of your duty as a researcher, it adds a little bit to your CV, it pleases important people when done right, and most importantly it makes you learn stuff. But as said it takes a lot time to be done right, and you are in a position where your own research will earn you the right to have a career as professional mathematician or not.
I therefore consider that you should only accept to review papers that are either easy enough (or easily rejected enough) not to take too much time, or that are of primary interest for your own research, in which case a few weeks of part-time work on a review can be very beneficial.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/11/25 | 1,800 | 7,483 | <issue_start>username_0: In my field (chemistry), review is always done in a single blind process, i.e. the author does not know who the referees were, but the referees do know who the authors are. In ten years, I have never seen a referee breaching this anonymity, e.g. by signing their review, unless they got prior approval by the editor (in order to continue discuss things further with the authors, once the manuscript was accepted for publication).
So, it seemed logical to assume that in single blind peer-review, the reviewer should not disclose his identity without the editor's consent. Yet, some people have told me ([here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/14037/2700) and [there](https://mathoverflow.net/questions/98308/when-if-ever-disclose-your-identity-as-a-reviewer); also IRL a friend from human sciences) that they have seen people sign their reviews, or write emails to them after the review but before the paper is published.
So, **in single-blind peer-review, can you reveal your identity without the editor's consent?** Does it depends on the customs of each field, or is there a hard rule? (in which case, the few anecdotes I heard were outliers)<issue_comment>username_1: I would think that it's a bad idea to open the possibility of referees communicating with authors, since this opens the possibility of authors' influencing referees, compromising the process. Of course, this is not to say that there aren't some positive possibilities, but the conflict-of-interest criterion seems to me in this case to be clearly manifest.
That is, it should be understood, implicitly or explicitly, that referees will remain anonymous "in perpetuity", so that there is no hint or possibility that authors could communicate with them or influence them. E.g., either overt or subtle invitations from authors to a referee to communicate (and get some credit for the paper, maybe co-authorship, etc., as discussed around here some time back...) would be understood in advance to fail absolutely.
Thus, editors who discover referees willing to engage in such would probably regretfully stop asking them to referee, since if such activity became known it would seriously damage the reputation of the journal... if only in principle, but "principle" would seem to be the point...
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, **informing anyone that you was their referee is a serious betrayal of the system.** The fact that the reviews are (at least) single-blind by default has a good reason, which is that you don't feel unsafe writing a very negative review to a paper if it deserves it. As such, it works only if it's standard that this information stays secret.
Imagine a situation when 15 people vote for something in secret vote, but vast majority of them plan to reveal publically their vote. It stresses the minority to state their opinion as they feel it. And the uttermost reason for reviews is that reviewers state their opinion as they feel it.
There are some exceptions when it is acceptable, like:
* When you reject to review the paper for whatever reason, you can of course tell them that you saw the paper.
* Another exception is when the paper is really excellent and contains some breaking results (so that it is really really far from giving a negative review), but even then I would be quite careful.
AFAIK, in some countries, even a randomly-chosen portion of PhD theses get single-blind reviewed after they are published, to ensure that the thesis oponents take it more seriously in general.
**The fact that others do it doesn't mean that it's correct.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It's possible to sign peer reviews. It's not common, but also not unheard of. You should check if you're unsure, though I don't think it's usually possible to do so without the editor's consent, as all the reviews typically go through them, not directly to the authors. If the editor truly found it unacceptable, I believe they would have the option of redacting the review or refusing to accept the review until it was amended.
A rising sentiment in my field (biological sciences) is that anonymity in peer-review is increasingly abused to make disingenuous, unreasonable, or inflammatory comments without having to stand by them, or to get away with sloppy or ignorant reviews. Signing reviews is seen as a step towards greater transparency. This pair of blog posts by <NAME> ([1](http://www.molecularecologist.com/2014/04/why-we-sign/), [2](http://www.molecularecologist.com/2014/04/why-we-dont-sign/)) has some further pros and cons from people who sign or don't sign their reviews, respectively.
Personally I think open reviews, where they're actually published along with the manuscript, are a more effective remedy. But that's a separate discussion, probably.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It is overwhelmingly clear from the answers at <https://mathoverflow.net/questions/98308/when-if-ever-disclose-your-identity-as-a-reviewer> that **in the mathematical research community it is perfectly acceptable to sign one's reviews**. I know people who do so, and their purpose in doing so is to ensure that they keep the tone and content of their reviews such that they are not embarrassed to be acknowledged as the author of the review. I think that other mathematicians largely consider this a courageous and responsible action. Some may think it is unwise, but I don't know of any who think it is unethical.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: For me (EE PhD in USA in 1990's) one would not reveal one's identity as a reviewer. This would seem to violate ethics, even though I suppose 'double-blind' would be a stronger system than 'single-blind'.
However, if certain reviewers made certain comments, it is likely my advisor could finger them by their concerns, and determine that it was a certain researcher (or one of their associates). Of course, this is just using likelihood.
We were able to revise a paper to get it published after it was initially rejected. This is certainly possible. However, the reviewers should remain anonymous at all times.
I suppose someone could reveal this years later, when it no longer 'matters' except as a curiosity.
As pointed out elsewhere, this would vary by field, publication-outlet, geographic-region and other concerns.
However, the default assumption would be for the reviewer(s) to remain anonymous.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Just one more data point: I recently submitted a paper to a physical science journal that uses double-blind review. One of my reviewers suggested that I add in a more detailed discussion of a relevant previous paper that I had cited - but then he revealed for the sake of transparency that he had somewhat of a conflict of interest, because he was the author of that paper. The journal editor chose to pass the review along to me even though it revealed the reviewer's identity.
I don't think that this reviewer's course of action is very common - and I acknowledge that many editors probably wouldn't like it - but personally, I really appreciated having the additional context behind the review.
In my personal opinion, I think that by default you should avoid revealing your identity in reviews, but in situations where there is a potential conflict of interets (e.g. a request to add citations to your own papers), it's ethically acceptable - although not mandatory - to reveal your identity.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/25 | 1,644 | 6,951 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just graduated from a masters degree in information systems, and I'm due to begin a role at a large IT consultancy firm in 6 months time.
For the interim I have arranged a period of desk research with one of my old professors. I cannot go into specifics but to give you a taster my research will be around small/medium IT firm strategies.
I will of course receive direction from my professor on the detail, but some general advice for someone wanting to shift into an appropriate mindset for being effective at desk research would be very helpful.
What strategies would you use to tackle a desk research role?<issue_comment>username_1: I would think that it's a bad idea to open the possibility of referees communicating with authors, since this opens the possibility of authors' influencing referees, compromising the process. Of course, this is not to say that there aren't some positive possibilities, but the conflict-of-interest criterion seems to me in this case to be clearly manifest.
That is, it should be understood, implicitly or explicitly, that referees will remain anonymous "in perpetuity", so that there is no hint or possibility that authors could communicate with them or influence them. E.g., either overt or subtle invitations from authors to a referee to communicate (and get some credit for the paper, maybe co-authorship, etc., as discussed around here some time back...) would be understood in advance to fail absolutely.
Thus, editors who discover referees willing to engage in such would probably regretfully stop asking them to referee, since if such activity became known it would seriously damage the reputation of the journal... if only in principle, but "principle" would seem to be the point...
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my opinion, **informing anyone that you was their referee is a serious betrayal of the system.** The fact that the reviews are (at least) single-blind by default has a good reason, which is that you don't feel unsafe writing a very negative review to a paper if it deserves it. As such, it works only if it's standard that this information stays secret.
Imagine a situation when 15 people vote for something in secret vote, but vast majority of them plan to reveal publically their vote. It stresses the minority to state their opinion as they feel it. And the uttermost reason for reviews is that reviewers state their opinion as they feel it.
There are some exceptions when it is acceptable, like:
* When you reject to review the paper for whatever reason, you can of course tell them that you saw the paper.
* Another exception is when the paper is really excellent and contains some breaking results (so that it is really really far from giving a negative review), but even then I would be quite careful.
AFAIK, in some countries, even a randomly-chosen portion of PhD theses get single-blind reviewed after they are published, to ensure that the thesis oponents take it more seriously in general.
**The fact that others do it doesn't mean that it's correct.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It's possible to sign peer reviews. It's not common, but also not unheard of. You should check if you're unsure, though I don't think it's usually possible to do so without the editor's consent, as all the reviews typically go through them, not directly to the authors. If the editor truly found it unacceptable, I believe they would have the option of redacting the review or refusing to accept the review until it was amended.
A rising sentiment in my field (biological sciences) is that anonymity in peer-review is increasingly abused to make disingenuous, unreasonable, or inflammatory comments without having to stand by them, or to get away with sloppy or ignorant reviews. Signing reviews is seen as a step towards greater transparency. This pair of blog posts by <NAME> ([1](http://www.molecularecologist.com/2014/04/why-we-sign/), [2](http://www.molecularecologist.com/2014/04/why-we-dont-sign/)) has some further pros and cons from people who sign or don't sign their reviews, respectively.
Personally I think open reviews, where they're actually published along with the manuscript, are a more effective remedy. But that's a separate discussion, probably.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: It is overwhelmingly clear from the answers at <https://mathoverflow.net/questions/98308/when-if-ever-disclose-your-identity-as-a-reviewer> that **in the mathematical research community it is perfectly acceptable to sign one's reviews**. I know people who do so, and their purpose in doing so is to ensure that they keep the tone and content of their reviews such that they are not embarrassed to be acknowledged as the author of the review. I think that other mathematicians largely consider this a courageous and responsible action. Some may think it is unwise, but I don't know of any who think it is unethical.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: For me (EE PhD in USA in 1990's) one would not reveal one's identity as a reviewer. This would seem to violate ethics, even though I suppose 'double-blind' would be a stronger system than 'single-blind'.
However, if certain reviewers made certain comments, it is likely my advisor could finger them by their concerns, and determine that it was a certain researcher (or one of their associates). Of course, this is just using likelihood.
We were able to revise a paper to get it published after it was initially rejected. This is certainly possible. However, the reviewers should remain anonymous at all times.
I suppose someone could reveal this years later, when it no longer 'matters' except as a curiosity.
As pointed out elsewhere, this would vary by field, publication-outlet, geographic-region and other concerns.
However, the default assumption would be for the reviewer(s) to remain anonymous.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Just one more data point: I recently submitted a paper to a physical science journal that uses double-blind review. One of my reviewers suggested that I add in a more detailed discussion of a relevant previous paper that I had cited - but then he revealed for the sake of transparency that he had somewhat of a conflict of interest, because he was the author of that paper. The journal editor chose to pass the review along to me even though it revealed the reviewer's identity.
I don't think that this reviewer's course of action is very common - and I acknowledge that many editors probably wouldn't like it - but personally, I really appreciated having the additional context behind the review.
In my personal opinion, I think that by default you should avoid revealing your identity in reviews, but in situations where there is a potential conflict of interets (e.g. a request to add citations to your own papers), it's ethically acceptable - although not mandatory - to reveal your identity.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/11/26 | 361 | 1,587 | <issue_start>username_0: I am working on a multidisciplinary subject which involves mechanical engineering, chemical engineering and chemistry. I have a decent amount of research completed and now I need to select a journal to publish my work. How do I select a good journal to publish my papers?
Also for the same topic I need to select conference to present. How do I select that too?<issue_comment>username_1: In general if you are looking for a journal where to publish a specific type of manuscript do a survey of the material you have referenced. Where are those articles published? You should pay special attention to articles that are multidisciplinary such as yours. The next step if you are uncertain about the appropriateness is to e-mail the journal editors of journals and ask if they consider multidisciplinary articles. I do not think you should send the manuscript to them because they usually do not have time to read anything substantial just to answer a question but do paste in your title, author list and abstract.
As of conferences, I cannot see a patented answer. If a conference is a recurring event you can always go back to collections of abstracts to see if other multidisciplinary papers have been presented. Another option is to see if you cannot organize your own session at a larger conference that permits sessions.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the journal accepts pre-submission inquires try this way.
Alternatively consult [Elsevier Matching](http://www.elsevier.com/journal-authors/home) tool, it should help.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/26 | 1,590 | 6,857 | <issue_start>username_0: ### Background
I'm doing some work for a new online-only university that is being founded, based in the US and offering degrees up to doctorate in courses like history, philosophy and literature. It's heavily research-based and doesn't allow credit transfer.
One of the great things about this university is that it will offer scholarships to people in developing countries allowing them to complete a degree at a US university for as little as $100. The university is not designed to make money, but only to keep itself going. (This does not mean it is non-profit; in fact most non-profits are designed to make as much money as possible, they just don't have shareholders.)
We need academics/professors to volunteer to advise and help us get started, especially during the current period where the application for a new university is being considered. We expect them to help by:
* associating with the university for the sake of the application, even if only in name;
* marking theses, when students reach that stage (though no teaching will be required).
### The questions
I've tried emailing professors asking for their help, but it seems no one is interested. I get the impression that online universities don't have much respect from these people and that no one wants to risk their reputation by being involved with something new and different.
**What is the best approach to convince established professors to contribute to this project?** Would they expect to be paid in return? (A stipend is possible, as well as a title, but no salary.)<issue_comment>username_1: This my vary by school, but at least at my institution, this is close to the line where approval from higher-ups is required for a professor to participate. While professors have a great deal of latitude with how they use their time, the university does actually claim possession of our teaching (it is, after all, what they're paying us for).
There are written-in exceptions (for example, giving tutorials on research subjects is a standard thing, and allowed), and it's possible to request permission for other cases. It's not clear to me from your question whether what you're asking for would require permission, but it's close enough that I probably wouldn't be comfortable without permission. That's a big enough deal that it might discourage participants who were otherwise inclined.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Different requests warrant different communication styles. By simply sending an email and leaving it at that, your request is in the same boat as any other piece of spam they receive; unsolicited mail asking for their resources (time, money, whatever).
If you truly wish to have them partner with you in a new business venture, you should engage in standard courtship behavior expected for this sort of relationship; phone conversations, in-person conversations, take them out for coffee, lots of follow-up. Additionally, they'll need to be convinced that you're not a fly-by-night nobody and that it's worth their while to work with you. This takes time and effort, and is guaranteed not to happen if your main communication channel is email. You are acting in a Sales position here; treat it as such.
Do note that you will likely be received with significant skepticism, and you should have ready answers for all the questions you're sure to receive.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There are a number of issues here:
1. The new university probably isn't accredited (yet?) and is for-profit (at least that's how I interpret "this does not mean it is non-profit"). In principle a for-profit, unaccredited university could be innovative and wonderful, but it will face a lot of prejudice because most such universities are not.
2. Joining a new venture like this involves putting a lot of trust in the people who are running it. If they turn out to be crazy or dishonest, then everyone involved will look bad. It's difficult to reach this level of trust, and almost impossible starting with e-mail from a stranger.
3. Advising research students takes time and effort. It's not just a matter of proposing a topic and waiting for the thesis to come in; instead, there's a lot of advising and mentoring. This is a major commitment, and I wouldn't want to have my name associated with something like this unless I was doing everything necessary to help the students succeed. Some of your comments (such as "virtually no need of professors until it comes to marking theses" or "we need academics associated with the university for the sake of the application, even if its only in name") sound like I would be setting students up for failure or misleading them as to my level of involvement.
4. Time is a major limiting factor. If I had all the time in the world, then I would cheerfully volunteer to help with all sorts of things. As it is, though, there are a lot of students at my own institution who seek supervision, and working with them in person is more satisfying and productive than supervising someone over the internet. If I maintain my current level of engagement with students in person, and add internet activities, then what am I going to cut? It's not enough to make a case that participating in this new university is valuable. Instead, you have to make the case that it is more valuable than whatever I might be doing instead, such as research or family time.
5. What you describe comes across as saying professors aren't really necessary except for validating research output and ought to be willing to do that for relatively little money. This philosophy won't be popular with many professors, who would like to believe they engage in plenty of crucial activities. If this isn't the impression you would like to convey, then you need to modify your sales pitch.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Unfortunately I seem to agree with JeffE. It does sound like a scam. The open universities I know: a) They have permanent administrative personnel organizing the university tasks b) Despite the fact they are online they have buildings (not necessarily a campus) but at least offices where the administrative people work. c) They have deans, professors and lecturers. Some of them are part-time but certainly not all of them. All faculty is paid accordingly d) Before hiring professors they have courses, syllabus etc. Based on that they hire their faculty. g) For hiring faculty they make public announcements. Public announcements are put in scientific societies (i.e., ACM), on the university site, on press etc. As a result they cost money. Emailing professors sound a poor-guy's scam working from his basement.
If you have all those prerequisites, you will be taken seriously. If not, you should probably look to well-established open universities for inspiration.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/11/26 | 1,682 | 7,454 | <issue_start>username_0: A journal which accepted a paper of mine has made some alterations to the text of the paper as part of their editing process. They sent me the edited version for approval, and I discovered that at least some of these changes are erroneous (for instance, one of the changes included a typo, and another was changing the spelling of a technical term incorrectly). I asked for a list of all the changes made, and was told that this was "too messy" (I assume because the alterations to the text are mixed in with the changes to the formatting of the paper, which is a more standard part of the editing process).
At this time the journal is waiting for me to approve/make changes to the final proof before publication.
My question is how I should deal with this situation. I feel like I have an obligation to be responsible for the contents of a paper published in my name. (Though, if I'm mistaken about this, that would be a helpful answer.)
I can think of a few solutions, ranging from the tedious (compare the PDF files line by line to identify the changes myself), to the demanding (insist on a list of changes anyway), to the passive-aggressive (either withdraw the paper or add a sulky footnote disavowing responsibility for the unknown changes to the paper). These all have problems, so I'd appreciate more constructive ways to approach the situation.<issue_comment>username_1: I've run into bad editing situations like this. In these cases, I've gone through the paper line by line, with a fine tooth comb. Yes, it is painful, but it is a good idea even if the journal editors aren't obviously screwing up. (This can get doubly horrible if you have complicated formatting in your paper.)
You should bear in mind whoever is doing this is unlikely to actually understand what you are writing, and my experience of people doing this sort of thing is that they can be well-meaning and not too bright, so they can take it upon themselves to "correct" your manuscript, while not understanding what they are doing. Additionally, if you give them last minute changes to the paper, make sure to check they have applied them correctly. Are you the sole author? Can you get anyone else to help with this? It would make it less awful.
Your other ideas sound less viable. Asking for a list of changes assumes that there is someone there who actually knows what those changes *are*. My experience is that journal staff are often amazingly technically incompetent, and probably have never thought of using version control for example. though I'd love to hear about the exceptions. But you can certainly try to insist.
Your passive-aggressive ideas just sound bad. You don't want to withdraw your paper over an issue like that. And if there are errors in the paper, they will reflect badly on you, and nobody else will care.
At times I've thought someone should start a site like ratethisjournal.org where people could discuss their experiences dealing with different journals.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Some background. Many copy-editors (I would say most) are not experts in any field but are experts on the house style of the publisher. I have experienced how copy-editors new to the journal make lots of mistakes, they sometimes edit several journals with different styles. They should not make such mistakes but sometimes the communication between the publisher and the copy-editor does not work well for one reason or another. Note that the journal and its editors may not be involved in this part of the process; I cannot say what applies in your case.
I would suggest you contact the editors of the journal, or the contact to which you are supposed to return the comments. State that your manuscript has been corrupted by the copy-editing and ask how they suggest you should proceed (considering that the state of the paper is completely unsatisfactory). What you can also do is to try to summarize the systematic errors you have observed so that the journal/publisher can provide these comments to the copy-editor. Unfortunately, the copy-editor will not likely be able to make any better judgements on the corrections without input from others, so I think it is safe to say at least some will most likely fall back to you to correct in the end.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Copy-editing is a normal part of the publication process, and a few errors can be introduced that way. **A good proof-reading is in order, of course, but if you miss a typo or two it's not the end of the world.** Moreover, if you later come to realize that a critical error has been introduced, which was not present in your initial copy and which you did not find in the your proof-reading, you can always ask for a correction at that point.
However, many publishers give you more information to help review the copy-edited proofs. For example, many publishers will gladly give you (automatically, or upon asking) the list of changes made (“edit track” or something like that). Something a bit like a `latexdiff` output, in most cases. It's a crowded document, and hard to read through because there are many formatting and copy-editing changes, but it can be helpful with some details.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A Copy Editor speaking. I have couple comments:
1. It is true that **it is impossible to seperate the changes in the text and changes in the formatting**, even in good systems like LaTeX.
2. **Good Copy Editor never changes any scientific terms as is.** Sometimes we have to change a formula (split in two lines, etc.), or we are dubious about a comma, preposition, hyphen or whatever. Even though the Language Editor corrects these, I sometimes don't make the changes if I feel it is against the intention of the author. Honestly, this is a complicated process, even inside the Editors' Office, not speaking about communication with the authors. As well, we put some notices in the Proofreading version if we're unsure about something, so that the author can be aware of it. Unfortunately, it seems to me that not many journals do quite a great job in Copy Editing.
What can you do:
1. **Read your manuscript really carefully during the proofreading.** No matter what
happens, you can get as angry as possible at the Editor's, but if there was a mistake in the proofreading version and you did not point it out, it's your mistake, not the journal's.
2. **Prepare the manuscript as perfectly as possible.** Use the correct template (esp. in LaTeX), follow the (typo)graphic manual of the journal etc. This way, you minimise the changes the Copy Editor/Typesetter has to make, thus minimising the chance of something going wrong. My experience is that the amount of mistakes that appear is highly dependent of the quality of the manuscript when you send it. (Example: We work in LaTeX, and when I receive an article in Word, I have to re-write/revise all the math formulas. Imagine how many mistakes I make during this very stupid process.)
3. There are tools that allow a document to be "linearised". Then you can linearise the accepted version and the proofreading version and compare them. However, I don't have any how-to for this.
4. **If you find a serious mistake after the publication,** see what errata policy the journal has. In our case, the online version (we're open access) can be corrected, and additionally, Errata are printed in the next suitable issue.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/26 | 1,799 | 7,781 | <issue_start>username_0: I enjoy creating presentations a lot and I think I have an eye for nice design, however, I tend to always have the same layout/colour scheme/etc. and I'd like to try something new for my defence.
So I've been googling great presentations for hours, and there are heaps of innovative designs but usually these are from outside academia. I still want to convey information in a serious manner. But when looking at websites that intend to give advice for scientific presentations I find the examples horrible and very much 1990s (bullet points...)
So, in short, can you think of any scientific presentations with unpretentious but great design, which can be found somewhere online?
**Edit** Thank you for your comments, which definitely include heaps of helpful advice, however, I was less looking for "basic" presentation guidelines but more for design elements, which do not distract the audience but which make the presentation a bit more interesting. For instance, a colleague of mine recently gave a presentation and before each section she'd have a slide with just the title of the section and a photo (e.g. "Methods" and a picture of her lab equipment). I liked that because it structures the presentation and is a nice break from charts, diagrams and (in the worst case) bullet points. So, yes, I am really more looking for inspiration on fonts, colours, using white space, ...<issue_comment>username_1: There are two aspects to your question, in my opinion: design and function.
*Function*. Many have criticized PowerPoint and bullet points and perhaps none so much as Edward Tufte in his essay booklet [The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint: Pitching Out Corrupts Within](http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/books_pp). The defaults of PowerPoint and reliance on bullet points is interesting and "forces" users into a particular form of presentation where bullets are more reminders for the speaker than the audience. From this background an alternative is to use the so-called [Assertion-Evidence Structure](http://www.writing.engr.psu.edu/slides.html) which takes a very different approach to building slides.
In the Assertion-Evidence Structure the heading of the slide is the main point of the slide, a take-home message. The slides use graphics extensively to support and high-light the main point. The structure has been shown to yield significant improvements in both audience understanding than normal bullet-point presentations. Se the [linked example of the structure](http://www.writing.engr.psu.edu/presentations/speaking.pdf).
The Assertion-Evidence slides are not necessarily pretty but they do the job very well so that brings me to the second issue.
*Design*. When you look at designing slides it is probably easier to list the don'ts than the do's. In general, anything "fancy" easily becomes boring when overdone. Therefore simple is better. I would also add that subtle is better. Do not use strong colours and avoid backgrounds that can clash with the text, either structurally or in terms of colour, after all you want your message to shine.
So design anything with a principle to do as much as possible with as little as possible and you should be on a good road. I think referring back to <NAME> is useful also here.
So taken together, it is not clear what is a well designed presentation depending on whether you are looking at aesthetic impact or factual impact.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I personally like the books from <NAME>, "slide:ology" is about design and how to express certain concepts (Flow, Structure etc.) while "resonate" is about structuring the story.
Clearly these books can't be applied to Science directly, there is nothing about setting formulas etc, but they provide good directions and give inspirations on what to think about.
Beside this I would not focus that much on the whole presentation, but on special components, like "How to visualize Information/Data", typography or design in general. There are a lot of websites and books on these things.
Finally on real examples: There are tons of presentations on ted.com. In my opinion <NAME> is an interesting speaker, his talk "Global population growth, box by box" is a example of a presentation which combines powerpoint and real things. <NAME> is also worth mentioning.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I've tried following a number of design presentation guidelines (Presentation Zen being one of them).
In the end, I've found that the real focus of presentation design needs to focus first on your story (and therefore your content) and less on the visual aspects of your presentation. One colleague of mine read a lot of presentation books and then tried to do a presentation filled predominantly with large photographs (as recommended by one of them) and minimal text. A faculty member complained that he couldn't follow the talk because there were too few words. I've seen slides that are dull and boring that are accompanied by fascinating speakers. I've seen talks with boring slides and really amateurish graphics that are good talks (the amateurish graphics were actually interesting in that they made the presentation stand out).
I think my main message here is that we could throw examples of good scientific presentations with good visual design at you all you like but they won't necessarily improve your presentation. If you already knew that, then that's excellent - you're probably just looking for something minor then, like a new type of bullet or an interesting color scheme. But if you're hoping that "using more animated builds" to explain complex topics and adding "more punchy pictures" will help, that's not a sufficient condition!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are tired of the slide-by-slide format of PowerPoint, you can have a look at dynamic presentations with [Prezi](http://prezi.com/) or [Impress.js](http://bartaz.github.io/impress.js/#/bored). These two tools can introduce you to a whole new way of creating presentations but using them must always be motivated by good reasons. Because PowerPoint follows a linear path in the presentation, it is easy to do the same with Prezi and Impress.js while they can afford for a higher level of interaction between each *slide*.
Last but not least, some people have motion sickness and using too many effects might annoy them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: [Butterick’s Practical Typography](http://practicaltypography.com/presentations.html) has some great tips for making more readable presentations that don't look like typical PowerPoint ones.
**Don't use a white background**. High contrast slides can be very exhausting, especially if your presentation is given in a darkened room. In that case, consider a black background with light grey text. Even in bright rooms, using a light grey background with dark grey text reduces eye strain.
**Use a consistent font size**. Most presentation programs will automatically adjust the font size based on the text, which just looks messy. It's better to adjust your text so that it displays nicely at your font size.
**Limit the use of color**. Use color sparingly to emphasize or set apart certain elements. A lot of color quickly distracts from the content, and when everything is emphasized, nothing is emphasized.
---
Other than that, I have seen some really good hand-drawn presentations. They have a feeling of authenticity that you can't get from PowerPoint. I've seen two versions of this: using note-taking software, or simply a sequence of photographs of a stack of hand-written sheets of paper. The note-taking software can make it much easier to do certain animations, as you can draw on the slides during your talk.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/27 | 1,382 | 6,007 | <issue_start>username_0: I rewrote my thesis work with improved analytical explanation of major problem statement and included few subsections which were not the part of thesis. Also I rewrote the algorithms with more clarity for better understanding.
One of my colleagues at current working place has helped me in organization of paper and correction of English. I submitted the paper by mentioning my supervisor as second and my colleague as a 3rd author of paper. I also mentioned in acknowledgment that work is extended version of my thesis work under supervision of Mr. X.
After acceptance of paper my supervisor is causing trouble and saying I cannot mention anyone else except him in acknowledgement, and he must be the corresponding author. But as per editor's response, it’s too late to make changes. Now he wants me to withdraw my accepted SCI paper and resubmit according to his wishes (1-He must be corresponding author 2-Acknowledgment must be written according to his wishes 3-Exclude 3rd Author)
My question is whether his reaction is proper? If I don't listen and proceed for publication whether it can cause some problem?<issue_comment>username_1: The problem you ran into is one of the prime examples of why one should **always** get *all* the coauthors' approvals before submitting an article.
If you have in fact documented approval from your previous advisor for the paper in the form in which you submitted, the facts are on *your* side. And there's little your advisor can do about it: it is his own fault for not having caught something he disliked and to have given you the OK to submit. (Though pissing off one's advisor is generally not a good career move.)
If you *have not* obtained the approval, then you almost certainly *must* retract the paper. All journals I have submitted to and refereed for either requires the assent to publication be individually given by all the authors (in which case the journal will often ask for contact information of all authors to be keyed in when submitting), or that the corresponding author certify that he is in a position to speak on behalf of the other authors about the paper. The fact that your advisor is making noises means that either
* He will disagree, as a coauthor, for the paper to be published, or
* You have in fact lied when you certified that you can speak for him, in which case the journal will retract your paper for violating their rules
(assuming some form of this question was asked during the submission process). In other words, most likely you are already in a situation where you either voluntarily retract the submission (in which case the only people who will know about it are likely yourself, the two coauthors involved, and the handling editor at the journal), or, if you chose to publish anyway, be forced to retract the paper by the journal, since many journals take authorship problems rather seriously. In this latter case anyone with a subscription to the journal would know that your paper was retracted because of some sort of misconduct (yes, misrepresenting author information is scientific misconduct). Your call.
---
The above basically answers what you should do in your situation. But what about the case where the paper has *not* already been submitted, but there are disagreements over authorship and wording of the paper?
My only suggestion is that in that scenario, you should get together with your two "co-authors" and hammer out a compromise yourselves. While I find the objections by your advisor a bit strange, there may be ulterior reasons you are not telling us. A possible compromise in this case would be for you to publish one paper, containing only the contributions of your thesis work, with your advisor, and a second one containing the reanalysis and extension, with the other author.
And do **not**, in any case, go over the objections of your co-author(s) and submit a paper in a form they do not agree with. That's a recipe for academic misconduct right there.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I will add some supported information to the answer and comments, perhaps more for future reference. There are guidelines for author ship. The [ICMJE (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors](http://www.icmje.org) has written up guidelines for [authorship and contributorship](http://www.icmje.org/ethical_1author.html) based on the Vancouver Protocol. You can also see the post [Paper contributions and first authorship](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/13946/4394) The requirements for becoming an author are quite strict. Based of these guidelines you can see whether co-authorship should be reasonable.
You can also check out COPE's [How to handle authorship disputes:a guide for new researchers](http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/2003pdf12.pdf) and the [American Psychology Association APA Student’s guide](http://www.apa.org/science/leadership/students/authorship-paper.pdf) for thoughts on authorships and disputes particularly from the perspective of a young scientist.
To cap off, your situation is far from ideal. To evaluate possible co-authorships must be made early on. You will inevitably experience people who will bully their way into a paper (pressured authorship) and in some cases such behaviour is more a tradition than abuse (but nevertheless wrong and unethical). But remember that missing to add an author (ghost authorship) is also unethical. What you can do in this case is to contact the editors of the journal to seek their advice. Suggestions to retraction of articles is not something they take lightly. You do, however, need to assess the authorship issue carefully along the guidelines given in the examples above. Whether someone is missing from the acknowledgement or not is cause for any drastic measures. The acknowledgement is the only part where the authors can add thanks etc. as they see fit. It is not even necessary to have an acknowledgement, although that might appear odd to readers.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/27 | 429 | 1,845 | <issue_start>username_0: How long does it take for a cited paper to show up online? I can see a couple of papers that were cited very recently and the papers containing those citations are currently online since a week or two. How long should I expect it to take before those citations show up as citations through Google Scholar or other indexing services?<issue_comment>username_1: [Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com), [Web of Knowledge](http://wokinfo.com), [Scopus](http://www.scopus.com) and other indexing services have their own ways how the papers get into their database. For Scopus, the journal has to be registered there, and then actively send the data. It's similar for Web of Knowledge I think. Google gets the data from who-knows-where and I doubt you can control it efficiently. *In general, it takes couple weeks to several months.*
As **dgraziotin** pointed out in comments, Google Scholar indexes citations from [arXiv](http://arxiv.org) quite quickly, in couple days. However, by many people and many institutions, arXiv papers are not considered at all regarding citations, unless they are published properly elsewhere and properly Journal-ref'ed; even then, many people don't trust that the arXiv version is correct, because nobody makes any check of this (I mean, you can put whatever Journal-ref to whatever your arXiv paper, so it's not trusted).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: With Google Scholar, it depends at least in part on the deal the publisher has made with Google about how soon they are allowed to scrape. For this reason, Google Scholar citations for a year keep going up for months after that year has ended.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It took four days for a Science paper (four days from online publication, three from official publication / print.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/28 | 615 | 2,779 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate intending to apply to an American graduate program. In my SOP, I decided to write one paragraph about my final year thesis. However, the truth is that I failed to propose something new in my final year thesis. The only positive things, I believe, is that I have found related papers quickly without any guidance.
I hope to talk positively about this experience. Is it positive to mention that "I have found papers quickly?" And how to mention such a "failed" final year thesis in SOP?
---
More background information:
Field: graph theory
My supervisor was busy and he did not spend much time discussing the topic with me or teaching me about it. I have a problem understanding papers that are somewhat concise. At last, I had no choice but to change my topic. He only described the topic, did not give any references to read. I found the references by myself, which were exactly what he wished me to read. The time is limited and hence I do not propose many new things in my final year thesis.<issue_comment>username_1: At undergraduate level usually it is expected that student has basic understandings of intended field. Your SoP must state that what kind of motivation you got from your thesis/studies and how it is influencing your decision to select future field of research. Sometime you may select a topic (due to to lack of guidance and experience) which is not suitable to you. If this the case and you want to change your major research area be honest and explain why you want to change and why you are selecting new area of research.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not so sure that your final year thesis has actually 'failed'. It is not actually expected that many students will propose something truly new in their bachelor's thesis. The purpose is to teach you how to research a topic and write about your research. In this case, the fact that your supervisor did not give you much guidance or direction may actually be seen as positive, since you have succeeded in finding the relevant papers on your own, and have (I presume) written a decent paper about your research.
You are now heading into a phase where you *will* be expected to go beyond a literature search and propose "something new". Finding the relevant references is a basic skill required of any researcher. So is being able to work independently (that is, without someone always telling you what to do and where to focus your research). Your current supervisor's supervisory style has forced you to do this--point out this fact in your SOP! Take credit for having initiative and independence, and do not see your final year thesis as failed. It may not be outstanding, but it has served the purpose well.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/11/28 | 463 | 2,133 | <issue_start>username_0: There are some very well-known results and equations, e.g., Shanon Capacity formula, Erlang Distribution and Poisson Distribution, etc. Do we have to provide a reference for these results as well?
Also at times we seek help from a user manual while writing a simulation program or conducting a practical experiment. Do we have to provide reference for user manuals as well?<issue_comment>username_1: At undergraduate level usually it is expected that student has basic understandings of intended field. Your SoP must state that what kind of motivation you got from your thesis/studies and how it is influencing your decision to select future field of research. Sometime you may select a topic (due to to lack of guidance and experience) which is not suitable to you. If this the case and you want to change your major research area be honest and explain why you want to change and why you are selecting new area of research.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I am not so sure that your final year thesis has actually 'failed'. It is not actually expected that many students will propose something truly new in their bachelor's thesis. The purpose is to teach you how to research a topic and write about your research. In this case, the fact that your supervisor did not give you much guidance or direction may actually be seen as positive, since you have succeeded in finding the relevant papers on your own, and have (I presume) written a decent paper about your research.
You are now heading into a phase where you *will* be expected to go beyond a literature search and propose "something new". Finding the relevant references is a basic skill required of any researcher. So is being able to work independently (that is, without someone always telling you what to do and where to focus your research). Your current supervisor's supervisory style has forced you to do this--point out this fact in your SOP! Take credit for having initiative and independence, and do not see your final year thesis as failed. It may not be outstanding, but it has served the purpose well.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/11/28 | 740 | 2,600 | <issue_start>username_0: I have found that [wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page) is not a coherent, exhaustive, or detailed reference. I would like to find a similar resource that explains academic/scientific terms and methodologies clearly, briefly, and in a detailed manner. Ideally, this resource would be freely available on the Internet and provide descriptions that clarify these sorts of terms e.g: theory, theorem, hypothesis, assumption, conjecture, lemma, corollary, law, rule, principle, etc.<issue_comment>username_1: If you find wikipedia not clear and brief enough, try [wiktionary](http://www.wiktionary.org) instead. Instead of a full scale encyclopedia type site, wiktionary only provides definition and examples.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Here is the result for entering "theorem" into [Wolfram alpha](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=theorem):
>
> A theorem is a statement that can be demonstrated to be true by accepted mathematical operations and arguments. In general, a theorem is an embodiment of some general principle that makes it part of a larger theory. The process of showing a theorem to be correct is called a proof.
>
>
> Although not absolutely standard, the Greeks distinguished between "problems" (roughly, the construction of various figures) and "theorems" (establishing the properties of said figures; Heath 1956, pp. 252, 262, and 264).
>
>
> According to the Nobel Prize-winning physicist <NAME>, any theorem, no matter how difficult to prove in the first place, is viewed as "trivial" by mathematicians once it has been proven. Therefore, there are exactly two types of mathematical objects: trivial ones, and those which have not yet been proven.
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is a short list of resources, for different fields, which I frequently use for reference:
1. Springer, [Encyclopedia of mathematics](http://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php/Main_Page)
2. IEC, [Electropedia: The World's Online Electrotechnical Vocabulary](http://www.electropedia.org/)
3. IUPAC, [Compendium of Chemical Terminology - The Gold book](http://goldbook.iupac.org/)
4. IUPAC, [Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry](http://media.iupac.org/publications/books/gbook/IUPAC-GB3-2ndPrinting-Online-22apr2011.pdf) (pdf)
5. JCGM, [International Vocabulary of Metrology](http://www.bipm.org/en/publications/guides/vim.html)
6. IEEE, [The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=4116787) (requires subscription)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/28 | 560 | 2,085 | <issue_start>username_0: I am looking for two kinds of data about the great scientists of today,
* Their average daily routine of work. Like how many hours and when?
* Their average length of time of being able to think continuously.
I vaguely remember seeing a post by <NAME> about this - like he mentioned that it takes him some x-minutes to focus on a question when he begins working. Though I don't remember if he mentioned any specific length of time for which he can concentrate at a stretch. [..sadly I can't find that post...]
I am more looking for examples among mathematicians and theoretical physicists though other theory fields might also look more or less the same.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have access to this article, but if you do, you might want to look into it:
[<NAME>. (1978). Relations between work habits, research technologies, and eminence in science. *Work and Occupations, 5*(1), 97-112. DOI: 10.1177/003803857800500106.](http://wox.sagepub.com/content/5/1/97.abstract)
There is a fair amount of psychological research on eminence/genius/creativity out there, so work routine information might be available, but I'm a little more pessimistic about representative data on "average length of time of being able to think continuously" (partly because I'm unclear on what it would mean to think discontinuously). More general populations are more accessible, and some research may consider relationships between the factors you mentioned interested in and the factors that define your criterion group (e.g., intelligence, creativity, achievement, productivity). You might want to ask this again on the [Cognitive Sciences site](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/) if you don't get the answer you're looking for here.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This popular book [http://www.amazon.com/Daily-Rituals-How-Artists-Work/dp/0307273601](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0307273601) contains precisely descriptions of working routines of various creative people, including several scientists and mathematicians.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/11/29 | 1,128 | 4,852 | <issue_start>username_0: A paper of mine has been under review for more than a year now. About 6 months ago I heard from the journal that one referee report is in while they are waiting for the 2nd. The editor promised he would get in touch with the Associate Editor to speed up the process.
In any case, nothing has happened until now.
I am thinking of withdrawing the paper citing excessively long review times. Could I ask for the one review that the journal received on my paper?
What is a good way to frame the withdrawal email with the request for the journal office to be kind enough to share at least the single referee's report they received?<issue_comment>username_1: I actually had a similar situation some years ago. I don't think my experience is very useful, but I will briefly recap it in any case.
I submitted a paper to a journal in October 2009. In April 2010, after several requests, I was told that one referee had given a report, and the journal was still waiting on the second report. The journal then sent me the report at that time (in April), though I gather that was not standard procedure, and as far as I can see, I did not explicitly ask for it, though I had been repeatedly asking for feedback of any kind. The journal wrote:
>
> In fact, we got a report from the first referee. The referee's opinion
> is rather negative. As a rule, we do not send a negative report before
> we get a report from the second referee. Taking into account your
> will, we send the first referee report to you - please find it below.
>
>
> SInce we have not yet got the second referee report,
> there is no editorial decision concerning your paper.
> We hope to receive the second referee report in April.
>
>
>
I don't know exactly what was meant by "taking into account your will".
The second report never arrived, and I withdrew my paper in September 2010, slightly less than a year after submitting it.
I suggest that you ask your journal for the one report. You might want to wait on withdrawing it till you hear what the report says. You could say that you would like to use the first report to improve the paper while waiting for the second.
If they refuse, I guess you could then say that you are withdrawing the paper, and then ask for the report again. If you are going to withdraw the paper, this marks the end of the process from the journal's point of view, and I don't see why they would refuse feedback that might help you. Of course, they might refuse regardless. I imagine that individual journals would have different policies about such things.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the question I must acknowledge the comment that times vary between disciplines (and to some extent journals). You should therefore check what applies to the journal where you submitted your manuscript. Based on what you find you can start thinking about withdrawing the paper.
From my perspective what you describe sounds like good grounds for withdrawing and trying a different journal. In my field (Environmental sciences) and in the journal where I am editor-in-chief, the time from submission to acceptance can be anything from a month and a half to slightly less than a year, but then the long times involve revision and a second round of reviews. If what you describe happened in "my" journal i would be very sympathetic to a request to withdraw. One could argue that because you have received a review you should feel obliged to stay because of the work the journal editors have put in, but then one must also consider the work they have not done, which is following up on the lack of response. It would not be too much work to assign a third reviewer when lack of response from the second becomes obvious. So in the end I think the journal seems to suffer from internal problems. A lack of response from a reviewer (which is not uncommon) should not halt the process for a paper. So with the assumption that turnover times in your field are within what I see as normal in mine, I think you have a good case for asking to withdraw your paper.
So, in my view, this is what I would do. I would write a polite letter to the editor explaining that you have decided to withdraw the paper because of the (severe) delays you have experienced. You do not need to point out the obvious short-comings of the journal but explain how the delays affect your personal situation. We all need publications to strengthen funding applications, job applications, promotions, evaluations etc. so significant delays have negative effects. Now it is of course not a responsibility of a journal to help your career but in a case like this, there is little point in blaming a (failed) process within which you have no insight, so focus on the effects it possibly has for you. And keep it brief.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/11/29 | 492 | 1,839 | <issue_start>username_0: I do not have any prior experience of publishing any kind of research material, it would be a huge favour if you can give your comments in the following matter:
In a thesis related to Seismic Image Processing, the author has proposed a method for Automatic Fault Detection, I have implemented that method and I have improved the results of the method by introducing some more equations.
My question is, given the above situation can I publish my findings ? and how should I quote that thesis in the publication ?
Any suggestion/comment/idea is welcome.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: This is standard practice. Someone does work and publishes it. Someone, possibly same people, but not necessarily, improves on the work and publish that. The fact that it is a thesis should make no difference, so long as the work being improved upon reflects the state of the art.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The best practice would be, IMHO, to contact that person, discuss your ideas with them, and make a common paper with them. In general, they will be interested in it (if they stayed in science), and you're sure you don't offend them or anyone. At least for me (in Math/CS), this is the way to go if you really "improve" some other's work. It might be a bit different if you "build on" their results.
You quote the thesis as any other source:
>
> <NAME>. *My most stupid work on Josh phenomenon.* PhD Thesis, University of Neverland, Nevercity, 2013.
>
>
>
(These are the mandatory fields. You can add ISBN, number of pages etc. if you wish.)
In BibTeX, it should be:
```
@phdthesis { doe_2013,
author = {<NAME>},
title = {My Most Stupid Work on {J}osh Phenomenon},
publisher = {University of Neverland, Nevercity},
year = {2013},
pages = {666}
}
```
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/11/29 | 346 | 1,476 | <issue_start>username_0: First, I am not asking for name suggestions. I am just not sure how to express very well the content of my paper. The paper theoretically compares four algorithms, and nominates and implements one of them. I found many papers in the literature which started with the name `Comparative analysis`. Does this term apply to my paper? (In all the literature I've found they implement all algorithms, not just one.) If this term does not apply, is there a proper term that can pinpoint the content? More specifically, my paper compares four pattern recognition algorithms and implements one of them that theoretically seems to be the best. Does **(Selection and Implementation of an Algorithm for optimizing ... system)** properly express the content of my paper ?<issue_comment>username_1: Difficult to choose a title without more information, but why not choose:
***Performing ..., theoretical comparison of four algorithms, and implementation of ...***
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would go for something brave:
>
> **Algorithmic Jungle on GPU: QuickSort, HeapSort and ShakeSort Compared.**
>
>
>
The fact that you implement one of them should be mentioned in the abstract, however, it seems to be too long for the title, and people don't like too long titles.
On the other hand, if the implementation is more important for you, then maybe:
>
> **QuickSort Implemented on GPU for Sorting Ducks.**
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/11/30 | 672 | 2,805 | <issue_start>username_0: As a third year graduate student (theoretical physics) I need to find out methods to understand if I am doing well or not, am I making progress or not, am I putting in enough effort or not?
How do I judge/measure my performance?
---
Of course a primary skew in my situation is that I found an advisor only towards the end of my second year of PhD. (..before that I was working in other groups on topics which I didn't like at all..)<issue_comment>username_1: I think that one factor should be "ask your advisor". Depending on the relationship that you have, they might be best placed to give you an honest opinion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It's a good question, and one that's rather difficult to answer. I'll say a few things though.
* being able to judge your own level of progress and evaluate yourself honestly but fairly is a crucial part of your development. After all, you won't have an advisor for very long, but you'll be a researcher for a long time. So it's good that you're asking this question
* Research has many phases, and to evaluate your progress it's important to recognize which phase you're in.
+ in an exploratory phase where you're looking at different topics to see what might be worth pursuing, you should be reading a lot. A plausible metric here could be whether you're reading something every day, and if you're getting a sense of familiarity with the literature (you know citations without having to look up the bibliography, you keep encountering papers you've read before, and so on)
+ when you are working on a particular problem, do you have an idea that you're trying ? If not, what are you doing to search for the next idea ? do you have concrete tests of whether the idea is going to fail or not ? If you're thinking concretely and constructively, then you'll automatically make progress (notice that I'm not talking about how long it takes, but rather whether you see paths to progress)
+ when you're writing up work, are you methodically identifying things that need to be edited/cleaned/removed, and are you spending enough time each day working on these. When there's a lot of grunt work to do, time spent is a good measure of productivity.
Conversely, students (and researchers!) often become unproductive when:
* they don't know what to do next, and don't know to ask, or how to find something to do next
* they have things to do next, but are overwhelmed/fearful, and avoid doing them, or fritter away time in busy work (getting the exact right font for the title, for example)
The trick is not to get caught up in doing things at a certain rate, or worry about the large-scale, but rather **ensure that you always have something to do next**. If you don't, that's when you go talk to your advisor.
Upvotes: 5 |
2013/12/03 | 1,236 | 5,277 | <issue_start>username_0: I just submitted my applications to all the grad schools I am considering. Is there anything I can do during the wait to help my application?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Is there anything I can do during the wait to help my application?
>
>
>
I'll answer assuming you are applying to programs that work like most U.S. math graduate programs. In other words, programs where admissions are decided by a departmental committee, rather than by individual professors, and where there are no interviews or other direct involvement of the applicant after the application is submitted. For other sorts of systems, I'm not competent to offer any advice.
To a first approximation, there's nothing you can do during the wait to help your application. It's best to find a distraction and try not to worry about it. That being said, there are several things to keep in mind:
1. You should make sure your letter writers actually submit their letters. Every year, a few letter writers are many weeks late, and this can cause real damage. Even once you have submitted everything you are responsible for, the application is not complete until enough letters are received.
2. Getting in touch with potential advisors might help, but it should be done exceedingly sparingly. If the content of your e-mail amounts to "please look at my application" or "see how great I am", it will only annoy people. "Please estimate my chances of admission" is even worse. I'd recommend restricting pre-admission e-mails to cases where you have something genuinely substantive to say. For example, if you have intellectually serious comments or ideas related to the person's research, then that's always worth an e-mail. Same thing if you would like to bring their attention to a paper of yours that is closely connected with their work. A good test is whether you would still send the e-mail even if you weren't applying to their university. I don't recommend manufacturing a contrived reason to send e-mail, but if you never got in touch with someone whose research you extended, now would be a good time to do so.
3. It's usually possible to add information to your file if something important comes up (e.g., a paper acceptance or a prize). This is not worth even trying unless it's a real improvement in your file, and you certainly shouldn't make repeated changes in an attempt to draw attention to your file (any additional attention will be negative). However, if you get good news you should consider sharing it. The best news is often financial: if you get a fellowship that would pay for one or more years of grad school, then you should definitely add this information to your file. It's both a serious vote of confidence from another organization and a real savings to the department.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You should follow username_1's advice. The very unhealthy thing to do is to obsessively update the Results Search at <http://www.thegradcafe.com>. It does pass the time, though...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am exactly in this situation. Here are some of my suggestions:
* **Advancing your specialty knowledge.** If you are changing your field, or having some knowledge gap in your specialty, then you will need to learn a lot of new things. While learning during work is fine, knowing them ahead will save you lots of time. Everyday, you can read 5 pages of a good textbook, that only takes you half an hour. Do you have any subject that you want to have a review?
* **Knowing your body.** You won't have much time to care about health, and going to hospital (in the US) will rip you off. If you have an illness, try to know the why your body goes wrong, how it goes wrong, and how to prevent it. I had always known that I should exercise, but I was just lazy, until I know *the reason why* I should do that: exercise will move my lymph, and my illness has a relationship to that. Since that day, needless to tell me that I should exercise, I workout everyday.
* **Reading books, learning new skills.** You won't have much free time during your study. Read as much as you can. If you don't know where to start, then here are some topics I can suggest you: personal development, ergonomics, project management, personal finance, designing, language acquisition.
* **Exploring something new.** What's your favorite activities? Swimming, playing go, drawing, taking photographs? It's time to do that. Going abroad, climbing mountain, parachuting, etc. They are the moments that you will never forget in your life.
* **Getting familiar to programs aiding your research.** Every programs will take you a learning curve. If you have to simulate something, Python and Linux is your friends. Never heard about LaTeX? Better than Microsoft Word a million times. Learning to design, so that you will never make a boring slide or poster, or at the very least they are easy to be digest. I also suggest you to learn to customize the programs. My beloved apps so far are OneNote, Kanbantool, Toddledo, Google Keeps, ManicTime and Firefox with [addons](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/username_3/favorites/).
* **Having a job.** Money is also good, right? Or joining a summer school or lab to improve your CV.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/03 | 1,035 | 4,498 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently applied for an academic job that did not request letters of recommendation at the time of application, but only a list of potential references. I just now received an email from the search committee chair that I had made it to the "short list" and to please contact my references to arrange for my letters to be sent. I thought that a "short list" was the list of people who were going to be flown out for an in-person interview, but it seems that the "short list" in this context just means "the list of candidates whose letters of reference we'd like to see". Is there an agreed-upon definition of "short list" that I'm missing?<issue_comment>username_1: Nope, there's no widely agreed upon definition of "short list". Sometimes a committee draws up an official short list, while sometimes people informally talk about a short list based on who is being seriously considered even if there's no official list. Sometimes the short list consists of the people being interviewed, sometimes it's the people for whom letters are being requested, and sometimes it's in between. Things can get more complicated when there are several forms of interviews (e.g., interviews at an annual meeting vs. fly-ins). Sometimes a reference to the short list is a meaningless pleasantry meant to soften the blow of rejection when a committee member knows an applicant personally. Ultimately, the only thing you can say for sure is that it's better to be on the short list than off it. Beyond that, you have to guess from context or ask for clarification.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: "The short list" doesn't have an agreed upon meaning besides "The list that's shorter than the long list" in my experience.
In some places, it does mean the people they're intending to interview, but not necessarily. In your case, since they've been kind enough not to waste the time of (potentially) hundreds of people writing letters for candidates that never stood a chance, it might actually *mean* what you thought it meant, just that there's an additional step between "We like him" and "Fly him out". Namely, get letters of recommendation before they spend airfare, department time and resources etc. for someone who has some hidden flaw that will come out in the letters. So the intent might be there, but with an added bit of due diligence.
It might also be that they have a "short list" and then a "shorter list", which would be the scenario you're assuming.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Your interpretation is similar to how things work at my institution.
1. We scrutinize the applications and filter them
2. For the filtered set, we ask for letters of recommendation (this is the stage you appear to be at). We do this because it takes work to track down the letter writers, and we don't want to invest the effort unless the candidate has some chance of making it to the next phase.
3. We go through the letters very carefully, solicit extral informal feedback if necessary, and then develop a (partial) interview list.
We don't necessarily tell candidates that they've reached phase 2, and in some universities there's no step 1, so it's not always clear what "asking for letters" really means. In your case, since the department explicitly mentioned a short list, you've likely passed a plausibility filter (which is good!), but you can't draw any further inference from it.
From the department's point of view, this is also a way to make you excited and motivated to push your letter writers into action (so it saves them effort :))
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Being on a short list does not necessarily mean that they are going to interview you. It costs them quite a bit to fly you out and put you up in a hotel for a few days. But it is very possible that candidates ahead of you will ultimately turn the job down. And at some point they may well consider you, and fly you out.
Quite likely, also, they haven't decided who they are going to call for an interview, and they want to read the letters to get an idea of who they want to interview.
Finally, these decisions may be based upon things beyond your control, or your talents. For example, they might be looking for candidates with a very specific skill set, and you might not be a good fit. Or there might be some internal politics in the department - perhaps one person really wants to hire you, and another really wants to hire someone else. It's all out of your control.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/03 | 335 | 1,582 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper that describes a programming language that I am developing as part of my PhD. I think that writing the paper using an example can greatly improve how the paper is understood. Is there a "standard" example that is used in programming languages paper? A set of examples?<issue_comment>username_1: It would be helpful to learn about the specific strengths of your language, since good examples should illustrate its strengths (yes, this is more a meta-answer, but maybe exactly what you should be looking for).
*The* standard example is printing "Hello World"; everything else depends on the language and its features. E.g. you might want to demonstrate simple database queries, easy list processing, recursion, string manipulation, logic deduction, complex mathematics, ...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The biggest problem that you face when writing a programming language paper is explaining why the world needs another programming language, rather than a library or an API or something of the sort.
I would thus recommend skipping "standard" examples such as "Hello world" and recursive factorials entirely, and instead going straight to a set of minimal examples that illustrate the *value* of the new language. Only in the case of a [particularly extreme langauge](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakespeare_(programming_language)) will the standard examples be necessary to help understand the scientific concepts.
Note that *documenting* a programming language is an entirely different matter.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/12/03 | 1,116 | 4,655 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a master student in mathematics studying in Europe and I am applying to several graduate schools in the USA. They aren't all Top 10 in these dubious rankings, but I am applying to Harvard, Northwestern and Rutgers.
Currently, in the first paragraph of my letter of motivation (=letter of intent, statement of purpose, personal statement, ...) I explain how I overcame a big slump (=phase in which I had not much motivation to learn maths) which I went through after completing my bachelor, so roughly 1 year ago.
I mention it because this was an important experience to me, and as a result I feel like a more mature mathematician, and I am now confident that I want to do maths in my life.
However, I read that one should never put negative things about oneself in the letter of motivation, so right now I'm having doubts.
Could people on the admission committee consider having gone through a slump a negative point? Do they only want to hear how awesome I was my entire life?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I kind of disagree with [@TheHiary](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/9488/the-hiary)... I don't think you should put negative statements about yourself in your cover letter.
While they do not want to only hear how awesome you would be, they do want to hear **how, and why, you would be totally awesome working for/with them**. You can look up some tips and guidelines about writing a cover letter here: [A good motivation letter](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/13574/4249).
I also think that any half-page story has no place in your cover letter. **It should be fairly short, clear and memorable/striking**. I was suggested two pages maximum. One page is better.
But, **if it was an important experience for you as a potential researcher, there's definitely place for it in your cover letter,** *just not directly*.
What you should include, however, is:
* what helped you get back your motivation
(you can say that e.g. a project made you "rediscover your love of science" without explicitly saying that you lost it for a while)
* how your approach to research has changed in a positive manner
(e.g. working on the team project made me realize how important and helpful peer input, informal discussions and exchanging ideas was for my productivity)
* how your vision of science/yourself changed after that
(e.g. working with Professor X. what made me secure in my opinion that I want a career as a researcher)
* basically, any positive result of your experience is worth mentioning, but I would rather mention just what triggered the positive change of attitude instead of motivation-less period before
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: First, having observed graduate education in mathematics for a long time, very many people encounter their own period(s) of extreme disheartenment \_in\_grad\_school\_, for the obvious reasons of the challenges, but also for having not thought through the level of commitment to the enterprise that's required to make it work, and how delayed the gratification may be.
(So to a large degree it's not *whether* one has an episode, but *when*, and what happens afterward...)
Thus, if portrayed well, acknowledging such an experience already weathered could be a big plus, if the net was that you have a clearer purpose and clearer interest in mathematics, etc.
Maybe this oughtn't be the first point you make, and not in the cover letter, just toward the end of the personal statement... so if anyone is interested to read that far, they may also be interested in your remarks. In fact, thinking it's worth reading statements of purpose may be well-correlated with sympathy and interest in your having worked-through a bad period.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Youll hear a lot of "rules" in presentation and writing. There are no real rules, only guidelines.
For this question specifically the guideline is:
If you take your audience to depths, definitely bring them back to end a higher point. Do not end in the depths. If you experienced hardship, it has to be the second act in your story arc. The story must include how you learned and grew and are now a different, better person.
Always leave the audience feeling better at the end. Your goal is not to inform, but to enhance the audience. (Informing is a good route to making the audience feel better but thats a different conversation)
This might be tricky in a short letter, but youre talented. Im sure it can be done. I personally would stick with a purely upward story arc in this specific scenario, but saying it cant be done is false.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/03 | 964 | 4,213 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student who wants to do research in computer graphics field. I would like to know how a computer science masters degree and a computer graphics and Game Technology (goes with similar names at different universities) would affect my future Ph.D. applications and career, upon graduating from the masters program.
At this point I should also mention that some of the "Computer Graphics and ..." master programs are 1 year long. (No thesis I assume?)
Thank you<issue_comment>username_1: It really depends on what sort of research you want to do. I know people who I work with in scientific visualization that have Computer Science degrees and that's probably the best thing for their kind of work. They use computer graphics, but most of their work is more related to computer science. If you're going to go the route of Computer Science but are interested in graphics, make sure you pick a program that offers enough education in that area (good coursework, professor interested in the research, etc.) and take plenty of Math, possibly even another Master's degree.
I'm not sure what kind of PhD work you would do in Computer Graphics outside of scientific visualization (though I'm sure there's some of which I'm unaware), but it sounds like the kinds of programs at which you're looking are more focused on people who are using the Master's program as an end goal to go into the computer games industry. I'd be wary of those programs if you're trying to move into a Ph. D. later as they may not be relevant to the kind of program where you'd be applying in another year or two.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd look at this a little like a wager on where you want to go in the future.
If you'd like to do a PhD in the future, then focus on the fundamentals will pay off. I can't think of a single PhD that wouldn't benefit from stronger research and math skills. Especially if you want to go on to a PhD, ensure that you're getting the background in research --- typically this will mean a focus on thesis based programs.
If you're unsure of where you want to go afterwards, be aware, that a good master's program in Computer Science, is unlikely to close any doors for you, whereas a focus on Computer Graphics may mean that it's more difficult to make the transition into a different field later should you decide it's not for you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you think you might pursue a PhD later, it's a **very** bad idea to pursue a one-year master's degree without a thesis, no matter what it's called. PhD admissions committees tend to consider all applicants with master's degrees together as one equivalence class (because it's difficult to remember the exact details of hundreds of different master's degrees). You will be directly competing with other applicants who took more time doing *and publishing* research during the first full year master's program, before applying at in their third semester. Students in one-year master's programs would apply after only two or three months in their program, which (for most mortals) is not enough time to do any significant research, much less publish it.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: You've not said anything about where it is studied. A handful of "ivy league" comp sci labs are the parking place where old ARPANET pioneers end up, and those might pass on useful undocumented procedures to their best students. It is not by chance that the collection of protocols and permission changing routines used in an annual "The Facebook" were all in one place at one time.
At an upgraded sixth form college who've decided to rebrand their media studies and colouring-in creche staff as "computer graphics", you won't find out nearly as much as at a specialist massively-parrallel programming satellite of ATI reasearch division located at MIT. Look up "<NAME>".
What I'm saying is; look at industry links. ex-Bell labs:MIT. google:stanford, facebook:harvard and so on, and avoid anywhere which has no useful spinoff to swap interesting comp sci information with. Define your interests and strengths, and choose from that where to apply to.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/12/03 | 1,760 | 8,115 | <issue_start>username_0: I teach a course in academic writing covering the writing aspects, the very basics of research skills, such as referencing works, plus related college skills. At this point in the term, quite a number of foreign students have begun to express frustration:
* Some wish they can organize their papers in more “creative” ways.
* Some want to share their feelings and personal experiences.
* Some see the style guide rules as overly pedantic or finicky.
They don't like the many “restrictions” dictating how they should gather information and organize and present their ideas.
I compiled a short list explaining why such strict conventions are necessary:
* Predictably-organized writing helps readers to access information quickly.
* The various research procedures generally raises the quality of the work, so others can benefit from the ideas presented.
Most of these students, however, have no intention of ever becoming “academics”, and maybe they don't care so much benefiting readers. They just want to get a degree and get a good job.
Can I help them to see some personal benefit to learning all of these conventions?<issue_comment>username_1: The points you list are key, and a good starting point. I am not sure you need to add to that list but rather expand on the points to set them in a wider perspective.
There are several misconceptions that needs discussing. There is the idea that academic (scientific) writing is complicated and uses difficult language. Well, it does not have to be, and really should not be. With the huge onslaught of information, we must all learn how to express ourselves concisely and clearly. This is an art that requires training, not only in science but also in writing. Regardless of which sort of work we have, assuming communication is part of it, we need to be able to get our points across. Hence it is key to impress on students the importance of learning to write well. So point at the goals: being able to present information in a way that it can be understood by the intended recipients. You then need to be able to take complicated issues and express them clearly and in language that can be understood. Understanding terminology and concepts is the basis for being able to explain them and making necessary simplifications. Badly written reports will not serve the author, the company (equivalent) the author works for, or the recipients who need the information. I therefore think it is important to make these wider perspectives clear to students.
Companies usually have very strict rules for how reports should be written and formatted. Getting used to following such instructions may seem like a limitation, but understanding the necessity is a good preparation for the work place. With commercial reports come legal aspects that puts much restriction on how to express oneself. Learning about such rules and restrictions is therefore a key to become a successful contributor in the future, inside and outside of academia.
The fact that most (if not all) employers look for people who are good at presenting information, written as well as in speech should be emphasized (often included in social skills). These skills require much training and a solid foundation to build on. Courses in scientific writing and presentation as well as term papers and other reports (including a final thesis) are all parts of this education.
So, in the end, I am totally convinced that skills such as these will make a difference when applying for jobs. We just need to point out the fact. Getting feedback from employers about the necessity for these skills to share with the students is very valuable. Some students have better basic skills than others but none are good at writing concisely and clearly without the training we can provide. It is also important to make students understand that in the longer term they will have to develop their own skills, not just take whatever is served and think it is enough. It is a life-long learning experience which requires solid a foundation. and that is what we can offer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> * Some wish they can organize their papers in more “creative” ways.
> * Some want to share their feelings and personal experiences.
> * Some see the style guide rules as overly pedantic or finicky.
>
>
>
I'm not sure why there are "rules" about organizing papers, and what's wrong with more "creative" approaches. As for style guides, they are often overly pedantic and finicky, and in any case are mostly appropriate for an actual publication.
It's possible you're referring instead to the way to organize a paper (in terms of introductions, related work, methods, discussion, and so on). In which case you can explain the particular roles these components serve, while emphasizing that these components achieve a certain purpose and if that purpose can be achieved using other methods, there's nothing wrong with it.
As for sharing feelings and personal experiences, it's common for students with little experience of writing formally to confuse the "what" with the "how", because they're focused so intently on the "how". One way to help them is to identify places where they're spending too much space on process words, and ask them to describe the outcomes instead. In other words, their goal should be to describe WHAT was done, rather than WHO did it, in order to ensure that the process can be repeated by someone else.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would encourage a peer-exchange assignment that is not marked. Each student writes a technical paper (or maybe a short technical paper), and then each student has to read every other person's paper and then "mark" them on a scale of criteria such as "clarity of presentation" and "I was able to decipher the main ideas of the paper" and "This paper was easy to read" and "I clearly understood the technical contributions of this paper".
After they finish that with others' papers, then they should go back and read their own paper, and then mark their own paper. (I would also recommend in parallel that you or other markers also mark the paper to "check" that the marks given to the particular paper are not outrageously out of line).
By comparing their own work with those of others, they will get exposure to a large number of different writing styles, get constructive feedback, and a large portion of the class marking will be done for you as well. With so many papers to read, many of them will start getting a feeling of what works, what doesn't, what they skip, what they absorb, and so forth.
I wish I could say that I thought of this all by myself, but many of the ideas were mentioned in a talk by [<NAME>](http://d.ucsd.edu/srk/) about innovation and evaluating innovation in a massively open course situation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Consider emphasizing the potential personal benefits that come with good communications skills:
* Organizing information in an easily accessible manner makes others more likely to read your writing and follow your thoughts.
* Presenting ideas concisely helps make your idea more accessible, and therefore make it more likely that the reader will actually understand your point.
* Presenting methodology along with your idea demonstrates transparency, showing that you have nothing to hide, making you appear trustworthy.
* Citing other people's work has two benefits: Firstly, it demonstrates your knowledge scope by showing that you're familiar with the literature, and secondly, it improves your standing with the people you cited, as it shows them you found their work useful.
All of these apply to academia, but apply equally to all other areas of life. I used to work in academia, and I know work in operations for a health care company doing analytics. I use all of the above when I write white papers, and I have seen numerous times how following these guidelines helps others understand, appreciate, and build upon your work.
By emphasizing these points you may be able to better connect with your students.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/03 | 1,251 | 5,107 | <issue_start>username_0: I have written a paper (only internally marked) and I have a title:
"GCR2: A Riddle, Wrapped in a Mystery, Inside an Enigma".
This was initially a Winston Churchill quote about Russia (after the colon anyway). However, it seems silly to reference it directly in the title and I have been looking around on the web and cannot find how to reference something that only appears in the title.
Any guidance or links to websites will be very helpful (although I couldn't find any!)<issue_comment>username_1: No-one would expect a reference in the title. There are a few alternatives you can consider.
The simple one would be to add "(Winston Churchill)" after the quote in the title.
A better option in my opinion, is to start the introduction with the same quote built into an explanatory sentence and then add the reference there. After all, the quote must have a significant meaning for your work, otherwise it would not form the title. I am not sure what the "GCR2" stands for but in general one should avoid abbreviations in the title.
A third possibility is to rewrite the title to something more explicit. you can have the quote as the main title followed by a subtitle that explains the significance. Different field have different ways of handling such titles so I cannot say what would be suitable for you. The title should draw attention to your work and make readers decide whether the work is worth reading. For me it has no meaning and although I am in a different field, I think that is a sign that the construct is not optimal.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Leave the title as you suggest,
>
> GCR2: A Riddle, Wrapped in a Mystery, Inside an Enigma
>
>
>
without any citations or quotation marks, or any mention to Churchill or any of it. In the introduction of the paper, however, make sure to mention where appropriate the quote, and to give the appropriate reference(s) to it.
In particular, do not try to add footnotes, or references to the title. Any of it would result in turning a clever choice of title into something very confusing, which may further lead to unintentional mistakes when others try to reference your paper.
(Truth be told, I imagine --hope-- a referee would ask you to change the title if you tried to include footnotes or the like.)
If you are worried that you are not giving due credit to Churchill (hehe) or somesuch, don't. Your introduction will hopefully clarify all of it.
In fact, if your title were something like "To be or not to be. Of proteins and men", where what you quote or reference is essentially universally known, I would suggest not to bother explaining it anywhere, as it could be perceived as you suggesting your readers would not understand it otherwise, and they in turn may react negatively to such a suggestion.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. I think that phrase is so trite that it almost doesn't need a citation.
2. All that said, if you want to avoid the ugly of an endnote in the title, you could use the phrase in the first para or so of the intro (not the abstract) and then put an endnote citation on that first usage. This also has the benefit of cluing in the unwashed towards the beginning of your paper (and making the smarty pants pat themselves on the back).
For example: "In 1952, <NAME> penned the famous quote "blabla" to describe the secretive Soviet Union.(endnote number1) In recent years, GCR2 has drawn the interest, and frustration, of researchers trying to understand how it [does whatever it does]. This review will describe the major recent findings and remaining questions for this critical protein [or whatever it is]."
3. In some other case, I could even imagine just adding the citation number superscript to the title.
4. I advise not to weight a title down with (Winston Churchill). Titles should be strong and brief. Don't weigh a title down with a parenthetical. That's worse than the ugly superscript number.
5. While I love the quote, you could also consider to kill it in the title. There is a point of view in science writing (and all writing) that you should find whatever you did that you think is cute and kill it. Note, I'm not endorsing this...I like a little "juice". But it is an option. However, it does work very well for the title of an oral talk (where a little "tease" is helpful).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: This is not unheard of, though it's fairly uncommon.
My favorite example, which may give you some insights on how others have handled their desire to use a reference for a title (especially if you can access the published version):
[One Ring to Rule Them All ... and in the Darkness Bind Them?](https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0408106)
The authors quickly explain why the plain meaning of the two references are relevant (they were studying "black rings", and there was "one" that basically governed things; and black holes and bound states were discussed, hence the second part), and there's a footnote in the acknowledgments/funding disavowing any association with the Tolkien estate.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/03 | 647 | 2,581 | <issue_start>username_0: I have recently submitted a paper to arXiv, but the arXiv moderators put my paper in status "on hold", because they have to make a decision on the right classification for the paper.
To those who have experienced a similar situation, how long did it take before they made a decision and published the paper on the arXiv? I just want to have an idea of how long I will have to wait.<issue_comment>username_1: I had the same experience with arxiv and it took only 1-2 days after they change my paper track. However, they mentioned it may take up to several days. The arxiv helps says
>
> On Hold
>
>
> Your submission was identified by arXiv administrators or moderators
> as needing further attention.
>
>
> Submissions may be put on hold for a variety of reasons, ranging from
> questions about proper classification, pending moderator approval,
> presentation issues, copyrighted PDF, etc., to editorial concerns.
> Most of these do not require any further input from the submitter and
> will be dealt with in due course. arXiv urges submitters to be
> patient. Due to the large volume of submissions, it may take several
> days before a resolution is reached.
>
>
> Note that oversize submissions are automatically put on hold, and this
> is one particular circumstance in which submitters should follow up
> with arXiv administrators.
>
>
> Submissions in this status will not expire. Authors must not create a
> new submission with the same content when a pending submission is on
> hold.
>
>
> Please be sure to include the submission identifier of the form
> submit/NNNNNNN when contacting arXiv administrators.
>
>
>
wait for few more days and send them an email. They are quick in response.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Sending an email to ask when to expect publication will trigger a standard response from arxiv.org that looks like this:
>
> Your submission is currently on hold pending a decision by our
> volunteer moderators. The "hold" status merely indicates that one or
> more of the moderators need additional time to consider your article.
>
>
> Due to the volume of mail arXiv receives, we are not able to provide
> regular status updates. Upon resolution, your submission will be
> deposited in arXiv, or we will contact you with further information.
>
>
>
Seems that long waiting times can occur particularly when volunteer moderators are in holidays. I received this answer several times during summer while my submission had "on hold" status for more than two weeks...
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/03 | 735 | 3,114 | <issue_start>username_0: I finished some experiments on classification and I am now preparing for a **presentation**.
The experiment yields data which will then be manually verified to determine if the data is correct or incorrect. The experiment is run a total of 10 times and the output for each run is the amount of hits ("Yes") or misses ("No"). In the end, I have this complex table:
* What is the best way to present this kind of complex tables?
* If applicable (as in my example), should I present normalized data?
* If applicable (as in my example), should I present average values?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe visual representation is nearly always a much better way to present data-intensive information. However, it may depend on your audience, and the depth of analysis you go into with your results.
If you are repeating each experiment *n* times, it would be most useful, in the least, to present the average result (the [mean](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean)), along with a [standard deviation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation). There are many different ways to visually represent your data, but whatever method you use must be able to deliver the main points you need to convey clearly. To help you decide on the best form of presentation of data, here a couple of suggestions:
* Ask yourself what the main message is that you need to deliver from this data, and focus on a delivery style (graph, table, list, whatever) that *best delivers that main message* (and not all the other stuff)
* Reduce the number of variables you need to display to reduce distractions from that main message. So you wouldn't need to display results from 10 repeats of an experiment when you can just show the average result for that experiment.
* Remember that in the majority of cases, a picture tells a thousand words.
As an aside, regarding your statement *"The experiment yields data which will then be manually verified to determine if the data is correct or incorrect."* Always believe your data. Your data is always correct. You just have to come up with the explanations for why the data is as it is.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you are going to show frequency data as yours with more than 4x4 cells in a presentation, I would generally recommend to use graphs instead of tables. Either you spend much time explaining such a big table or you will leave your audience with the feeling that they just saw something they did not have time to really understand.
The [LabWrite Guide](http://www.ncsu.edu/labwrite/res/tablevsgraph/res-tablevsgraph.html) by NC State and the paper ["Using Graphs Instead of Tables in Political Science"](http://www.princeton.edu/~jkastell/tables2graphs.html) by <NAME> and <NAME> provide some ideas for graphs substituting tables.
Note that there is a closely related question about [Book recommendations for information visualization?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/3059/book-recommendations-for-information-visualization).
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/12/04 | 225 | 986 | <issue_start>username_0: Can I publish my technical paper on more than one publishing sites? The paper content is the same while only the formats differ. I am the author of the paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer : No.
Long answer: Only under certain circumstances where you have explicit permission to do so. Be aware that even if you have permission to do so, there are many folks who take an extremely dim view of multiple publishing.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The only formal process that I'm aware of is the reprint mechanism. You publish a piece of work. Sometime later, editors of a compendium or collection wish to take your article and reprint it. In that case, the original publishers have to approve this (as well as you of course).
More commonly, papers published in a peer-reviewed venue might also appear in a Ph.D dissertation in some form. Here again, there's some form of copyright approval needed for it to happen.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/12/04 | 1,043 | 4,053 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a relatively young faculty member. I was asked to provide a reference for a student of mine so he is admitted in a PhD program in Sciences in UK. The student is probably one of the best students I had in a couple of years in terms of academic potential. I firmly believe he will do well as he is bright and hard-working.
I have to fill in an online form rating him. My problem is that the form's scaling is very strong.
How can I honestly say that someone was `outstanding` (3%) and not `exceptional` (1%)? Even the third most positive option is `unusually good` (rated at 10%) which I feel as a characterization in itself should be *strong enough* for someone to be at least considered for a PhD.
My classes are never above 40 to 45 students and I believe that simply "lumping" all the students from my past couple of years in one sample is ineffective and unreasonable. I would probably be unable to single out one of my students as the single best student I've ever had so that I can place him in the top 1% interval with certainty and not top 3%.
As I said, I want to support him and I worry that simply putting him down as `outstanding` would harm him as other referees might be tempted to "max out" everything. On the other hand simply rating him as `exceptional` in almost all aspects would be just grade-inflation.
Could someone provide me with some advice on the matter and what they would do? The scaling I have come across before topped at 5% which I found reasonable but here this not the case.<issue_comment>username_1: The question of gauging inflation in these situations is both serious and important. It affects peoples' lives!
The difficult task of the letter writer is to visualize what other letter-writers will say, their degree of effusiveness. "Being brutally honest" is obviously stupid and naive to the point of destructiveness.
The operational issue is about achieving the desired effect. And, in particular, if your recommendee is fairly exceptional, it would be a grievous error to praise them "modestly". Yes, the problem is to discriminate between "fairly exceptional" and "exceptional" and "truly exceptional". And these are not things that can be rationally discussed about young people by committees...
Thus, consider the noise in the system into which you put your information...
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Suppose I am in your position,
I have a student and I have to rate him. The rating in my mind is top **2**%. I need to make a choice between top 1% and top 3% when I fill in the rating form.
I would choose top 1% for the following reasons,
>
> There is really no significant difference between 1% and 2% or between 2% and 3%. I only know his past performance well. I can only firmly believe his future will be bright (I am not a superman. I cannot predict the future.). **I want to give him top 1% rating because I want to let him have a better chance to succeed.** I know top 1% is a little bit grade inflation. But, this is not my fault - there is no place for my real rating, that is, top 2%. I would not feel guity for the inflation.
> I would not know what others will do. I am just performing my duty as his professor.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: First, find out, independently of course, what percentile, 1 2 5, this "science" committee requires for admission into their hallowed PhD programme, and give them what they want. Of *course* your students are in the top k% -- why would be recommending them otherwise?
Second, and this is very important for the future of our planet, you need to convince the world that this "science" committee is made up of complete idiots, hypocrates, clowns, and fools who are doing all they can to help aggravate the UK's STEM crisis.
(OK, I'm being a wee bit cynical, but I provide this as a separate answer because I fear the other folks, while sympathetic to your plight, just have not come down hard enough on the ridiculously high "standards" that are being set.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/05 | 225 | 1,022 | <issue_start>username_0: I plan to apply for USA universities. Is there any difference between the number of PhD opportunities in spring and fall semesters? I mean in which semester do I have a better chance to be approved?
In my country application for spring semester is not so usual. What about USA?<issue_comment>username_1: All institutions I know of in the US have *deadlines* for submitting applications to the doctoral program. The earliest ones I remember were in December, and the later ones were in early spring.
Your chances of being accepted are zero if you submit after the deadline, and if you submitted early it would be at best annoying. So long story short just follow the rules of the institution to which you are applying.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Most universities offer Doctoral admissions exclusively in fall semester (once a year). Deadlines for applications are typically in December. For more detailed information, you should check the particular department's webpage.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/05 | 1,139 | 4,951 | <issue_start>username_0: This recent question [How high should I rate a good student for PhD admission?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14529/how-high-should-i-rate-a-good-student-for-phd-admission) is just an example of how puzzling the problem of writing reference letters is.
One knows that there is inflation in the field, so they feel they have to adapt, but it is not clear how much inflation is appropriate and when it is too much. Negative comments are often omitted, and this gives the evaluators less data.
There is an analogous problem when refereeing papers, or serving as anonymous referees for research proposals and grants. This seems to be a flaw which is implicit in the evaluation method. Apart from this voluntary inflation bias, there is also an involuntary component: if I ask you to evaluate your research field/colleague/student is, you will unconsciously feel biased towards it/him/her.
**Is this perceived as a big problem?** If so, **why is there no attempt to obtain more reliable results?** Some possible strategies, although difficult to apply, spring to my mind:
* if there are enough data points for the recommender, normalize everything and "grade on a curve".
* don't ask "how good X is?"; give them two paper/applicants/projects to evaluate, and ask "which one is better, X or Y?". This makes it more difficult to find good referees, because they have to be familiar with two of the persons/projects under evaluations.
* force the evaluators to provide at least 3 positive and 3 negative points, the most outstanding ones. This won't affect the inflation bias, but at least it provides some more data on the negative aspects.
I have seriously considered writing a standard addendum to enclose to my letters and reports, stating that I realize how biased and unreliable these things are, I am in a difficult position giving an absolute score on a scale that is totally unknown to me and the other evaluators, and I'd really feel more comfortable with a comparison-based evaluation system. **Would this be appropriate, or raise some eyebrows on the trustworthyness of my evaluations**?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that an academic committee, sitting in consideration of an applicant to their PhD programme, would very likely view your addendum as being an honest attempt to preserve your set of professional ethics with regard to fairly ranking the applicant.
I do not think that the academic committee would doubt your trustworthiness. However, I expect that the committee would view whatever ranking you provided on the Good/Great/Excellent/Outstanding/Genius scale in light of your action of submitting your addendum.
Therefore the committee are not going to doubt your ability to rank the applicant, but are going to doubt the veracity of your ranking on the artificial scale.
However, I would hope that any sensible academic committee is going to be aware of the problem that we are discussing here and are therefore going to take a scaled single-valued ranking of any applicant with a massive grain of salt. They must know that a single value rank is going to be useless when judging the suitability of an applicant for a PhD programme.
Thus I would hope that, with or without your addendum, a sensible academic committee would take very little notice of the single value ranking and pay much more attention to the substantive letters of recommendation.
The addition of your addendum would not, I think, damage the applicant's application before a reasonable academic committee, as it wouldn't be news to the committee that such single-valued rankings are untrustworthy. To a reasonable academic committee, your actions of submitting the addendum might prompt others to do the same, and the practice of demanding a single-value metric abandoned over time. To an academic committee that places great store in such single-value metrics, your addendum sets out your concerns and presumably instructs the committee how you the single-value ranking is to be interpreted.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't worry too much about it. Good schools will rely primarily on the content of your letter. Focus on writing a helpful letter. Include comparisons to other students who you have worked with in the past, where possible. That will enable people to calibrate your letter.
I wouldn't don't worry too much about the numeric scores. Good schools won't pay too much attention to the numeric scores, if you've done a good job with the body of the letter and written a detailed, helpful letter with plenty of concrete specifics. Any school that puts more weight on the numeric score than the body of the letter is just screwing themselves by using bad decision-making processes. You can't do anything about that; you can't fix other peoples' bad judgement. All you can do is do the right thing when it is under your control, and leave it at that.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/05 | 1,509 | 5,893 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student in Canada doing a double degree concurrently, a B.Sc (Bachelors of Science) and a B.Eng (Bacehlors of Engineering) over 5 years. (8 years down to three at the price of my sanity? Sure haha!).
My Major in Science is Physics, and my Discipline in Engineering is Electrical/Computer.
When it comes to picking my masters, I have three options:
* M.Sc (Science, thesis based)
* M.A.Sc (Applied Science, thesis based)\*
* M.Eng ( Engineering, project based)
From knowing nearly nothing about these, I think the M.A.Sc sounds right for me, sort of a "middle ground".
I want to go on study quantum computers, specifically to apply the principles of quantum field theory to microprocessors and develop quantum computing hardware and software.
(I work as a computer programmer alongside my studies, and I've been a professional polyglot programmer since I was 16, and a hobbyist since I was 11)
My question is, which masters would help me more on a path to a Ph.D, and eventually to a job in academia?
A fellow undergrad suggested I do a double-masters to compliment the double-degree, is this possible? Would it be useful to me at all?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> When it comes to picking my masters, I have three options:
>
>
> M.Sc (Science, thesis based)
> M.A.Sc (Applied Science, thesis based)\*
> M.Eng ( Engineering, project based)
>
>
>
The letters in your masters degree do not matter. In other words, you'll never see an M.Sc. or an M.Eng. specifically asked for in an application call ... you'll only ever see "Masters". As such, your degree could be called an M.Xk.Cd. and nobody would really care. It's the topic and quality of your masters matters most!
If you want to work on quantum computing, then you should look for a good masters programme in either Computer Science, Electrical Engineering or a relevant field of Mathematics. These are typically M.Sc. or M.Eng. courses (again, not that the letters matter!).
A research masters is usually preferable, in that you may even get a publication or two which will help with PhD applications ... or you may continue in the masters programme and graduate into a PhD programme if you are happy with your supervisor.
On a side note, I would encourage you to be flexible in your interests. You quote "quantum computing" as an interest but it can often be unfeasible to get a PhD you like in a really specific area. I think at this stage it's important for you to decide what discipline you want to pursue (Comp. Sci., Maths, Physics, etc.). Having a sub-field in mind is great, but don't plan your future *too* rigidly around that.
>
> A fellow undergrad suggested I do a double-masters to compliment the double-degree, is this possible? Would it be useful to me at all?
>
>
>
Of course it would be useful. :)
But as to whether it would be worth your time, I would say absolutely not. See (1).
```
(1) Masters + 0.5 × PhD ≫ 2 × Masters
```
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You have picked a nice area for having a wide background. **Most theoretical quantum computing positions usually ask for experience in at least two of Physics, Computer Science, or Mathematics**, so you are in good company. Don't pigeonhole yourself into one discipline if you are planning to be a theorist. More applied and experimental work usually requires a single background in the specific methodology used, and usually comes from Physics, Chemistry, or some type of Engineering. It is common for [strong quantum programs](https://cstheory.stackexchange.com/q/2323/1037) to have professors of background in various fields, and in that case you will usually decided the letters after your M. based on the department/faculty of your preferred supervisor.
First, check if your undergraduate school offers a straight-to-Masters program, since that might be a viable option for you. I know that at McGill you can now get a Masters at the end of 5 years, instead of doing just a Bachelors, I am not sure how it is at Dalhousie. Ask your professors.
In Canada, your best bet for a Masters will be at the [Institute for Quantum Computing](http://iqc.uwaterloo.ca/) in Waterloo. They have one of the strongest and largest quantum computing/information programs in the world (and definitely the strongest and largest in Canada). If you browse their website, you will see that **you can get any of M.Sc, M.Math, or M.Eng as your degree** with departments ranging from: Applied Mathematics (2 profs), Chemistry (2 profs), Combinatorics & Optimization (4 profs), Computer Science (2 profs), Electrical & Computer Engineering (3 profs), Physics & Astronomy (7 profs + 3 assistant profs). I think all of the programs are thesis based, and students are expected to produce original research. I would base you department choice based on potential supervisors (you will have to list who you prefer as supervisor during your application) and what sort of non-quantum courses you like (since you will be expected to take some non-quantum related courses in your department).
Keep in mind, that **in the USA, it is not customary to sit for a separate Masters before your PhD**, so consider applying straight to PhD with your choice of supervisor determining the department. The [IQI at CalTech](http://www.iqi.caltech.edu/) is a good choice, I know that <NAME> has an interest in the intersection of quantum field theory and quantum computing; note that most other work in quantum computing doesn't use QFT and concentrates on the non-relativistic limit. Make sure to do a little bit of work in quantum computing during your undergrad before you make your Masters/PhD decision, to make sure you have an idea for the lay of the land. A lot of people don't have a good grasp of what research in quantum computing will look like when they first say they are interested.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/12/05 | 2,353 | 10,050 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a Master's student who is mentoring a recent graduate through a research project in the same field (of astronomy). He is a very good *student*, but struggles with one of the realities of being an astronomer - coding. Right now, he is just running code others have written, but despite my strong suggestion that he start learning the language, still asks for my help on even the most elementary of problems. His confidence in using computers is lacking, and if he continues in the field it will become a serious hindrance.
I did provide a very high level of assistance early on, but this was mostly due to a couple of bugs in setting my own code up on his computer. In later stages of this research project, he is going to need to write some basic code of his own, so I feel we're getting to the stage where we need to establish a greater level of independence.
One of the key points of difference between a student and a researcher is that a researcher solves their own problems. It is the job of a mentor and supervisor to *assist* in that, but I feel that my mentee still feels entitled that I should solve his problems for him (I only solved "his" problems before because a bug in code that I wrote is *my* responsibility). It's time to start taking a more hands-off approach: I'm happy to give advice on how he might solve a problem, but it's his responsibility to sit down and implement that idea.
How should I approach this problem - (a) with my mentee, and (b) with our supervising professor (we have the same supervisor)?<issue_comment>username_1: **Disclaimer:** I am a current PhD student and speak from personal experience as one who has guided both masters as well as undergraduate students.
Learning how to code appropriately takes skill, time and confidence (among other things). My strategy for this while mentoring students is as follows:
1. Develop a small project which will have some significant coding component in it but will still add to the overall project. Lay out the coding expectations and deliverables very clearly. Don't start with something too difficult.
2. Consider using version control tools (such as git) to manage your mentee's code. Be very clear about what languages/libraries etc. you plan to use and how this code will add to the project.
3. Lay out a timeline with your mentee with very specific coding expectations.
4. Achieve each small component with your mentee. Guide (but **don't** spoonfeed/handhold) your mentee. Make sure that he/she codes everything by him/herself.
5. Give him/her a small reward. (coffee/sugary thingy/beer) This always makes my students very happy. :)
In my experience, once a mentee has achieved a small project by him/herself, they are usually quick and eager to move onto the next objective. I use this to ramp up the difficulty level slowly but surely.
Regarding the second part of your question, I would definitely keep your supervisor/adviser in the loop regarding this. He/She may have much better suggestions than any that I have to offer here.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One of the more difficult tasks of the mentor is to assess current skill levels, set milestones accordingly, and ensure that the student has the necessary resources (and capabilities) to improve his skills.
At your admission, he is a novice coder, if that. Are you setting expectations too high? Does he have the right resources to learn how to code? There are lots of books/websites/youtube videos/whatever that teach coding; is he aware of these tools? Does he know how to use his IDE? Having watched my wife learn to code as a graduate student, I learned that the ability to represent a theoretical solution in software is a skill that takes a lot of time to develop. He may just need time.
Having said that, if you've done all that and he's still not making any progress (after sufficient time... say, two to four months), then you may have to recommend that he take time off from working on your research until he becomes a more proficient coder.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Some relevant questions. What is the computational background of your student? Has he ever done any coding before? If so, what languages? What is his general computer literacy? What language are you trying to get him to use? You just write "learning the language". Programming languages vary greatly in their difficulty for someone without experience.
The first programming language I ever tried to learn was C, in the middle of an already busy semester as a grad student, for a course in numerical analysis, in 1997. I used the famous book by Kernighan and Ritchie. I had zero experience of programming at that time, and in hindsight it was a crazy thing to try to do. The instructor didn't offer any programming help; neither did anyone else. I think the instructor was a fan of Fortran. :-) At that time online forums were probably in their infancy. In any case, it never occurred to me to try and use them. There were easier languages to use even in 1997. For example Python 1 existed at the time, though I don't know how usable it was. Anyway, I think I came last in the programming assignments - I think I didn't hand the last one or two assignments out of sheer exhaustion.
Unfortunately the culture in academia with respect to programming and related computer work is very much - toss people in at the deep end and let them sink or swim. This is caused by several factors - often the instructors/senior people are very ignorant. Second, there is a feeling that programming languages are too trivial to teach people and they should just pick it up themselves.
Anyway, I think, depending on what language you are trying to get your student to learn - consider having him learn something easier and more user friendly. I recommend Python. Have him do some simple exercises and gradually warm up to something more difficult. A language like C/C++/Fortran is probably easier to learn once one has learnt some programming in a language that does not require things like compilation and manual memory management. These days there are many resources online to help the novice programmer - point him to some of them. E.g. Stack Overflow. Also, tell him to give high priority to learning version control. I recommend Mercurial. Git is probably fine, but it gives even experienced people a headache. It might be quite scary for an inexperienced person.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Since you are not a professional programmer yourself, it is a poor idea to have you teach programming to your mentee. He should take a real programming course with Python or Ruby or Java, be that online (EdX is offering a [computer science](https://www.edx.org/course/harvardx/harvardx-cs50x-introduction-computer-1022) course starting Jan 1, 2014), or with a real instructor at your home school. That way, he won't learn your errors (which you admit you make), and will learn the professional tools like the [revision control](http://hgbook.red-bean.com/) which I think username_3 mentioned.
[Poor programming skills](http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101013/full/467775a.html) among scientists is an unseen, but a real impediment to reproducibility of research, its soundness, and eventually scientific progress.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The other answers assume that the mentoring relationship can be saved, and that there are specific actions you can take to help the mentee. I want to add that sometimes, that isn't the case.
As a PhD student who is the main "experimentalist" in my group, I mentor many other students (grad, undergrad, even high school summer research students). Some are very good, some are very bad.
Also, like mmh, I mentored 6 or 7 grad students when I myself was an undergrad (because I was more experienced with the particular project).
**Mentoring students is hard when you are yourself a student**, especially when your mentees are officially at a "higher level" (of study) than you.
Unlike the official faculty advisor, you don't have the ability to enforce consequences for the student's poor performance. Sometimes you feel that the mentee isn't putting as much effort into the mentoring relationship as they would if the mentor was a professor. A student mentor is more approachable than a faculty mentor, which can be good (mentee feels more comfortable asking questions and admitting weaknesses!) or bad (mentee doesn't respect and value mentor's time because he's "only" a student!) depending on the mentor and mentee personalities.
On the other hand, unlike a faculty mentor, you have the distinct advantage that **the student is really not your responsibility.** If you feel the mentoring relationship is not working out, you can always say the following to the faculty member who **is responsible for the student:**
**"I've been spending a lot of time working with X and I feel like it's not really a productive mentoring relationship. He is taking up a lot of my time, without putting in the effort that he would need to learn what I can teach him, and then become more independent. Please find someone else to work with him to get him up to speed."**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Since your supervisor put you in this mentoring position, you need to let her/him know that you've run into this issue with the mentee. Then have the conversation with the mentee that "It's time to start taking a more hands-off approach: I'm happy to give advice on how he might solve a problem, but it's his responsibility to sit down and implement that idea." (your words are perfect!)
I supervise Higher Ed grad students - some are eager to work independently, others not so much. Be consistent with your expectations with all mentees you supervise. Help him by directing him to resources that will help him and set a weekly time to meet where you both go over progress made. You're not the one learning here, the effort is required from the one doing the learning. Be nice, but be firm.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/06 | 1,287 | 5,546 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently in the second year of my post-doctoral fellowship. My PI will be moving to a new university in ~9 months.
As the story of the potential move developed, I was honest with my PI during discussions and told him that it was likely that I would go with him if he left, but it was never discussed in detail.
Now that more specifics are known, it is time to talk details. I would like to negotiate for an upward move to a research associate position. I believe this would be fair considering I'm sure I will "lose" some amount of research time while the new lab is getting set-up. However, I'm worried about negotiations because a) this is not a "new" job, just a continuation of my fellowship at a new location with the same boss, b) I've already indicated that I would like to move to the new location, and c) my resume has not yet reached a point that I am able to strike out on my own for any other upward job move (though, I can probably make a lateral move to another post-doc, that is not ideal).
My questions are:
**Is it reasonable to ask for a title promotion in this situation? Or do I have no room for negotiation?**
**What else should I add to the negotiations in order to help my career progress to the best of its ability during a transition to a new university in another state?**<issue_comment>username_1: I think it's reasonable to at least ask for the title bump. What do you have to lose? Administrators are more familiar with this situation than you might expect. It's essentially a case of the worst they can say is "no" when it comes to giving you a revised position/title. It likely comes down to their budget and/or the budget of your PI and whether their faculty see you fitting in there longer term. Remember they may see you as an asset and someone they wish to also "pluck" from your current university, which ultimately makes the plucking university look better overall as far as reputation stuff goes.
I recently witnessed a very similar scenario in my department, where a faculty member left and took his lab with him, including two PhD students and a post-doc. The faculty member (not the post-doc) negotiated with the new department to get his post-doc a research professor position. So it does happen. So you may not be the one who should be doing the negotiating directly, this might fall on your PI to negotiate for you. Also, in this situation the negotiation happened after the faculty member had accepted the offer, so the negotiations can still occur after the initial offer is accepted by the PI. Remember this is the honeymoon phase between the administrators in this new department and your PI, so they may do whatever it takes to make him happy (for now) including whatever he asks for on your behalf. Or they could say no, but I don't think anyone is offended and even expects this.
Another consideration might be whether you wish to stay with this PI long-term or not? Prior to him telling you he was departing, did you see yourself working with him beyond your current post-doc? These university moves are common and can shake you up when you are caught in the middle. It's a very important time to keep your career goals in sight.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think it is more than reasonable to ask for a "bump", but you may want to reconsider moving. The way I see it is you are currently in your 2nd year as a post doc and the move isn't for 9 months so at the time of the move you would be approaching 3 years as a post doc in the same lab. This is getting to be a long time and you do not want to lose the time associated with the lab move to move to a new lab for a year. You need to make the move to the new lab desirable enough that you want to stay for 2+ years. The reason you may want to reconsider the move is that you would be effectively doing 2 post docs in the same lab instead of 2 labs. This means less of a chance to learn new things (both technical and interpersonal skills) and meet new colleagues (specifically ones who can write letters of reference for you and help you get the next job).
If you chose to stay, the argument for a bump is that (1) this would effectively be your second post doc, and (2) you would be taking a hit in your research associated with the move and need additional support to over come that. The reason keeping you is advantageous to your PI is continuity and the ability to get started quicker. Finally there is the issue that the PI probably has a start up package so can actually afford a bump (both salary and resources).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Depending on the relationship you have with your PI, I would think it would be general to assume that there will be quite a bit of work / research / papers (however you want to define work apart from the integral of a force curve over the distance) to do after the completion of your current postdoc.
I would think it would be more reasonable to go somewhere else for your second post-doc position at a lateral position as you will be extending your contact base for people to work with and because the work under the previous fellowship will probably still continue (at some level).
I would think that a title would not be of any import, unless you can come up with something that would be reasonable and continue on past your time there, i.e. the beginnings of some type of endowed post-doc chair and some associated name to go with it. Even going from post-doc to say 'Research Assistant Professor' would be fine.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/12/06 | 1,359 | 5,808 | <issue_start>username_0: I have seen that some researchers in my field, that is Computer Science, do this:
* They publish a paper, for example titled "The use of the Fourier transform for problem X". The paper gets accepted.
* Then after a while they have another paper titled "The use of the Fourier transform for solving the problem X under these constraints". I read the paper and I see this is the same as before with only the title changed a little bit and published in another conference.
* Again, the same paper in another language "l'uso della trasformata di Fourier...", which has the same content, but submitted to a local conference
Is this alright? For me it just seems that it should only be put like one publication under their CVs and not "resell" the idea over and over. I have this question because they had asked me to translate one of my papers to a local conference, but I do not consider that to be like a new publication. Should I translate and claim a new publication?<issue_comment>username_1: In computer science, papers are published in archival conferences, which makes things a little confusing. (In many other fields, papers are published in journals, and conferences are just for giving talks -- you can only publish a paper once, but you can give a talk about it many times).
a) It is unethical, in violation of the rules of the venue, and an incredibly stupid idea to publish the same paper more than once in an archival conference. This is self plagiarism, and is a serious academic offense.
b) On the other hand, in computer science there are also non-archival workshops to which people are invited to give talks. (These are more like the "conferences" in other fields). It is fine to give a talk at such a venue about a paper that has been previously published elsewhere.
Your question seems to be whether you personally should commit unethical and stupid act a). I would advise against it. (It is unethical for obvious reasons. It is stupid because anyone who seriously considers your publication record will be sure to spot such a move, and you will not be able to get a reasonable academic job).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For the detail you've provided, it's difficult to tell.
* Self plagarism is a big no-no, obviously.
* However, when you're building on previously published work (e.g. by adding constraints), there's almost certainly going to be overlap.
I think what I'd look for is as follows:
* Does the new work provide a meaningful contribution? (E.g. is solving the problem with constraints tricky to do, or does it give unexpected results?) This will depend on the field, and the standards of the conference.
* *Is the previously published paper cited by the new work*? You don't specify whether this is the case or not in your question, and I think it's critical.
* Are large portions of the text lifted verbatim? If the author is continuing with prior work there's bound to be some crossover (there's only so many ways you can clearly describe a problem using standard terminology, after all, and that's before we consider page limits), but it shouldn't be a cut&paste job.
If they pass all that then it's probably ok, even if the paper isn't exactly wonderful - but chances are then, if it's making it through the review stage then it's probably been submitted to a less prestigious conference, and people will pick up on that.
With regard to translating a paper for a local conference, it's not an issue I've ever faced and I'm a lot less sure about what the accepted etiquette is. My gut feeling though is the key test would be whether anyone is being mislead as to what's happened. Off the top of my head this including the local conference organisers, the conference that published the original version of the paper, any funding bodies who might ask how many papers you've published, and the people later reading your CV. If you're deceiving any of them in the way you present the publication, or even leaving an unreasonable opportunity for them to misunderstand, then no, don't. Otherwise, I can't see a reason to object.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Such a paper can be published, but it should not be treated as a new research output. Using the Australian HERDC specifications for research publications at 9.1 a publication is characterised by:
>
> * substantial scholarly activity, as evidenced by discussion of the relevant literature, an
> awareness of the history and antecedents of work described, and provided in a format
> which allows a reader to trace sources of the work, including through citations and
> footnotes
> * originality (i.e. not a compilation of existing works. See important notes below regarding
> the treatment of scholarly editions and scholarly translations)
> * [...]
> * increasing the stock of knowledge [...]
>
>
>
When dealing with papers, a new paper on a theme must still "increase the stock of knowledge" by "substantial scholarly activity" and be "original". Adding a new case study may fit the bill. Using a new technique of analysis may fit the bill. A new theoretical context may fit the bill. "Substantiveness" would be indicated by the portion of the work that is "original." If the original component would fly as a paper by itself, in the sense that the component of the paper that is original scholarly contribution to knowledge is reportable as research by itself; then it is fine. My dictum when dealing with these is "new evidence?" "new analysis?" "new conclusion?." If it meets one of these, originality has been met, and probably substantial scholarly activity.
Authors have a separate responsibility in terms of IP and copyright agreements that they may have previously made, and obviously have ethical obligations to cite prior works.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/06 | 1,296 | 5,532 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently applying for several post-doctoral positions. For these applications I have to prepare a research document in which I present my current research and my future projects in a limited amount of pages (typically not more than 4 or 5). But there is two possible organisations of ideas:
* 1) A first approach would be to present first my past and current
research topics and then my future projects.
* 2) A second approach consists in a thematic organization in which I present for each topic
my past and current research and what I plan to do in this topic in
the future. Some topics can be only past/current and some other only
long-term project.
What is the best organization ?<issue_comment>username_1: In computer science, papers are published in archival conferences, which makes things a little confusing. (In many other fields, papers are published in journals, and conferences are just for giving talks -- you can only publish a paper once, but you can give a talk about it many times).
a) It is unethical, in violation of the rules of the venue, and an incredibly stupid idea to publish the same paper more than once in an archival conference. This is self plagiarism, and is a serious academic offense.
b) On the other hand, in computer science there are also non-archival workshops to which people are invited to give talks. (These are more like the "conferences" in other fields). It is fine to give a talk at such a venue about a paper that has been previously published elsewhere.
Your question seems to be whether you personally should commit unethical and stupid act a). I would advise against it. (It is unethical for obvious reasons. It is stupid because anyone who seriously considers your publication record will be sure to spot such a move, and you will not be able to get a reasonable academic job).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For the detail you've provided, it's difficult to tell.
* Self plagarism is a big no-no, obviously.
* However, when you're building on previously published work (e.g. by adding constraints), there's almost certainly going to be overlap.
I think what I'd look for is as follows:
* Does the new work provide a meaningful contribution? (E.g. is solving the problem with constraints tricky to do, or does it give unexpected results?) This will depend on the field, and the standards of the conference.
* *Is the previously published paper cited by the new work*? You don't specify whether this is the case or not in your question, and I think it's critical.
* Are large portions of the text lifted verbatim? If the author is continuing with prior work there's bound to be some crossover (there's only so many ways you can clearly describe a problem using standard terminology, after all, and that's before we consider page limits), but it shouldn't be a cut&paste job.
If they pass all that then it's probably ok, even if the paper isn't exactly wonderful - but chances are then, if it's making it through the review stage then it's probably been submitted to a less prestigious conference, and people will pick up on that.
With regard to translating a paper for a local conference, it's not an issue I've ever faced and I'm a lot less sure about what the accepted etiquette is. My gut feeling though is the key test would be whether anyone is being mislead as to what's happened. Off the top of my head this including the local conference organisers, the conference that published the original version of the paper, any funding bodies who might ask how many papers you've published, and the people later reading your CV. If you're deceiving any of them in the way you present the publication, or even leaving an unreasonable opportunity for them to misunderstand, then no, don't. Otherwise, I can't see a reason to object.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Such a paper can be published, but it should not be treated as a new research output. Using the Australian HERDC specifications for research publications at 9.1 a publication is characterised by:
>
> * substantial scholarly activity, as evidenced by discussion of the relevant literature, an
> awareness of the history and antecedents of work described, and provided in a format
> which allows a reader to trace sources of the work, including through citations and
> footnotes
> * originality (i.e. not a compilation of existing works. See important notes below regarding
> the treatment of scholarly editions and scholarly translations)
> * [...]
> * increasing the stock of knowledge [...]
>
>
>
When dealing with papers, a new paper on a theme must still "increase the stock of knowledge" by "substantial scholarly activity" and be "original". Adding a new case study may fit the bill. Using a new technique of analysis may fit the bill. A new theoretical context may fit the bill. "Substantiveness" would be indicated by the portion of the work that is "original." If the original component would fly as a paper by itself, in the sense that the component of the paper that is original scholarly contribution to knowledge is reportable as research by itself; then it is fine. My dictum when dealing with these is "new evidence?" "new analysis?" "new conclusion?." If it meets one of these, originality has been met, and probably substantial scholarly activity.
Authors have a separate responsibility in terms of IP and copyright agreements that they may have previously made, and obviously have ethical obligations to cite prior works.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/06 | 665 | 2,906 | <issue_start>username_0: I wrote an article containing quite a lot of maths using latex. I want to submit this paper to a given journal. However, submission guideline explicitly states that
all submissions must be done in word format. I am a bit confused about such a specification and really feel unconfortable to reedit everything in word. Some companies seem to offer convertor or online conversion. Maybe some of you have already experienced some of them and can give me some feedback and advices.<issue_comment>username_1: I can sympathize with your situation but unfortunately there is not much you can do if the journal explicitly asks for Word files except to provide them. As was stated in a comment you can (and should) contact the journal to ask about the use of LaTeX. Most large publishers handle LaTeX but the individual journals (editors) may not be aware of this and may not use LaTeX themselves so as to see the benefits. I doubt anyone would change their local policy based on one manuscript but if they are not aware that people wish to submit LaTeX files, nothing will ever change.
If you ask editors about LaTeX, remember to also ask them about formats for supplying equations. In some cases, journals accept the built in so-called equation editor in Word and in some cases they may request equations as graphics. They should however, have some standard way of handling such, since I assume your manuscript cannot be the only one they ever published that includes equations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've used [pandoc](http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/) for this problem previously and it worked pretty well. Problems I have encountered are;
* Multi-line equations (e.g. `align` or `matrix` environments) are not converted correctly to word. (I don't think there is an equivalent of `align` in word).
* Converted all citations to the ones within parentheses (much more minor a fix).
Last publication I did this because I got so frustrated with the journal (it would accept and compile my Latex file, but gave no instructions about what packages I could use nor any instructions on how to get the bibliography to compile - and emailing for three weeks with the staff did not help). But it only took me a few hours to convert the paper (that publication had minimal math though).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Try [Adobe's pdf-to-word converter](https://www.adobe.com/acrobat/online/pdf-to-word). Apart from some issues with equations, works extremely well.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: For quite some time, Word has allowed equations to be entered in LaTex. It shouldn't be a big deal to handle all your equations in one session, and get your paper out the door. A good text editor like notepad++ would be a big help.
You might also look to see if there is any tool in the OpenOffice or LibreOffice suites that might help.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/06 | 326 | 1,537 | <issue_start>username_0: I am applying for my Masters in CS in US universities. I am very much interested in Artificial Intelligence, but some of my friends said that it would be very difficult for me to learn AI as I have no overview about the course in my undergraduate degree.
Can anyone tell me if I can easily learn by putting some effort on learning AI. I am very much interested in that course.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't know about the US, but in some schools in Canada you can be admitted to a CS Graduate degree without prior background in an interest area. You'd have to take background courses to get yourself up to speed, possibly in excess of the bare-minimum program requirements, but it should be doable.
For AI specifically, ensure that the schools you're applying to have enough background in the topic, and that there are supervisors and supervisory capacity for you. Look for undergraduate courses in topics that interest you, as they may form part of your background studies.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From my experience, many graduate courses do not require prior knowledge about the specific subject being taught, only background knowledge. Alternatively, they may require only minimal knowledge that you could teach yourself very quickly. But it is worth checking specific courses - naturally some would be more advanced.
For something like machine learning, the relevant background would probably be algorithms, probability, linear algebra and maybe some calculus/optimization.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/06 | 1,533 | 6,306 | <issue_start>username_0: I am trying to compare PhD training programs of different universities, institutes and departments in my field of interest. One of the comparisons I made is where did the previous students go after they finished their PhDs; how many papers did they write during their PhDs; and how much are they cited 1-2 years after completing their PhDs.
Now, comparing the citations counts is difficult. They vary quite a bit. How many times should a successful young scientist be cited 1-2 years after completing his or her PhD? How about an average one? What is the minimum number to be able to continue in academia? I understand that exact numbers are difficult to provide but I would guess you senior scientists can provide good estimates.<issue_comment>username_1: I believe your first two criteria are far more relevant than the third one. Two years after the defence is too early to evaluate scientists based on citations. Moreover, the average number of citations varies a lot from one field (or even subfield) to another.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe that scientometric indicators of scientific productivity and impact are at best, limited if the overall objective is to compare different college, departments, universities, institutes, centers (or any other academic organization) in one discipline. This is coming from someone who has had rigorous training in bibliometrics/informetrics/scientometrics.
This is because there are massive variations in citation patterns ***within*** a particular field. This is especially pertinent if the field is rather interdisciplinary. Note though that in any given field, there is a general level of agreement among scholars in that field which departments are "*better*" than some other ones.
For instance, in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), critical theorists and ethnographers get, on an average lower numbers of citations per article published than say, ubiquitous computing folks.
However, purely on an ***exploratory*** basis, there could be several ways of looking at departments:
1. **Where are graduate students from a particular department publishing in?**
*Are they consistently publishing in top tier venues?* e.g. In core HCI, I would look at [CHI](http://chi2014.acm.org/)/[CSCW](http://cscw.acm.org/) conferences. When considering, the subfield of usable privacy, I would, in addition, look at [SOUPS](http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2013/)/[IEEE Privacy & Security](http://www.computer.org/portal/web/computingnow/securityandprivacy).
2. **Among these publications, are they receiving best paper awards or best paper nominations?**
3. **Where are students from these departments being placed on a consistent basis?** Are they being placed in industry or academia? Where, specifically? Google or a no-name startup? Are they getting tenure track positions or primarily post doctoral fellowships? Which other departments?
4. **Are some of these students recipients of prestigious fellowships during their doctoral studies?** e.g. [NSF Graduate Research Fellowship](http://www.nsfgrfp.org/) or [Facebook Fellowship](https://www.facebook.com/academics)? How many?
5. **Bibliometric Indicators:**
* Average number of peer reviewed articles? (full journal and conference papers)
* Average number of citations per article?
* Co-authorship network analysis (which gives a nice idea of collaboration networks)
* Average number of student grants received or otherwise?
You can go on and on and on.
The idea is that, there is always some way to standardize or normalize any given construct. Sometimes, that is an useful approach. But, strict adherence to bibliometric indicators at many times, **make you mistake the noise for the actual signal**.
Consider the bigger picture and use metrics to buttress your concerns. That might be a more holistic approach.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: *You should decide on your PhD institution by the quality of the tenured faculty, not their students.* Great students make great co-workers, but it's the quality of your supervisor that can make (or break!) you. If you have good relationships with faculty at your current institution, you should ask them what, in their opinion, are the best departments to apply to.
You should review the publications of faculty members you would like to be supervised by, to see if their research interests you. The papers that are first-authored by the faculty member (they are still active in research and don't spend all their time supervising and teaching, right?) will be particularly useful in this regard.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Although this approach to measuring is plausible, I fear it is not what you want. Although of course things vary by field, the *papercount* per se, or even "impact factor", or ... any other easily-measurable thing is not quite what will affect things.
At least in mathematics (my field), a smaller number of very-good papers is much better than a large number of irrelevant papers. One might imagine that this would be measured by "impact factor", but it is absolutely not reliably so. As an extreme case, consider what happens when an important problem is finally and definitively solved: there may be fewer follow-ups, fewer citations, simply because there's little more to say.
And there's time-lag: I have many examples of 10-20 year (and longer) delays before people widely realized the interest of a given paper. Srsly, surely we're not trying so much to be of-the-moment-celebrities, but to make a long-term impact.
One could go on-and-on about the unreliability of appealing-but-fatally-flawed metrics... but the real point is that a less objectifiable judgement is necessary to evaluate the "merits" of a program. Stats on the students is probably not quite what you'd want, even though it might seem to be. E.g., at more elite places, there is vastly greater variance among students... so the "outcomes" are harder to interpret meaningfully... and, for you yourself, what those other kids did or didn't do is operationally irrelevant:
That is, *your* level-of-performance, that causes (or doesn't) respected experts to commend you to their peers, is what will get you a job, or not. The "published papers" thing is a *side-effect*.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/07 | 436 | 2,030 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm wondering how I should put my internship experiences in my Statement of Purpose for Master program. The internship experiences (mainly building java web applications) are not quite related to my research interests like distributed systems, real-time computing, etc.<issue_comment>username_1: Any relevant experience is valid subject matter for an application for a program of study.
In your case, your internship experiences are well within the same field of endeavour and I would include them, if space allows.
A researcher who has a particular interest in developing a java web application to interface with a real-time computing solution, might therefore be very interested in your particular skill set.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: While I think that any relevant work experience should definitely be included in your resume or cv, I am not sure if its place is in the statement of purpose.
If your internship in some way inspired you to get your master's degree or to pursue a certain area of interest, then I would include it; however, mentioning it for the sake of mentioning it doesn't make sense to me.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Well It really doesn't matter much whether your research subjects are related to what you have done internships in!
To make it more clear. Internships depicts that you are inclined and willing to work along with your regular curriculum. **I would suggest you to relate your internship with research subjects.** As we all know that all subjects in Computer Science are inter- related so try to find out any open source concept that you can relate to or willing to work for it. This much is enough. No doubt Research is most important aspect for admissions but you should know to combine it with your life. Give small Instances (backed with Proofs) where you can prove your point. Speaking about Number of years to show for experience is all depends on your profile, show max possible and make sure that you have salary slips.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/07 | 818 | 3,230 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing Algebra in a college in India. The professor asks students to note down solved examples in class, and then poses the very same questions in the tests.
I don't go to class for these very reasons. Hence, I end up writing alternate proofs for such problems. The professor is incompetent to the extent that he does not understand proofs written by an undergrad, and gives me zero on all those answers.
When applying for grad school, I will have bad grades in Algebra and other math subjects (I suspect). How do I convey the this to the Admissions committee when applying for a PhD?
I believe this is relevant to a lot of students studying in the sub-continent.<issue_comment>username_1: Unfortunately, this is a classic no-win situation. If you protest about instructors being incompetent, you may come across as someone too eager to assign blame for mistakes to someone else. If you say nothing, then your record may be dismissed out of hand (given how important algebra is in the undergraduate math curriculum). You also don't want to admit that you're skipping class.
I think your best bet may be to take your chances with the poor grade in algebra, but then follow the advice [suggested for other people with weak transcripts](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/324/how-do-you-get-a-bad-transcript-past-ph-d-admissions).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If someone else is teaching algebra next semester/year, just drop the class. Cultivate a competent faculty mentor that you respect and trust. Listen to them. Meanwhile, **document everything**.
If there are really no competent, trustworthy faculty in your department, do everything you can to move. In that case, sadly, your department is a diploma mill, and even with the best grades in the world, you're unlikely to get into a good graduate program.
If you can't drop out or move, at least stop skipping class; you're just giving your instructor a legitimate excuse to dock your grade. Yes, it's childish, but your grades are more important than your pride.
>
> The professor is incompetent to the extent that he does not understand proofs written by an undergrad
>
>
>
Careful. I also do not understand many proofs written by undergrads. But in most cases, that lack of understanding is not due to **my** incompetence.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is a supplement to username_1's and username_2's excellent answers.
I understand it may be hard to drop the class or move to another class for some reasons. For your best interests, it's better to follow the instructor for now.
>
> The professor is incompetent to the extent that he does not understand proofs written by an undergrad.
>
>
>
I have a suggestion for you. Sign in to our sister site [Math SE](https://math.stackexchange.com/). Present your proofs. See what people think. After you verify your proofs, you'll know your professor is incompetent or not.
If your professor is indeed incompetent, you should seriously consider dropping the class. You don't want to waste your precious time. However, if it turns out that you do have serious flaws in your proof, I would listen to my professor if I were you.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/12/07 | 475 | 1,994 | <issue_start>username_0: I have stumbled upon a paper that is very related to my field of research and after reading and discussing it with my supervisor, I found some issues in the paper that I need more information about, such as the data set they used.
When I sent them an email (their emails are university email accounts) I received a failure notice telling me that these emails have been discontinued.
What is the protocol that I should follow to pass my inquires to them?
I have found one of the author's LinkedIn account, from it I know his current working place, can I contact the company asking them for his contact information? And I have already sent him a connection request containing a brief message of my intentions.<issue_comment>username_1: There's no particular "protocol"; just try to find some other way to contact them.
I would try:
* Google the author's names.
* Look for more recent publications by the same author(s); see if they list updated email addresses.
* LinkedIn was a good idea.
* If you have found the author's employer, see if you can find his contact info on their website; or contact someone else at the company and ask.
* Some professional societies maintain a database with contact information for all members. For instance, mathematics has the [Combined Membership List](https://www.ams.org/cml/).
* Contact someone at the previous employer and ask if they have current contact info.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would like to add one point of note to the other answer:
**Do check if the first author is still in academia.**
It is quite possible that the first author wrote the paper as a PhD student, and has since left academia. Quite probably, if he/she has left academia, he/she will not have time or want to make time to address the issue. When this is the case, probably their supervisor is also on the paper, and might still be in academia. In this case, contact the supervisor or another co-author.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/12/07 | 547 | 2,448 | <issue_start>username_0: Application forms for graduate school usually contain some vague statements regarding the extents of usage of one's social security number.
Some people believe that educational records at other institutes are private information and the universities should have access to the educational records that *the applicant* would disclose to them ONLY. (Regardless of potential consequences and/or ethical justification for actions of either party.)
My question is, having the applicant's social security number, can schools see which schools/programs the applicant has attended, for how long, and the courses that were taken in the past? If so, is this a common practice? That is, do graduate offices commonly check with social security information to make sure that the records from each previously attended institute is included in the application?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe your question is really about the existence of some sort of central database where all student records can be searched, if one has a key like a Social Security Number (SSN).
I do not believe any such system exists as I have never heard of it and if it did exist, it would likely run afoul of FERPA mentioned in the comments.
Basically, the only way one school would know you were at another school is if you (or someone else) tells them. Having your SSN does allow people to find out information from you but that is mostly from credit reporting agencies. If you borrow money from the school and they report it to the agencies, someone might be able to find out some information that way, but I can't imagine they would find out the program you were in.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The answer provided by username_1 is excellent. I would like to tackle this question from another angle.
I don't believe any school will purposedly leak or illegally obtain student information. You are in the US. You are protected under FERPA.
However, accidents always happen. For example, what if one of the professors in the school you previously attended just transferred to the school you are applying. He would know you were in another school and the program you were in. Or your current advisor met with your former advisor in a conference. Academia is a small world.
I would not worry about the SSN issue if I were you. Just focus on your application and your study. Put aside your past. Pursue the future.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/08 | 829 | 3,415 | <issue_start>username_0: I am bachelors of commerce from a not known university. I am going to take economics masters from India's top institute. I will take higher math courses as well. What else should I do to get in top 10 economics program ? (Are there any chances for me?)
Also can you please suggest some masters economics program which enrolls commerce undergrad?<issue_comment>username_1: (If I had more rep then this probably would have been a comment not an answer, sorry). That is a very hard question to answer without you providing much information.
Generally getting into a top 10 economics program is already a semi random process because so many applicants are so well qualified. It requires a high GPA in hard courses, good recommendation letters, etc... That being said, there are a lot of students from India who end up placing very well.
A website where you might get more opinions is <http://www.urch.com/forums/phd-economics/> . They have a general format for how to submit your profile, look at a few and check it out. Might help you know where you stand (They also have old archives of student profiles with results).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I will say the highest probability course of action, but nobody has a guaranteed entrance into a top 10 program.
1. Practice the GRE extensively. If you score 800 in math that will help. Verbal score is not a hindrance if everything else is right, but if you score above 95% in verbal that will show.
2. Get in touch with professors in the top 10 programs, especially some that might have connections to you either through your schools, country, or area of interest. Start an intelligent conversation with them. Show them how interested you are in working with them. For this you will have to do thorough research on their work, but it is the best way of showing how badly you want to work with them.
3. Get excellent grades and develop relationships with your current professors to obtain the best letters of reference possible.
In summary, people tend to focus on the quantitative and the impartial, a typical economist bias, but develop personal relationships can pay off in putting you ahead of the curve.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: As an international applicant, I would recommend against getting a masters from anywhere except one of the top (1-3) schools in your country. A master's from university in the top 30 in the US or one of the top schools in UK/Canada are also options.
If you are not yet competitive for a top master's program, I would suggest trying to get a job as an economics research assistant, ideally with a well known professor. This has the advantage also of giving you a better look at what economics research looks like first hand, which is closer to what you'd be doing as a PhD student and professor than your classes in a masters program.
Ultimately to be competitive for a top 10 school, you absolutely need a high GPA and GRE, and then on top of that you need letters of recommendation from at least 1 or 2 professors that are respected in the field, ideally who have a track record of placing students at top PhD programs. Even then there seems to be a lot of noise in the system about who gets accepted where.
I posted it in a comment above, but to reiterate, I think this is very good advice. <http://faculty-gsb.stanford.edu/athey/gradadvising.html>
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/08 | 1,160 | 4,621 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in an applied science subject at a UK university, part way through my first year. I have two supervisors: 'A' is a senior professor, and 'B' is a PDRA. Most of my work is centred around a large multi-university project. A is the PI on this project, and most of B's time is spent on it. B and I often work together on the same problems.
B has recently informed us that she is pregnant and will be going on maternity leave next year. By that point I will be a few months into year 2 of my PhD.
A has told me that that there is a possibility that, if I am willing, my PhD could be put on hold for the duration of A's maternity leave, and I could be employed as a RA to cover the work that she would have been doing.
My initial thought is that if this comes to pass, it would be a win/win: It would provide continuity for the project, and give me more experience and more time around the subject before my funding runs out. While the work that I would be doing would be slightly different to my PhD topic, it would be relevant and closely related.
My question is: What potential pitfalls are there here? What questions should I ask if this is formally proposed? What pros & cons can you see?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes this is a slippery slope you are mounting!
It would be better for you to keep on your PhD on track, taking a year out to do other research may end up being a complete waste of time for your PhD. It wouldn't be so bad if it was a 6 month absence but a year is a long time to be dropping your tools. I did my PhD full-time over 4 years in Computer Eng. and I needed those full 4 years to get the job done.
I'd ask if you can continue on your PhD track and get your supervisor A to take full charge for the year - just coordinate your plan with supervisor B before she leaves.
That said if your fairly young and can afford to spend a full year on a different subject matter then good for you! Personally I'd try to finish your PhD research goals ASAP
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't know your field, so my answer might be wrong.
It seems to me that taking this opportunity runs the risk of a small lifetime earnings hit (since there's a good chance that it means you would spend an extra year at PD salary rather than TT or industry salary), but that beyond that it would only help you career-wise. Especially since this year wouldn't count against your clock. That is, compared to your peers graduating at the same time as you, you'll have more experience, more publications, and experience with more projects.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Having been in a similar situation at least once before, I would say the following:
* Your priority should be the rapid completion of your PhD;
* The family circumstances of colleagues or machinations of your dept's internal labour market are irrelevant to your career;
* Don't be flattered into "helping out" by the temporary prestige of a salaried RAship;
* Universities are infamous for their exploitation of PhD students and are ruthless in the substitution of permanent salaried posts with FTCs (fixed term contracts).
* Be aware that your supervisor may attach a higher priority to delivering a project they are contractually responsible for as PI, than to facilitating the early completion of your PhD and thus your exit to an independent career;
* The early completion of your PhD will give you mobility in the job market, rendering the internal labour market irrelevant;
* If you aspire to a career in UK academia, now is the time to strategize and position yourself for REF2020. Unless some dramatic shift in hiring practices takes place, your next employer will only be interested in your PhD (tick), publication history and REF-ability for 2020.
I apologise if any of what I say sounds miserably pessimistic; but academia has become ruthlessly competitive and I would advise putting self-preservation ahead of any internal loyalties.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Pros:
1. More experience. Remember, experience is almost always a benefit. You'll instantly be more recruitable.
2. You'll get paid. This should help with the student debt and/or living expenses in the future.
3. You'll get in the good graces of the university. You never know when this might come in handy.
Cons:
1. You will graduate later than your peers.
2. It may take awhile before B comes back from her maternity leave.
If I were you, I would first check to see how long B will be gone. If it's less than a year, I would go for it. Over a year, and it'll be up to you. Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/08 | 521 | 2,396 | <issue_start>username_0: What is the prime motivation/incentive for people to supervise undergraduate projects? Students want the degree obviously, but what do the supervisors get? Is there some incentive? Are undergraduate supervisors paid per project as well?
I am an undergraduate computer science student. We mostly make applications and computer programs as final year projects.<issue_comment>username_1: Sometimes undergraduate projects can form an extended talent scouting, looking for good matches of personality and interests for future graduate students.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In community/junior colleges, faculty members may be offered a small fee for supervising student's honors projects. In my experience, most of those who agree to do this put in far more work than would be covered by the stipend. Although some may agree to supervise projects just because they are expected to, most do so because they enjoy working individually with motivated and talented students.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Beyond a general desire to train students to be good researchers, a few of the benefits of undergraduate supervision for the academic include:
* **Workload:** Some departments have a workload model with various degrees of formality. In such models, supervising undergraduate projects would count towards an overall workload. Thus, if you preferred supervising undergraduate projects to some other tasks such as teaching or various service roles, you could do a little more. In a similar way there might be a default expectation that each member of academic staff take on a certain number of undergraduate students.
* **Facilitating research:** Some undergraduate research is publishable. Thus, the research can contribute to the academic's research track record. Obviously undergraduate students don't usually have the research skills of a PhD student and the time frame is shorter. That said, with proper design of projects and some work by the supervisor, it's often possible to get a publishable research project or perhaps a piece of a publishable project. In other cases, merely supervising a project keeps the supervisor thinking about a project.
* **Identifying potential doctoral students:** It provides an opportunity to get to know a student and identify those with particular research talents. Such students may consider doing a PhD.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/09 | 2,166 | 9,577 | <issue_start>username_0: As we all know, during our higher-education careers there have been many professors who have assigned academic papers that require a minimum word or page count in some shape or form.
Personally, I feel this simply forces students to create “fluff” in their papers. I can understand creating a maximum word count (this makes students sift out what they feel is relevant to answering the prompt of the paper) whereas a minimum word count encourages one to think more broadly about how to go about the prompt. In some situations this is good – perhaps the instructor expects evidence or more critical thinking – but in most situations this will only lead students to find more evidence to reaffirm their claim (which is not very useful if you can prove your claim with less evidence) or create “fluff” in their paper in order to meet the requirement.
I found a [blog post](http://michellerafter.com/2012/10/08/everything-you-need-to-know-about-word-counts-but-were-too-afraid-to-ask/) about word counts for people writing stories/articles but this is in the professional world (not academic) and doesn’t actually have statistics, but it does give some interesting perspective.
**I want to know if there are any statistics or studies that prove specifying a minimum word-count is beneficial or hurtful in academic paper writing? Does it vary based on subject?** Perhaps instructors can give their experience and/or thoughts on this?
**So far there have been answers of people’s experiences which is extremely beneficial and I encourage more of them. Inevitably though, I am hoping to accept an answer that has a case study or any research relevant to this topic.**<issue_comment>username_1: I agree that providing a minimum word count promotes fluff. I have often used an approximate number of pages (12 pt double spaced) expected together with a minimum number of references. The reason for providing anything, is that students ask how much they need to write.
The question from the students is the key, as I see it. They do not know what constitutes good scientific writing and tend to try to quantify knowledge as "number of pages to be read to the exam" and similar quantities they can relate to. How this should be translated into what we usually are looking for "quality" is not at all clear to them, nor us in most cases! This has made we think more about the training throughout the education and how to get the message of "quality" across. I, unfortunately, do not have a patented solution but believe that organized writing exercises throughout the education is necessary. The problem is that most if not everyone in the education have to synchronize exercises across course boundaries in order to build understanding of academic writing among the students, starting with simpler exercises and leading towards essays.
Part of the writing task should also be a clear goal providing a goal for the writing exercise, other than a ten page requirement. what are the goals? to write ten pages? To quickly gather some information on a topic? To handle references correctly? To write concisely? The list can be extended substantially. The goals need to be made clear and then one must have a clear picture of what one expects out of all these goals because a different number of them can be satisfied at different levels of an education.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me start by saying I'm an undergraduate, so take me as seriously as you feel I deserve. I've TA'd for a 200-level class with a fair amount of writing, which meant grading lots of papers, and dealing with students who need to have a word/length requirement to be happy. I also have worked in journalism both as a writer and editor (again, college paper), so I've done lots of writing, and spent a lot of time working with writers on their articles.
In class, length is seen as a good thing, while in journalism, it's seen almost as a bad thing (due to space requirements). Dealing with tight space constraints was very tough for me at first, but after doing it for a few years I've learned to write compact stuff. You write better when every word is a gift. You really think about what you can cover in a given space, and how to give every word as much impact as possible. You think about structure more, knowing you won't have room re-summarize later, and you don't bring up anything that's not essential to what you're writing. It's harder, but it makes you better.
Giving long length requirements seemed to have the opposite effect. Topics diverge, and structure can easily be ignored. Writing/syntax is encouraged to be verbose. I see many writers come onto staff used to writing they do in class, and what I've noticed is that their writing often lacks clarity and purpose.
Most of what I do as an editor/teacher is ask questions like, "What exactly are you trying to say?" and "Explain this to me like I'm a 5-year-old." I find that this really helps, and that good writing follows good and clear ideas. This is regardless of the length of assignment, but I think having limited space forces students to do this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> As we all know, during our higher education careers it is inevitable to be assigned
> essays or academic papers that require a minimum word-count.
>
>
>
I do not agree with your premise here. For my undergraduate and graduate students I rarely include a minimum word count. I do include a maximum word count (which students often want extended) for the reason you wrote: Encourage students to write concisely.
Minimum word counts do promote the things we want to avoid. Writing the same information with fewer words give greater power to the writing so encouraging students to do the opposite does not really do what I want to do.
That said, I do find that I have to be VERY clear with my students that writing too little can cause them to fail. I explain that when it comes to word count, there is a maximum, say 3,000 words, but no minimum. If they can show they understand everything they should understand in 500 words, great! However, unless they are an exceptional writer, they should expect to fail if they submit too little.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Generally, I try and provide enough room between the minimum and maximum word counts to accommodate both verbose and terse writers. I use word counts to provide a guide as to the scope and depth I want in the assignment. Generally, the students who stretch out/tighten up their writing to stay within the minimum/maximum range have bigger issues than just being overly verbose or terse.
I would probably see better writing if I let students use their natural length, but generally my writing assignments are about learning a topic in breadth (long assignment) or focusing on a key issue (short assignment).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Well, you don't specify in which area you are. I certainly know that in **mathematics** and **theoretical computer science**, only a very weird professor would enforce a minimal length on a solution of a problem (which is a typical assignment: to solve a problem). You simply assign a problem and you think to yourself: "This should be for 2 or 3 pages of proof." To your surprise, the student writes a 10-line proof in a way in which you never treated the problem before (and maybe no one else either)!
So you never put a lower bound on the length of the solution, for the above reason. You can put a upper bound so that the student "can't simply list all possibilities", but even that is not necessary; however, it still of course makes sense if you have many students and a lack of time.
*N.B.: One of my favourite scientific paper has 5 pages including abstract and references, and shortens a proof that was previously ~20 pages. Isn't that beautiful?*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Whether a minimum length is justified depends on the purpose of the assignment. For a typical problem set, of course it would be ridiculous. The purpose is to solve the problems, and a short solution is even better than a long solution. However, I sometimes assign term papers to teach students about technical writing. Writing a very short essay would defeat the whole purpose of gaining writing experience (and writing one perfect paragraph is very different from writing twenty good pages, in terms of the level of organization and skills required). In these assignments, the students are given quite a bit of choice regarding the topic, and I offer guidance and feedback. If the paper is not long enough, then either it's poorly written or the topic was too narrow, and the student should figure this out early enough that the topic can be broadened if necessary. I'm not sympathetic if someone says "I started writing my twelve-page paper the night before it was due and discovered that I could only think of four pages to say on this topic." [Of course precise rules are silly, and I make it clear that there's a little flexibility. I wouldn't penalize someone for turning in eleven pages with no fluff, while twelve pages with a lot of fluff would count as bad writing.]
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: Minimum word requirements can encourage fluff, but they can also encourage greater research and more depth to the writing. Fluff comes from the students who would rather not have to write anything in the first place. At least that has been my experience. The minimum word requirement is not always successful in accomplishing this.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/09 | 1,048 | 4,641 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been working in a big-shot multi-national corporation as a developer for two years now, with a possible future as a software architect in some eight to ten years.
Now I want to enroll in a PhD program. I am planning to quit my job and join some university for PhD programs. Now most of the universities needs some research papers, of which I have none. They also require recommendations from professors, however I have already quit college two years back and don't have a working relationship with those professors.
How should I secure letters of recommendation? Will a letter of recommendation from my manager help? Does academia really care about professionals wanting to enter back into the world of higher education again? Will I be able to apply to competitive universities with my profile?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe you really should give it a try, but of course it depends on the field of CS that you are going to apply to. So try to check a field of specialization that is closely related to the one that you have been working, eg. Software Engineering.
Also here it depends to which university are you going to aim for. A certain number of them require that you have already a master's degree in CS; some of them can choose you directly to do PhD studies being just a bachelor, but that usually happens to students that got at least one or two publications in a respected peer conference or journal (that is for the admission committee to check it up if you have research skills). The last point is not a must, but it is important. I have talked a few days ago with a Professor in one renowned university in the North America area, and he mentioned me that the admission committee in his faculty is getting more strict each year, and now to have publications is really a must (apart of a MSc degree of course).
In any case give it a try, and do not forget to say in your cover letter your research interests and why you really want to pursue a PhD.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not a computer science guy, so I don't really have experience with the norms of a CS department in a university. But I can give this general advice:
1. If you want to do a PhD, you should at the very least: 1) know you enjoy research; and, preferably, 2) have specific research problems you really want to work on. **Don't enter a PhD program if you don't like to research.** If you're not sure, start with a master's in a program that has a history of allowing master's students to graduate into PhD programs and in-so-doing take advantage of their master's coursework.
2. **References: get them from people who make you look good and make sure your letter-writers know what makes a good grad school letter of recommendation.** If you have a good manager who can attest to your capabilities as a learner, sure, have him or her write a letter. However, not all managers are going to know what graduate schools are looking for -- so educate the writer. Grad schools want people who can learn and work independently above all. Emphasize that. And, of course, if you are interested in a certain kind of research, make sure your letter-writer knows that and can comment about it!
3. **The personal statement matters.** In your post here you mentioned your strengths (professional experience at a good firm) and weaknesses (disconnected from academia, non-academic references). Be straightforward about those in your personal statement. More importantly, use the personal statement to discuss what you want to research, why, and your prior experience in the area. Furthermore, explain why you are a good fit for the department...
4. **Fit**. You need to fit in at your department. This basically means you should apply to programs where you can have an appropriate mentor who is an expert in what you want to study, or expert enough to guide you along. Do not just apply to any-old program, or a program with a good name. Read through the department web site, figure out the kind of work they are doing, and contact possible mentors/advisors with questions that show your interest and help you decide if the program is a good fit. Having prior rapport with the faculty will help you, and if the department knows you **want to be there**, this will bump you up a little in the stack of applications. Of course, having good credentials and clear research interests is what makes for a successful application, but departments don't want to waste giving offers and potential funding to candidates who are unlikely to attend the program should they be admitted.
Hope this helps.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/10 | 938 | 4,129 | <issue_start>username_0: What citation style allows the author to reference sources with superscript numbers?
I'm at the very edge of my page limit. I'm allowed to use any citation style. I need something concise that can point to the relevant works I've listed on the works-cited page.
Anyone have any suggestions?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe you really should give it a try, but of course it depends on the field of CS that you are going to apply to. So try to check a field of specialization that is closely related to the one that you have been working, eg. Software Engineering.
Also here it depends to which university are you going to aim for. A certain number of them require that you have already a master's degree in CS; some of them can choose you directly to do PhD studies being just a bachelor, but that usually happens to students that got at least one or two publications in a respected peer conference or journal (that is for the admission committee to check it up if you have research skills). The last point is not a must, but it is important. I have talked a few days ago with a Professor in one renowned university in the North America area, and he mentioned me that the admission committee in his faculty is getting more strict each year, and now to have publications is really a must (apart of a MSc degree of course).
In any case give it a try, and do not forget to say in your cover letter your research interests and why you really want to pursue a PhD.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm not a computer science guy, so I don't really have experience with the norms of a CS department in a university. But I can give this general advice:
1. If you want to do a PhD, you should at the very least: 1) know you enjoy research; and, preferably, 2) have specific research problems you really want to work on. **Don't enter a PhD program if you don't like to research.** If you're not sure, start with a master's in a program that has a history of allowing master's students to graduate into PhD programs and in-so-doing take advantage of their master's coursework.
2. **References: get them from people who make you look good and make sure your letter-writers know what makes a good grad school letter of recommendation.** If you have a good manager who can attest to your capabilities as a learner, sure, have him or her write a letter. However, not all managers are going to know what graduate schools are looking for -- so educate the writer. Grad schools want people who can learn and work independently above all. Emphasize that. And, of course, if you are interested in a certain kind of research, make sure your letter-writer knows that and can comment about it!
3. **The personal statement matters.** In your post here you mentioned your strengths (professional experience at a good firm) and weaknesses (disconnected from academia, non-academic references). Be straightforward about those in your personal statement. More importantly, use the personal statement to discuss what you want to research, why, and your prior experience in the area. Furthermore, explain why you are a good fit for the department...
4. **Fit**. You need to fit in at your department. This basically means you should apply to programs where you can have an appropriate mentor who is an expert in what you want to study, or expert enough to guide you along. Do not just apply to any-old program, or a program with a good name. Read through the department web site, figure out the kind of work they are doing, and contact possible mentors/advisors with questions that show your interest and help you decide if the program is a good fit. Having prior rapport with the faculty will help you, and if the department knows you **want to be there**, this will bump you up a little in the stack of applications. Of course, having good credentials and clear research interests is what makes for a successful application, but departments don't want to waste giving offers and potential funding to candidates who are unlikely to attend the program should they be admitted.
Hope this helps.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/10 | 397 | 1,724 | <issue_start>username_0: I submitted my paper to a reputed journal two days ago. I got a mail from the editor saying that I need to complete other forms (copyright etc) after he finishes screening. However,I hadn't received my supervisor's approval when I submitted the paper. Now my supervisor has got back to me saying that I should withdraw my paper. Currently the status is "Not Assigned." Do I need to send a withdrawal letter? Or I can wait for the screening result? If I don't pass screen, do I still need to send a withdrawal letter?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you need to withdraw the paper from formal consideration. This is the only way to stop the process once it's begun. This also actually helps you with later submissions. If the paper is submitted and rejected, then you may have to specify this to other journals that ask about the previous history of the manuscript.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You need to withdraw ASAP. Submitting papers without a co-authors consent is considered scientific misconduct. It can have SERIOUS consequences for your career!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on whether your supervisor is one of the authors/co-authors or not.
If your supervisor is one of the authors of the paper, submitting the paper without all the authors' consent is unethical. You should send the editor a letter to withdraw it.
If you wait until the paper passes the screen process, you are wasting the editor's precious time. If you withdraw it now, he can then proceed to other papers on his desk.
If you are the only author of the paper, I am not sure why you need your supervisor's approval to submit the paper. It would be up to you to withdraw or not.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/10 | 1,643 | 7,344 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm starting a new program in the spring and one of the first things that we will be tasked with is the creation of a 'XYZ Learning Contract'. After a bit of digging in the search engines I see that there is a pretty broad spectrum of thought on the value and composition of learning contracts. Having never dealt with them before I find myself wondering:
* How common are they?
* If the contracts can be, and some sources say - should be, modified then how is obligation and adherence managed?
* Following on to the last question, how are they enforced?
I understand that every department is going to be different and that an advisor's milage may vary but I'm also curious if there is some general consensus on learning contracts among those that have had to deal with them.<issue_comment>username_1: **Are Learning Contracts Common?**
----------------------------------
I have earned over 169 undergraduate credit hours and earned a Masters degree from decent state schools (in Florida). I have also taught at some small business schools in NYC. I have never seen learning contracts in practice. I would venture to guess that they are uncommon, although [one may find reference to them in academic literature.](http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22learning+contracts%22&btnG=&as_sdt=1%2C5&as_sdtp=) I would also venture to guess that the reason that they are uncommon is that they would require a great deal of individual attention per student from the institution offering them.
About Contracts
---------------
Legal contracts while having set components have many possibilities of variation, and I would expect learning contracts to be no different. [For example, legal contracts require competent parties, legal subject matter, meeting of the minds, offer and acceptance, consideration, etc...](http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Elements+of+a+Contract)
Some relevant aspects of legal contracts:
**Legal Subject Matter**
The subject of the learning would have to be restricted to the scope of the institution's design for offering the contract. It is important that the contract should be as specific as possible in this regard
**Offer and Acceptance**
One party should propose the terms, likely the student, and another party would have to accept, likely an advisor on behalf of the institution. When one party accepts the other's terms, we then have a contract.
**Performance**
The terms should be clearly stated. For example:
* Deadline, degree of flexibility allowed
* If keeping a journal and/or writing a paper, Quantity of Content
* If keeping a time-sheet, degree of completeness, terms for making up missed times
* Subject Matter, scope boundaries
* The institutional representative who will determine completeness
**Consideration**
There is consideration, i.e., compensation, for the one obliged to complete the contract (the student), if considered to have performed, as meeting one of the terms of completion of perhaps a series of hurdles towards earning a certificate or degree.
**Modification**
----------------
On the question of Modification, if the original agreed-upon terms allow for future modification, then so be it. There would likely be an expected period after which the two parties would assess the progress, and then determine if the terms of the agreement should be adjusted. If no agreement can be reached, the original agreement will remain in place.
**Enforcement of Performance**
------------------------------
If the terms of the agreement are reached, then the contract can be fulfilled. That is, when the student delivers evidence of their learning, likely contingent on an assessment agreeing that it is good delivery, the institution can deliver their consideration.
Conclusion
----------
These contracts do not appear to be common (if we exclude academic codes of conduct). They can be modified by agreement, but terms for their modification should be clearly stated prior to the performance period to properly manage expectations. Enforcement is managed by the terms of the contract, likely that the institution has to agree that the student's evidence of learning is sufficient to merit verification that they have performed.
My impression, although unevidenced, is that students with learning contracts tailored to their educational goals would be more likely motivated to focus more on the objective of learning than those checking off boxes in a standardized curriculum.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I've seen learning contracts been suggested for two types of situations:
1) As a motivational tool, to make students realize that there are things that they want to learn to accomplish their career goals. The idea is that once the student realizes that what (s)he is being taught in particular course is important for them, (s)he should be more motivated to make an effort in learning the material because it is really in his/her best interest to do so. In this type of situations, it seems to be that the enforcement is very soft/flexible.
2) To ensure fair, non-subjective grading of students in independent studies, research programs and internship programs. Departments undergoing accreditation programs (like ABET) tend to do this because they need to prove/show that there is consistent grading, that the students know what is expected of them, and that they know their grading criteria. These learning contracts are obviously more strictly enforced, but it is up to any individual department implementing this to decide whether they can be modified on-the-go to adjust to unexpected challenges that may arise during the semester.
In the end, though, it doesn't matter if they are "typically" very strictly enforced or not, because you should not care about the general/average case; you should care about your particular institution and we cannot know what their policy on learning contracts is. Just ask them. I am sure they'll be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Started to think on our concept of "learning plan", which sounds bit light-weight version of the learning contract of the original question(?)
*Commonality:* In our universities everyone has the opportunity & obligation to do a (short) personal study plan (and this applies to all student levels). One example here: <http://www.helsinki.fi/socialsciences/studying/new/HOPS.html> . Each university/department/professor might had some small differences of the content, but basically it was a self-made "project plan" for year(s)/goal ahead.
*Obligation & Adherence*:
Personally, I think making the plan was really useful as it helped to outline the schedule and requirements, and helped to think how to get all done. However, main drive was assumed to come from student herself - the desire to advance in timely manner.
*Enforce*: (?) One enforcer is/was to obtain a certain minimum quantity of credits that had to be done per year to get the student benefits. Anyhow, I think our system relies mostly on the students' personal drive. It's relatively hard to get to desired faculty, so most of those who get in won't waste the opportunity.
Anyhow it's bit tricky - one can has "perfect" study plan, but still studying can get stuck, for one reason or another...
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/10 | 531 | 2,070 | <issue_start>username_0: Many journals, especially in the life sciences, offer the possibility to submit results as as a brief communication.
I'm wondering when to choose this way of publishing. If I don't have enough results for a large paper because it used to be a "hobby project" that should be put to an end, but the results are interesting and I want to publish them, should I opt for a brief communication?
**How do I choose between this form of publication and an article?**
This includes the question of how small a "real" article can be.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer is often that you submit an article, and the journal says "We might accept this if you can make it a brief communication, which means 1 table, and X words". (Where X is a relatively small number.
Write the article and see if it naturally fits into their criterion for brief communication. If it does, submit it as such, if not, submit it as an article. The length of a 'real' article depends on the journal, but I've had a lot of papers rejected and this only happened once because the article was too short.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The Journal of Neuroscience has this web page
[Brief Communications](http://www.jneurosci.org/site/misc/ifa_bc.xhtml)
It does explicitly say,
>
> Brief Communications are short research articles intended to present **exciting** findings that will have a **major impact** in neuroscience. Brief Communications are limited to **4,500 words**. **. . .** may include **no more than 4** figures, tables, multimedia, and/or 3D models, **. . .**
>
>
>
Please ask the editors of that journal for more details.
Also, the [Wiki page](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Journal_of_Neuroscience) for that journal says,
>
> some issues of the journal contain articles in the following sections:
> Brief Communications **. . .**
>
>
>
I guess it means not every issue publishes brief communications.
*Disclaimer: My research area is not life science and I am not affiliated with Journal of Neuroscience.*
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/10 | 735 | 3,014 | <issue_start>username_0: I am used to European university system and I don't know much about how things are working overseas.
I already hold a Bachelor degree and a Master degree. I will soon be looking for a PhD. If I am not mistaken, in the USA, someone directly jumps from a Bachelor degree to graduates studies which include a Master degree + a PhD, is it correct? Is it also the way it works in Canada (Vancouver, UBC)? Is it possible to make a PhD in Canada without having to take time for the Master degree?
I read somewhere that a Canadian PhD last between 4 and 7 years. Does it include the Master degree? If yes, how much time does the PhD only represents?<issue_comment>username_1: Canada is different from the USA, in that direct entry for a PhD after a bachelors degree is rare. The typical path is a bachelors, followed by two year masters, followed by four to five years for a PhD.
As far as I know, no typical Canadian PhD program also grants a masters, as in Canada, it's sort of implied that you already had one going into the PhD.
This is of course, based on my understanding of the sciences: Humanities and Engineering may vary.
**EDIT**: One note about courses: Course requirements vary dramatically from program to program, university to university. Some will require relatively few courses, others, many more.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I completed a PhD in Canada. I started in a MSc program, but after one year transferred into the PhD without completing the MSc. My total length of graduate studies was 5 years. This is not uncommon in biology at the schools I've been associated with. I'm not sure if you can technically apply directly to the PhD, but many students enter the MSc program with the expectation that they will transfer after one year, so it amounts to the same thing.
In my experience Canadian schools with a PhD program also grant MSc degrees in the same program. There are schools that only offer MSc without PhD though.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I started a Canadian PhD program after completing a European Master's program. This is the typical progression in Canada; the combined Master's-PhD programs are the exception, not the norm. PhD programs typically take between 3 and 5 years. The exact length depends mostly on how quickly your research progresses.
That said, there are significant differences between Canadian and European PhD programs:
* Most Canadian PhD programs require you to take some courses. In my case, I had to take 3 graduate classes in various disciplines.
* **You are not an employee** of the university. You do not get a salary from the university for being a PhD student, and instead have to pay quite hefty tuition fees. You should make sure that your funding is enough to cover the tuition and living expenses. This funding can include salary from TA (Teaching Assistant) or RA (Research Assistant) work for the university, scholarships, and money from your supervisor's grant.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/10 | 340 | 1,553 | <issue_start>username_0: Can two people, a professor and a graduate student, sign a recommendation letter? The concern here is that the professor knows little about the student and the graduate student knows all about the student.
My concern here is that if the professor is contacted, he will not be able to provide further information, where as if I was listed as the primary contact: I could.<issue_comment>username_1: You can have more than one person sign a recommendation letter. I had one letter signed by two people. But it is unusual. My understanding is that the usual approach in your situation would be for the graduate student to help write the letter, but only the professor to sign it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Like Noah, I had a situation where two advisors co-signed a letter of recommendation. I should mention that the people reviewing the letter found this an unusual situation—and had claimed that they had not seen that in twenty years of reading recommendation letters. So this is definitely not standard practice. I suspect it would be memorable, but I am not sure it would be actually useful.
However, the difference was that my two co-signers were equal in rank. Your situation has a professor with a graduate student providing most of the insights. I suspect you will need to have the professor adapt the graduate student's comments, and then sign the letter. In the case where feedback is needed, the professor would then need to get the relevant details from the graduate student.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/12/11 | 549 | 2,329 | <issue_start>username_0: There is a two year gap after finishing my Master's degree and I am applying to graduate schools in the same field. This time has spent on immigration and then unemployment, tutoring physics, and a job not directly related to my field. But I have been following new research on the topics that I was interested in, without being supervised or any serious research.
My questions is, what should I mostly emphasize on in order to explain the gap most effectively: My teaching experience (indicating interest in teaching the field), Having a job and paying for my family expenses (indicating maturity), or that I was following the current research on topics of interest (indicating persistence)?<issue_comment>username_1: You can mention all three. The trick is to make these parts of your CV look like "features," not "bugs." It sounds like you have an idea of what to do there. I don't think it would hurt to mention that this slight detour, while being slightly off the path to graduate school, has only convinced you that graduate school was the right place for you.
Of course, no one ever got into a good program by saying "I really want to be there!" I was in a similar situation when applying to PhD programs -- I was teaching high school, which was good, but my background was not directly inline with what some PhD programs were looking for. I emailed some faculty about what to do to bolster my application, and one suggestion was to go ahead and do some academic writing on my own and use that as part of my application. I'm not sure if that's possible for you, but it's something to consider. If that work is high quality, shows that you are up-to-date on the state of your field, and actively thinking about workable research topics, that will surely impress admissions committees.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I presume you are applying to PhD programs. If I were you, I would emphasize
>
> I was following the current research on topics of interest
>
>
>
since research will be the primary task for PhD students.
Teaching experience should be also mentioned so that they would know you can be a TA.
Other things are not directly related to SoP. You can mention them briefly in your CV in case they wonder what you have been doing.
Good Luck!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2013/12/11 | 1,084 | 4,882 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a University Dissertation proposal on Big Data. I have recently received my feedback and while there are good, constructive points one of the main issues in the marking is it is "too descriptive". I do not understand what this means really, when we are talking about a literature review how can it not be descriptive - you are talking about what has already been found.
The exact feedback is:
>
> Your literature review is overwhelmingly descriptive in character and its needs more of a critical edge, evaluating the main contributions to the literature. Having a critical edge is essential, if you want to achieve a high mark in the final dissertation.
>
>
>
So the question is: What is descriptive writing and what is critical writing, preferably with examples?<issue_comment>username_1: The difference between descriptive writing and critical writing is much like the difference between a newspaper report and an opinion column.
*Descriptive* writing is the act of reporting on what's in the literature:
>
> Smith found that when X occurred Y and Z also happened.
>
>
>
*Critical* writing analyzes what has been done, and takes note of trends, as well as possibly offering feedback on the overall quality of the research:
>
> Smith found X occurred in the presence of Y and Z, as did Jones. However, Doe has demonstrated that Y and Z normally occur in conjunction with one another, so it is not clear if X actually influences Y and Z, or if it is an independent effect.
>
>
>
What you can see from the above is that critical writing does require some descriptive writing, but it goes well beyond it in terms of the depth of analysis.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To extend username_1's comment slightly, a good critical analysis will not only summarize and critique findings, but also extrapolate conclusions from multiple studies to support/disprove current theories. Each individual paper provides evidence to some small piece of the overall puzzle; a good review will tie together many related (and some unrelated) papers to build an argument towards a general conclusion, using the individual research findings as support for their argument.
Note that the individual results are almost expected to contradict each other. You can frequently have a batch of papers supporting theory A, and a second set of papers supporting theory B. This should be noted and identified as well; these are the current trends in your field of research.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Echoing what others have said, while reviewing the literature, you need not only summarize findings. That's what "Descriptive" means in this context - not that your writing shouldn't describe current findings, but that your writing *only* describes current findings, without any analysis, criticism or synthesis.
For example, I once wrote a review on the reasons why a particular disease follows a particular seasonal pattern. A purely descriptive review would have described the various theories as to why this phenomena exists, and stopped there. Instead, I evaluated the extended evidence for each (i.e. for X to be true, Y must also be true. We have no evidence that Y is true, which puts X on shakey ground), identified which were mutually incompatible, and suggested which might actually be describing the same mechanism in two different forms.
What your evaluators are looking for, in all likelihood, is not merely a listing of the current thought in the field, but work that shows you are *interacting* with that work. That you think someone might be wrong - or are at least critically evaluating what is currently being written. That you can extend where the field is going in unique directions based on what's been done before, etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I would like to tackle this question from another angle for you.
You have done *a literature review* for the **dissertation proposal**. You report your findings from those literature after you study them, so you have descriptive writings in the proposal.
But, **what do you propose to research**? Have you discovered anything? Have you challenged the existing literature? What do you want to research? Why do you want to research that topic? What are your arguments? What would be your own approaches? Why would your approach work? Etc.
Those are the things they are looking for. They want you to have *critical edge* in the proposal.
I found a link from University of Leicester about [What is critical writing](http://www2.le.ac.uk/offices/ld/resources/writing/writing-resources/critical-writing) very helpful, at least to me. It contains several sections, What is critical writing? What is descriptive writing? The difference between descriptive writing and critical writing, examples and other useful information.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/11 | 1,030 | 4,795 | <issue_start>username_0: I have to start writing my thesis. My topic for research is work life balance in IT sector - a comparative analysis of male & female IT professionals in Pune.
I need help in writing the first introduction chapter. what all should be included in this chapter & what should not?<issue_comment>username_1: Talk to your advisor and look into student services provided by your university. The department should have pretty clear guidance on document structure and format. You will also learn a lot by reading some of the dissertations of previous (successful) candidates.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As has been mentioned - look at previous candidates' theses, and ask what is expected by your advisor. The introduction contents will vary between disciplines.
What I included in my (successful) PhD thesis is:
* Brief outline of the topic and subtopics being covered in the PhD.
* A rationale as to why the project is an important addition to the current body of knowledge.
* The main objectives of thesis and a brief overview of how these would be achieved.
* A hypothesis.
Note: it is important thatyou check to see if this or any format is acceptable and expected from your faculty.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: An introduction should funnel the reader from the wider perspective, in which your study is part, to the formulation of your thesis theme or question(s). This means you need to establish the wider perspective where your work improves our knowledge as well as identifying the gap in knowledge where your work attempts solution(s). In terms of writing this can be accomplished in several ways, although similar content-wise.
In a short research paper you start out by writing about the wider perspective leading into identification of and statements about a gap of knowledge where your paper fits. You follow up by reviewing the literature to establish what is known in detail and perhaps highlighting the identified gaps. You may finish off by recapping your work and the main conclusion to the gap(s) identified earlier. Some prefer not to do so in the introduction; a matter of taste or tradition.
You can write your introduction in the way just described as a long chapter (due to the literature review) but you can also choose to split the text into several chapters. You would then have a chapter called introduction which will only contain the wider perspective and identification of a gap in knowledge. Sometimes it can be useful to add a short chapter detailing the aims of the thesis where you can expand on the questions based on the identified gap. You then follow up with a chapter called "background" or something more descriptive, but which contains the literature review.
Since all theses are different, some may have one question to solve, some may have several and somewhat disparate around a main theme, the way to write the introduction will have to be adjusted. for the former case the main template can be followed but in the case of several research questions around a theme some adjustments are needed. Exactly how to solve this is difficult to say since it depends on the type of questions and how they are tied together. But, it is necessary to make sure the place of each question in the greater scheme of things is known and that the literature review clearly shows what is known about each topic. This can in an extreme case mean to have a single short introduction of the major perspective and then have sections for each of the questions, almost like a set of papers (if it is not built from papers/manuscripts); each complete with introduction, methods, results and discussion.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In a lot of PhD dissertations, the introduction consists of material that would have been learned in a graduate course in your subfield. For example, the introduction to mine was a presentation of some basic ideas about low-energy nuclear structure that would have been contained in a graduate course in nuclear physics. Such an introduction is one of the least useful pieces of writing you'll ever do. Only a very small number of people will ever read it, and of those, only an even smaller number will learn anything from it. The text it contains will not be usable in a paper published in s journal. The only people who will benefit from it are maybe 2 or 3 people on your committee who are not in your subfield, and those people could just as easily read some other treatment of the topic. For these reasons, you should either not write such a chapter at all, or make it extremely brief. The whole concept of a PhD dissertation is a bizarre anachronism, and if your university offers an alternative, such as stapling together a set of published papers, you should take it.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/11 | 678 | 2,895 | <issue_start>username_0: If my university position is entirely funded by grant funds can I write for another grant while being funded by another grant?
More specifically the individual is a project coordinator hired by grant funds to manage a grant, not a faculty member or student. Can this person spend time writing another grant when the project coordinators entire position is grant funded , no appropriated funds used. A PI on the grant has asked the individual to start working on another grant during the regular hours, not outside the designated 40 hour work week. Thus, the real ethical issue can a faculty PI of a grant request a project coordinator to work on another grant<issue_comment>username_1: Yes and no. While most (possibly all) funding agencies will not allow you to work more than 100% of your time on a single grant, most universities will allow you to allocate more than 100% of your time (e.g., up to 125% or so) which is reasonable given a full time job is nominally a 40 hour week and 50 hours is not unheard of. This means that you are not using your time that is funded by the grant to apply for another grant, but rather some of that "extra" time. The key thing is that you need to make sure you still accomplish what you set out to do in the grant that is currently funding the majority of your time.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: From my limited experience, I think this varies depending on the field. It seems to me that it is done quite often in the humanities. When I myself did it, working on the grant proposal also helped me progressing in the original project I was working on, so I did have something to show for that.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: From my (obviously limited) experience it 100% depends on grant rules and, to an extent, local "grant culture".
It is common for people participating in 2-3 grants at any given time in here - and, obviously, getting paid from them. There are no limitations or expectations on work time listed in the grant rules - just that you properly attribute the results and list funding in publications. I'm yet to see a "a person holding X position in the grant must work a full 40 hour week on this project only" requirement. "One person can not lead more than one grant at a time" is common, though (and even then usually limits it to the given grant agency).
Main reason why this setup isn't unethical per se is that grants are not like full-time jobs - people are not getting paid to further the field in some abstract sense over time. Instead, they have ideas, list them in a proposal, work on them using grant funds and get evaluated. If you hire workers to build a house and set a deadline one year in the future, you have a certain agreement, and it should not bother you whether they work only on your project in that time or do ten more, long as your house is built properly.
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/12/11 | 548 | 2,188 | <issue_start>username_0: **Background:**
I'm a non-US undergrad majoring in Computer Science. I will have published a couple of research papers in a few months before I graduate, have worked on a couple of research-based academic projects, made some significant contributions to a big FOSS project, have done an internship from a small US startup, and a project in a big company (the size of Microsoft, Yahoo) - kind of a university-company mentorship. I intend to pursue my Ph.D from a US university.
**3 questions:**
1. If I join a US startup after relocating to US, work there (coding work - PHP, Python, iOS development) for a year or two before taking the GRE test and applying to MS/Ph.D programmes, will it increase my chances? I really want to work at a startup and want to found my own.
2. What if the work at the startup is based on data analysis and machine learning (along the lines of which I intend to pursue my Ph.D)?
3. Also, does having already founded a small startup (supposing I've got an investor or two too) help my chances in gaining admission? Considering I will co-found my own startup anyway someday, for sure.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to all of these questions and more is going to be: Maybe.
Experience will help, but testimonial in the form of reference letters will be better. If you work at this company and it gets you a dynamite reference letter, testifying to your skill, it may help you. On the flip side, for a PhD, skill may not be sufficient--- for a PhD your research background (what you already *have*) may be much more important than the work experience.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In answer to your three questions:
1) Working at a startup shouldn't hurt, and may help your application if it supports the part about "wanting to found my own."
2) Sure, the more relevant your work is to your proposed course of study, the better (all other things equal). Just don't get trapped in a lot of "mickey mouse" work in data processing.
3) Most universities pride themselves on training "leaders" in the field, and "tech founder" (to some fundraisers) sounds like "future large alumni donor."
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/12 | 2,126 | 9,166 | <issue_start>username_0: After I completed my PhD program, during which I published one refereed paper, I applied for several academic positions.
For a while, my two main thesis advisers agreed to write letters of recommendation, but after a few couple of years, one of them told me he would no longer recommend me because I had not published enough. He even admitted that it was not his job to judge my publication record -- potential employers could do that -- but until I published again, he wouldn't recommend me.
I do admit that I should have published more during my PhD program, but I was always under the impression that my publishing would begin after I had got a relevant job. During the period between graduation and being refused a recommendation, I'd been a consultant, a college teacher and unemployed. I could have published on my own but, after the delay, I felt hindered by being unemployed and rather "burned out" after the thesis writing process. Catch-22? Even more ironic is the fact that I had asked my thesis advisers if I could submit my thesis in the form of a series of published papers (this was allowed under the rules), instead of as an unpublished monograph, and both said no!
Don't thesis advisers have a duty to both encourage candidates to publish and to recommend them for academic positions? At the same time, is it right that universities expect job applicants to already have publications before they arrive? What could I have done, other than publish as an independent after the fact? It is hard not to feel very bitter about the whole PhD process.
**Addendum**
Since it was not yet listed, I add [How to handle not having my PhD advisor as a reference?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/635/how-to-handle-not-having-my-phd-advisor-as-a-reference?rq=1) is a related question.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Don't thesis advisers have a duty to both encourage candidates to publish...
>
>
>
Many Universities prefer, or require, that a thesis be in the form of an expository monograph, which is absolutely different to several papers stapled together. If that is the case at your University, don't interpret your supervisor's adherence to this as discouraging you to publish.
>
> ...and to recommend them for academic positions?
>
>
>
A thesis adviser does not have an obligation to *recommend* a student for a position. Arguably they have an obligation to write a reference letter, but that letter should contain the adviser's honest and confidential opinion of your suitability for the job.
I would encourage you to still try to publish, as good references from your thesis supervisors are a huge help if that will win them over. If you publish your thesis results years later, this well help show that you are serious about getting back in the game.
You will [*need* to prove](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5127/in-the-absence-of-strong-references-on-which-things-should-i-focus-so-that-i-ca) that you are an excellent researcher to get an academic job. If you cannot get [strong letters](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9341/how-do-i-make-sure-i-get-strong-recommendation-letters-for-faculty-positions) from your supervisory faculty, good publications become even more necessary.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: This is a tricky situation, and it's hard to interpret it without more information. Thesis advisors certainly have an obligation to help their former students within reason and to recommend them for appropriate positions. An advisor who gives up too quickly on a student is an unsupportive jerk at best (and it's easy to think of much worse descriptions). On the other hand, nobody has an obligation to recommend a candidate they cannot honestly support. Telling someone that is really awkward, especially when it's their own student, but the alternatives are writing a dishonest letter or writing a letter that undermines the candidate's chances, neither of which is any better.
Based on what you've written, there's no way of telling whether your advisor is a jerk or the two of you are just caught in an awkward situation. I'd recommend asking your advisor some key questions:
1. Are there other positions you could apply for that might be a better fit for your background and accomplishments so far?
2. Based on your unpublished work, how could you prepare a good paper as quickly and efficiently as possible?
Hopefully you'll get encouraging and useful answers. If you and your advisor can work out a plan that satisfies both of you, then that's great. If not, you may have to give up on your advisor and apply with letters from other people. That's far from ideal (the first thing everyone will ask is why your advisor didn't write a letter), but it can work if you get strong enough letters.
Of course publishing would help with getting strong letters. Ultimately, I'd bet that publishing another paper or two is in your best interests, regardless of the situation with your advisor. I can understand that it's upsetting to feel forced into publishing on your own, with no job in your field and no guarantee of getting one in the future. However, it's probably a worthwhile investment of your time, and it's a valuable contribution to the academic community in any case (so regardless of what happens, it's something you can be proud of).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: That a thesis advisor refuses to recommend a former student exposes the underlying tensions inherent during the supervisory process, or differences in what constitutes the core research question. The tensions are not exposed until after the student graduates. In my case, my supervisor used me as an "unpaid research assistant for three years" and sent my twenty texts to translate from a Southeast Asian language to English without even acknowledging my contribution to the research. He even stymied my PhD thesis submission by saying that my progress was marginal, even though I had finished 84% of the thesis six months before submission. I later realised that my supervisor was stymying my attempts to establish my credentials as a TA, soon after I would submit my thesis. He kept egging me to go back to India (he is incidentally Australian) and my thesis was undertaken in Australia.
Three weeks before I graduated my supervisor told me not to keep my hopes too high in the job market. I smelt that something was fishy and requested him to write a general letter of recommendation. My hair stood still on both ends when he commented adversely ion my social skills. I then decided not to solicit letters of recommendation from my primary supervisor. I instead, request letters from academics who are well-disposed to me. Of course, my supervisor's adversarial stance has affected my fortunes so far but I will never give up.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: Recommendations are a method for discrimination
-----------------------------------------------
The only reason why recommendations exist is to discriminate potential candidates - to have some information that is correlated with the candidate being better or worse. If everyone gets a good recommendation, or even a recommendation as such, then the whole process would be useless, so everyone getting recommended is definitely not a reasonable goal. If an advisor sincerely believes that a candidate is weak, then the only ethical action is to give a clearly weak recommendation or no recommendation at all.
What to do if you don't get good recommendations
------------------------------------------------
1. Become better - identify your weak spots and fix them. It depends on the field, but 1 paper during PhD and 0 papers in a few years after that sounds like a strong indicator that the candidate isn't doing solid independent research and thus can't be recommended. This can be fixed in the obvious way by doing such research.
2. Communicate your good things - if you have done solid work, then it needs to be communicated and shown in order to be appreciated. If you've done anything useful and worthwile, then you should get that published. This, coincidentally, seems to be exactly what the advisor suggested.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Demanding publication record in order to write a recommendation letter has no point at all to me.
Let us give an extreme example: someone publishes in Cell by his/her third year in graduate school and publishes again in Nature when he/she finishes the graduate program. This guy will not need a recommendation letter at all.
On the other hand, imagine a hard-working fellow who is acknowledgeable, knows the field in depth and is good at designing experiments, but got unlucky because the biology of his/her hypothesis was not what he/she, neither the supervisor, were expecting and, because of that, did not publish in a high grade journal or did not publish in a fast pace. This fellow is the guy who needs someone to state his/her qualities and to be vouched for. The recommendation letter is redundant for people with high grade publications, whereas it is usually essential for people without them.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/12 | 507 | 2,321 | <issue_start>username_0: I have presented recently in one of IEEE computer science conferences. My paper's main contributions was optimizing an algorithm to achieve 3.5X times speed up. Now, I am planning to submit another paper to one of Springer's journals with IF 0.7. However, the only new contribution here is I optimized the gain to be 4.5X in addition to theoretical comparison between the algorithm and other 3 algorithms to justify why I have chosen this algorithm to be improved. The paper has been re-written completely and I am aware of the plagiarism issue. However, I am still concerned, is that contribution sufficient to make my paper qualified?<issue_comment>username_1: Let the editors and/or reviewers decide whether the new contribution is sufficient. Mention that you extend previous work. It may be wise to be explicit about the novelties with regards to the previous work in the cover letter.
In case the original paper was published in conference proceedings (e.g. not just a talk), it is very important that you cite it. When you do that, there can be no claim that you are attempting to recycle existing material without anyone noticing (self-plagiarism).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is possible that your paper be rejected because it is not novel. This depends on the discipline, the paper, the editors, and the reviewers. However, extending a conference paper into a journal paper is not uncommon.
If I write a conference paper that I would like to later publish in a peer-reviewed journal, I take a different approach on the conference paper. I always say in the conference abstract something like "this paper details preliminary results of our analysis", and I make sure to not to provide all the details or all the results in the paper. I can provide more details in the conference presentation to make a strong story, if they are available at the time of the conference.
In the cover letter when submitting the peer-reviewed paper, I say something like "preliminary results of this study were presented at \_\_\_\_\_". And ALWAYS cite the conference paper. You could also state how the submitted paper is different/improved/expanded/corrected from the conference paper in both the journal article and the cover letter at submission.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 1 |
2013/12/12 | 4,824 | 19,257 | <issue_start>username_0: There's been a series of articles recently [[1](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/11/adjunct-faculty_n_4255139.html),[2](http://chronicle.com/article/Adjunct-Project-Shows-Wide/136439/),[3](http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/shows/real-money-with-alivelshi/Real-Money-Blog/2013/10/15/poor-working-conditionsforadjunctprofessorsleavestudentsshortcha.html),[4](http://www.npr.org/2013/09/22/224946206/adjunct-professor-dies-destitute-then-sparks-debate),[5](http://news.yahoo.com/adjunct-professor-death-190047241.html)] that basically decry the dismal working conditions of adjunct faculty.
I would like to ask: Why do these positions pay so little? Is it because there is a vast amount of oversupply of teachers? Is it because the Universities have such a diverse range of topics to cover that they cannot afford to hire full-time instructors to cover these courses? Is it because there is decreasing income and funding for academic institutions?
I am curious about what conditions led to this situation where adjunct professors are paid so little.<issue_comment>username_1: I believe the answer is simply one of supply and demand. As you mentioned in your question, there is an oversupply of those willing to teach. As the old saying goes, those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. While this saying does not represent my feelings I did find it a quite typical American perception toward the teaching profession.
Years ago I taught as an adjunct in the US. The hourly rate (just for teaching hours, forget prep, marking, etc.) was so low that I could make literally four times as much working in 'the real world.' The math was quite easy to see. They needed someone with lower skills than I had and while I could do the job, so could most others.
As you can imagine, I didn't stay in that situation long. I stopped teaching at universities and focused on the private sector. Those whom I taught alongside felt like they were lucky to have their opportunities (I clearly felt differently).
If you scan websites for teachers (e.g., the Chronicle, etc.) you can see countless posts of teachers complaining that some other teacher took their job. Sometimes it is a full time teacher who wants extra money so they pick up adjuncting at another school. This constant oversupply naturally pushes rates down.
So, why would schools pay more than they need to? Out of the goodness of their hearts? In the US, sadly, teachers are not valued. If you look at Europe or Asia, (average) teachers actually make quite a nice living because they are valued for the dual-professionals that they are (subject matter and pedogogy).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In my experience, adjunct faculty are employed *part-time*, and thus cannot be paid at the same rate as *full-time* faculty. Often a university department has a set allocation for the number of full-time faculty it can employ, based on *predicted* enrollment. So, adjunct faculty pick up the slack, as needed, based on *actual* enrollment.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to other useful comments and answers: in my context, of mathematics... : yes, only a very small fraction of "adjunct" teaching is done because of lack of expertise of "regular faculty". Examples would often be "financial math" or "actuarial math". Far more typically, adjuncts teach very low level math. Now, on one hand, while the mathematics itself is very easy, reaching the audience is non-trivial. Full of pre-existing neuroses, etc. Although the typical adjunct teaching such things has very modest mathematical ability, that is more than sufficient, and, typically, such a person's ability to "connect" to "normal" kids who're "having trouble with math" is greater than that of talented mathematicians. (Tho' not always.)
True, "The Market" observes that there are many more people able to do this than the number of jobs, so the pay is depressed. It doesn't help that there is a mythology in (academic?) mathematics that teaching itself is something anyone can do, perhaps after one has lost the "zip" to "do research". All the more ridiculous that this mythology exists among people who's teaching is awful, at every level, their whole life. Luckily, their job description emphasizes "research".
But the mythology, seemingly confirmed by The Market, marginalizes (non-specialty) adjuncts. At my current institution, none of the (non-specialty) adjuncts has a Ph.D., which further reduces their status.
And then there is the current budget squeeze on universities... Everything has to be done more efficiently, etc. Departments' supply budgets are cannibalized to pay for office staff, etc. It is crazy. Night-school classes, once paid for through separate budget lines, have been "in-loaded", so have to be covered by departments often with the same budget as before (!) So, hardly the time to think about equity for people who're willing to "work cheap".
The AAUP has long argued for better treatment of "adjunct faculty", but harsher economic times are not fertile grounds...
For that matter, often the real competition for adjuncts is grad students as Teaching Assistants, who are "more expensive" if their tuition is included in the package. Thus, at best, adjuncts have some incentive to keep their pay below that of grad students + tuition. A crazy dynamic.
It is true that the volatility of enrollments gives management incentive to find a way to avoid liability... but in the dim past there was simply consistent excess capacity, not so much a population willing to absorb that volatility!
Nowadays, upper echelons of the university almost make it against-the-rules to cushion people (other than tenured faculty) against volatility...
Not a happy situation.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: The adjunct model seems to be predicated on an assumption that most adjunct faculty are presumed to be employed somewhere else. It's supposed to be a win-win: the institution gets a qualified expert with current, out-of-the-ivory-tower experience; the adjunct gets a chance to scratch a teaching itch, or to work with the university. All this happens for a modest compensation – which turns out to be a bargain for the university, and a little extra pocket money for the adjunct.
I didn't read all five of the articles you linked to in your question, but I did look through three of them. They seemed to be focusing on the depressing conditions for those who are trying to make a full-time living through a collection of part-time teaching assignments. I don't think that's the way the system was ever intended to operate.
Where I teach, I'm an adjunct, and I love the perks. I get to use the campus gym, and I get access to campus library resources. I have a passion for teaching, but I don't get to do much teaching at my full-time job. The extra money hasn't made me wealthy, but it's led to a few lifestyle improvements and splurges for my family. $9,000 isn't enough to live off of, but it goes a long way when you want to renovate a kitchen, take a vacation, or help pay for a wedding.
Moreover, where I teach (a state university in the U.S.), the adjunct rates are not set by the department. The going rate is the going rate, take it or leave it.
My brother once asked me how much my adjunct job paid per hour, if I factored in prep time and grading time. I told him that I never bothered to calculate that, but it didn't matter, because I enjoyed my duties too much to give it up. I'm fortunate in that I'm not doing this for the money, so even the relatively low pay is very much appreciated. I enjoy the challenges of teaching, the chance to experiment with new pedagogies, and the chance to make an impact on the future.
Let me put it this way: Teaching two nights a week for fifteen weeks? *$3,000*. Staying up until midnight grading final exams? *Zero extra dollars.* Getting an email from a student from two years ago, telling you about how she's using stuff from your class at her new job? *Priceless*.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: The answer to this question probably varies quite a bit from one institution to another, although there would be some things in common.
I'm tenured at a community college in California. Here are the main factors that I think explain why adjunct faculty at my school are paid less:
1. Full-time faculty are unionized and have a fairly effective union. Adjuct faculty do not have effective union representation.
2. Full-time faculty have many duties that adjuncts do not. They keep scheduled office hours, go to division meetings, perform miscellaneous contractual duties such as sitting in the bleachers at graduation, and do committee work (hiring committees, faculty senate, curriculum, ...). I teach science, so part of my work involves helping to keep our lab curriculum going (retiring old labs and developing new ones, participating in discussions of what equipment to buy, ...).
>
> Is it because there is a vast amount of oversupply of teachers?
>
>
>
At a community college, I don't think supply and demand have much explanatory value. We don't do research at a community college. Part-timers have to do the same classroom work as teachers, and the non-classroom work doesn't require any special qualifications. Therefore the supply is the pretty much the same in both cases. Supply and demand may explain more at fancy research universities, where tenured jobs require exceptional creativity and research ability.
In addition to the rational reasons I listed above, there are probably many irrational ones. For example, community colleges may simply be emulating fancy research universities, or the structure may have become "baked in" as part of how society is organized.
>
> Is it because there is decreasing income and funding for academic institutions?
>
>
>
I don't think this works as an explanation, at least here in the US. The use of adjunct faculty arose between about 1950 and 1970, and I don't think it's changed much in the last 40 years. The period of 1950-70 was not a period of disinvestment in education in the US; on the contrary, that period saw a huge increase in the amount of money flowing through higher education.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: The model of why adjunct positions are needed is two Ideas:
1. real world, practitioner, industry background to augment academic background of PhD TT (or, just as often, master's degree, at the time this model was crafted) faculty;
2. sporadic need.
The facts though are that
1. applies to regularly needed faculty (instructor with legal practice teaches course in tort law)
2. applies to faculty who make use only of academic training but are used for overflow (freshman composition).
The bundling of these two ideas together is because they both mean dramatically reduced cost and commitment on the part of the institution, something that the tenure system makes all but impossible. That's how the adjunct position "augments" the value of the "regular" (at one time, majority) faculty.
"Win-win" was a subterfuge from the beginning. The "misuse" of adjunct positions was there from the beginning, willfully, but only now gets greater attention because of numbers.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: Schools are not really focused on teaching, per se: universities want to be recognized for research. Research faculty do not want to teach undergrads, they want to work with doctoral students (& get more publications!) But a doctoral program is costly, it eats the revenues produced by undergrads. Schools need big undergrad programs that can be run relatively cheaply to pay the big salaries of research faculty who really don't want to teach at all. This system probably exists because school administrators essentially worked their way up the ranks via research, not by teaching & not with their management/administrative skills (administrators who are good managers and/or good motivators are a bonus..not essential to the position). Once you understand that Universities are really about self-promotion of research and the status that comes from research publications (even if only within the academic community itself) you'll understand that the adjunct (low paid) faculty are absolutely essential. Providing that someone will accept the low wages, there is no reason to pay more.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_8: Because they can.
If universities had difficulty finding adjuncts, they'd pay more, but they don't. Sadly, it's all about supply and demand.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: Supply and demand can't be ignored in answering this question. If there was not a sufficient number of persons willing to take these positions at such ridiculously low pay, then we would not see what we are seeing. That does not mean less willingness to take the job would mean higher paid adjuncts as it could also mean more full-timers and fewer adjunct. However, there are factors beyond pure supply and demand that also play a role. If it was pure supply and demand, and given that a large number of those teaching as adjunct want very much to become full-time tenure track teachers, then we would see tenure track positions also paying very little. All faculty would receive very low pay and the pay difference between tenure track and adjunct would not be so pronounced. Many adjunct want to be tenure track teachers and are therefor willing to endure the low pay for years, paying their "dues", in the hope that the next full-time position will be theirs. The pay differential itself bolsters this desire and pushes up the supply of adjuncts. Also, when the general public looks at professors, they look at full-timers and see someone who makes an OK living; adjuncts are most often not consider as part of the faculty and so get hidden away. Wittingly or not, adjuncts can be exploited without creating a "black mark" for the college. It is also true that adjunct tend to not be well represented by unions. In California, most are part of a union. It's usually the same union that represents the full-time faculty. But the leadership and majority membership of these unions are full-time faculty. Colleges have learned to suppress union efforts to improve adjunct pay by offering instead to improve full-time pay. Such offers, attractive to the majority of the union voters, tend to be supported by the union. So, with adequate teacher supply, a system has evolved that feeds on itself to push up full-time pay, and suppress adjunct pay.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_10: The reason adjuncts are paid so little is that colleges and universities have become businesses and have adopted the neoclassical economic and neoliberal political positions that encourage the exploitation of workers. (Neoclassical economics and neoliberal policies are not mere labels but specific ideologies that emphasize markets, competition, and individual freedom while failing to regard any collective or communal responsibility. See Harvey, *A Brief Introduction to Neoliberalism* Oxford UP, 2007) If you want fulltime work in a college or university, go into administration. Administrations have ballooned in the last 30 years. (Can I be so radical to suggest that if the money that had gone into administration had gone into teaching, the problems with student success might not be as severe. But then, do we really want everyone educated to their highest potential?)
Adjuncts, those who teach the most courses and hope for fulltime work, represent the roughly 25% of the workforce that work part time because full time work is no longer available. In other words, being an adjunct merely reflects a pattern consistent with general employment market. Further, U.S. Labor law encourages policies that make all employment at the will of the employer. Fulltime faculty have annual or multi-year contracts. Adjuncts are also contract employees, but only for the specific academic term.
The deeper reason for adjuncts and low adjunct compensation is that education has become a commodity and thus, like factory workers, education in merely inculcating content. You can see how this flies in the face of reams of pedagogical research. There is in the mind of a politician voting on an annual or bi-annual state budget little qualitative judgment about what is needed in a classroom. In Virginia, where I live, the state legislature has failed in the past 20 years to raised college and university funding to meet the growth in enrollment. Even the Democratic governor, elected in 2013, has made sharp cuts in education funding requiring similar cuts in course offerings and adjunct employment. The funding formula twenty years ago where I teach had the state paying 80% of the cost with the student paying 20%. The formula is now the opposite: 20% state and 80% student.
Thus, adjuncts are low paid workers because what they do and who they are is devalued. We are going back to a place in American culture where education and the educated are suspect. We collectively talk a good game about the value and importance of education, but we have lost a deeper sense of what it means to be educated. I often mentally compare being an adjunct to being a medieval monastic or an 18th century journeyman who lack the cultural capital to establish their place in the world.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: My wife is an adjunct teacher at a state university. She is paid $3,000 to teach a class that meets twice a week for 15 weeks in Earth Science. That's usually 30 classes divided into $3,000 = $100 per 1 hour 45 minute class. So... she makes about $57 an hour. How is that "getting paid very little?" Now... many people want to tell me that she has to grade homework and tests outside of those hours, answer emails etc. Well there are many professions that have to take their job home with them too. (Real Estate Brokers get emails and calls and have showings and open houses on weekends to name one. Or getting ahead in the corporate world for me has involved after hours extra work, usually more than she has to.) The problem isn't that adjunct teachers get paid so little, it is that they work so few hours.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_12: Adjuncts get paid little because there are enough adjuncts to go for a dime per dozen. The abuse that adjuncts are subjected to is borderline bizarre - in some places front-desk secretaries or assistants are treated with more importance than an adjunct instructor.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_13: All this analysis isn't necessary though impressive. The answer is greed.
The pay disparity between the adjuncts and full-time faculty/administrators is so wide, it should embarrass them until you understand it HAS to be in order for them to get their high salaries. If the adjuncts get paid less than minimum wage for hours worked, they can give themselves higher salaries.
"It takes three of you to pay my salary" is an exact quote from a retiring
full-time community college faculty member who just came out and said this to us in the break room. His salary at retirement? $128,000.
It's pretty simple and comes down to just about what everything comes down to in this country---greed.
Upvotes: -1 |
2013/12/13 | 1,453 | 5,788 | <issue_start>username_0: ACM now offers authors of published papers a choice of two copyright licenses: the "traditional" [ACM Copyright Transfer Agreement](https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/publications/copyreleaseproc-8-16.pdf) or the [ACM Publishing License](https://www.acm.org/binaries/content/assets/publications/acm-publicenseagreement.pdf).
How should I choose between these two licenses? What are the advantages and disadvantages to the authors of each license?
I care a lot about maximizing the ability of others to read the paper (e.g., maximizing my ability to make my paper available on my web page, institutional repository, etc.); are there any relevant differences between the two licenses that affects this consideration? Are there any other important differences between the licenses that authors might care about?<issue_comment>username_1: First off, please note that IANAL.
That said, the **Copyright Transfer Agreement** is what ACM used to be doing to everyone: when you publish with the ACM, you transfer your copyright to them, and thus lose ownership of your creative work. The ACM has been receiving criticism for this as the Open Access movement has gained momentum.
The **Publishing License** seems to be their response to this criticism: with the Publishing license, you retain copyright yourself, and instead grant ACM a specified list of rights:
1. An exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, transferable and sublicenseable license to publish, reproduce and distribute the work in any way they feel like — including to hand these right on to other parties.
2. A non-exclusive permission to publish, reproduce and distribute any software, artistic images and auxiliary materials.
3. These rights “infects” any **minor revisions** (derivative work with less than 25% new substantive material).
I don't actually know what the exact implications here will be — the conditions are restrictive, but the copyright remains with the author.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are three options with transferring authors rights to ACM:
1. **Open Access** that requires paying >$1k.
2. **Publishing license** means **copyright license** except that the author continues to hold copyright.
3. "Traditional" **copyright license**.
Everyone author wants to have its paper as more distributed and open as possible without any *paywall* which directly leads to more citations and so on.
We can remove all money barriers with **option #1** (Open Access).
**Option #3** transfers absolutely all rights to ACM:
* **Plus**: let's imagine that someone publish your paper with its own name. In that case ACM guaranties that it will defend against this situation, not you.
* **Minus**: ACM can do anything it wants with your work, say, just delete. Or something more interesting as [The ACM and Me article](http://r6.ca/blog/20110930T012533Z.html) says: "*Imagine what happens if in the future the ACM goes bankrupt. Creditors could become copyright trolls, sweeping the internet for illegal exchanges of ACM owned papers by academics*".
**Option #2** transfers not all rights, only an exclusive licence to publish, reproduce and distribute the work. But in this case "... which gives ACM the right but not the obligation to defend the work against improper use by third parties".
**NOTE**: Each option allows authors to "*Post the Accepted Version of the Work on (1) the Author’s home page, (2) the Owner’s institutional repository, or (3) any repository legally mandated by an agency funding the research on which the Work is based.*"
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: <NAME> has addressed this question in her blog post "ACM Publication & Copyright", at <https://medium.com/@cfiesler/acm-copyright-licenses-which-should-you-choose-and-how-do-you-handle-third-party-material-dbe87be8b57c> (originally written in 2014, updated in 2018).
Her post analyzes all three options, and her own summary is as follows:
>
> My typical tweet-sized response is: “License. No reason to transfer your copyright.”
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: [Reading now the list of permanent rights](http://www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright-policy#permanent%20rights):
>
> Post the Accepted Version of the Work on (1) the Author's home page, (2) the Owner's institutional repository, (3) any repository legally mandated by an agency funding the research on which the Work is based, and (4) any non-commercial repository or aggregation that does not duplicate ACM tables of contents, i.e., whose patterns of links do not substantially duplicate an ACM-copyrighted volume or issue. Non-commercial repositories are here understood as repositories owned by non-profit organizations that do not charge a fee for accessing deposited articles and that do not sell advertising or otherwise profit from serving articles.
>
>
>
I think this (especially option (4)) means that one can post accepted versions to arXiv and like, even when transferring copyright to ACM, or giving them an exclusive license. Based on answers above, it seems also that option (4) is a newer one.
Some more information is available also in [SHERPA/RoMEO publisher copyright policies & self-archiving index](http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?id=21&fIDnum=|&mode=simple&la=en&format=full).
They ask to put a statement similar to the following in such case:
>
> "© {Owner/Author | ACM} {Year}. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here for your personal use. Not for redistribution. The definitive Version of Record was published in {Source Publication}, <http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/>{number}."
>
>
>
The tricky thing is how to put this notice in. I had to change `acmcopyright.sty`.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/13 | 470 | 2,073 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm organizing a conference and we have the option to set up the seating either around multiple tables ie a wedding arrangement or in the classroom style. There are benefits to either strategy but the way I see it, the tabular format allows people to put their stuff down and relax. On the other hand, the classroom style creates a much better learning environment for people to actually pay attention to a talk and creates a more cozy impression for the speaker.
I'm curious, what do people typically expect out of a conference and what is the ideal scenario for a one day conference? Does it make a difference if it's a bunch of students or a bunch of of professors?<issue_comment>username_1: Since it's a one-day conference, I'm assuming it's a little more relaxed than a powerhouse 3-day affair. But even then, I think the classroom format is a little more appropriate. Here's what happens with the table format:
* either people will have to move chairs around to see the speaker, in which case you've effectively created a classroom format with much less desk space.
* or people start talking to each other and ignoring the speaker. I've seen this happen in particular at business meetings, where arguably it's less important to listen closely, but the level of noise created is still annoying.
Either way, it's not serving its purpose. By all means use the table format for the coffee area or break spots. But I don't think it makes sense for the conference itself.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Different seating arrangements are best suited for different types of conferences. Auditorium style seating is best for listing to talks. For conferences that are built around breakout sessions then tables large enough for the size of the group are best. For conferences that are built around posters, small tables are the way to go. Ideally you decide how you want your conference to work and then find a venue that supports it, practically you find a venue that you can reserve and tailor the conference to fit the venue.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/13 | 742 | 3,050 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently came across this query on a LinkedIn group. The exact query was:
"Does anyone know if there are journals in image/signal processing, CV or related ares, which have no page limitation and have ok/reasonable reputation? I have a theoretical paper which has 50 page."
Online journals could theoretically have no page limits but they still end up having limits/bounds. Why is it so?
Are there any such journals which allow for publishing of large sized papers?<issue_comment>username_1: In biology there are some journals that allow very long papers. These journals are typically online-only.
One example of such a journal is Biology Direct: [here](http://www.biologydirect.com/content/pdf/1745-6150-5-7.pdf) is an example with 78 pages. I remember seeing a 200-page paper in Biology Direct, but can't find it right now.
I wonder what the motivation is for someone to publish such long papers in this manner.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: For a long theory paper in image/signal processing, you could try [IEEE Transactions on Information Theory](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=18). The papers typically run about 20 pages, but [this classic](http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=57199&punumber=18) runs 45 pages. Note that the two-column format can condense a one-column draft by 25% or more.
Trans IT is a very well-regarded journal in my field, with regular contributions from math-y engineers, statisticians, and engineer-y mathematicians. To quote the aims and scope (emphasis mine):
>
> The IEEE Transactions on Information Theory publishes papers concerned with the transmission, processing, and utilization of information. While the boundaries of acceptable subject matter are intentionally not sharply delimited, its scope currently includes Shannon theory, coding theory and techniques, data compression, sequences, **signal processing**, detection and estimation, pattern recognition, learning and inference, communications and communication networks, complexity and cryptography, and quantum information theory and coding. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory papers **normally contain a strong conceptual and/or analytical contribution.**
>
>
>
The "strong conceptual and/or analytical contribution" means theorems and proofs; don't submit here if your paper doesn't have these. I couldn't find any stated page limit, but if your work is unnecessarily long for its contribution, the reviewers will definitely complain.
Another option is the [SIAM Journal on Imaging Science](http://www.siam.org/journals/siims/policy.php). There is no hard-and-fast page limit there, but the policies do state that "papers exceeding 30 journal pages, excluding the supplementary material, will be reviewed more closely to ensure that the excess is fully justified."
For both of these journals, expect a very rigorous review cycle. I suspect that, unless the results are earth-shattering, you will still hear complaints about the length.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/13 | 757 | 3,127 | <issue_start>username_0: Some journals have their own bibliography styles (bst) for BibTeX.
>
> If a journal does not have its own bibliography style, am I supposed to include the content of the bbl-file into the tex-file I am sending? Or can I send the bib-file instead?
>
>
>
---
Many journals offer LaTeX-templates showing the style of the article. (This is almost always true if a journal recommends using its own document class.) In some case I have seen that this template contains BibTeX style (.bst file). But in other cases BibTeX was not used in the template, instead it was shown what the preferred formatting of references looks like.
I know that if I were the person who has to do the final typesetting from the sources submitted by an author to conform the style of the journal, I would prefer to have the BibTeX-file. (It is easier to simply change the formatting of references by changing the choice of BibTeX style than changing each separate entry manually.)
>
> If a journal does not explicitly mention the recommended BibTeX style, what would be preferable way to submit the paper? Should I send both, TeX source and BibTeX file, so that editor can change the references using BibTeX style of their choice, or should I simply send the TeX-file, where I include also the bibliography generated by BibTeX. (And, if necessary, I modify it manually to be in the style required by the journal.)
>
>
>
(So far I have done the latter, but I am not sure whether it was the correct choice.)<issue_comment>username_1: Most journals do not have the resources (read time) to handle lots of auxiliary files in submissions. Unless the journal clearly specifies they want bibliographies provided as a `.bib`-file and has a fixed `.bst` style file, you should not provide LaTeX based manuscript that way. What you can do is to run your final version yourself and then manually include the resulting `.bbl` bibliography in your manuscript so that content and bibliography is included in the same file (see e.g., [How can I insert by .bib file into my .tex file?](https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/52368/19384) on TeX.sx). The `.bbl` file contains all references in the common `\bibitem[]{}` format. Alternatively you can of course use the `\bibitem` form directly when you write the paper. If you do not have a bibliography style file for the specific journal, it would be simple to use one that yields a similar format and then manually correct the details that may differ in the `.bbl` file.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'd send the `.tex` and `.bib` file, which seems by far the most logical thing to do, to both you and me at least. On explicit request I'll grudgingly provide the `.bbl` file.
This should make things easier for them, as you correctly suggest. It is easy and fast to convert a `.bib` to a `.bbl`, but the other way round is impossible.
If the journal has a workflow that can't handle `.bib` files, that seems their problem and not mine. They are the professional publishers who charge for the "added value" of the professional typesetting and printing service, right?
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/14 | 674 | 2,823 | <issue_start>username_0: After reading [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/14741/2692), and specifically [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/14745/2692), I find myself wondering why someone would publish an extremely long paper, for example 200 pages, instead of publishing as a book.
I was always under the impression that publishing a book was more prestigious than publishing articles so **why would someone write something with the quantity to be a book and prefer to publish it as a journal article?** Are there hidden benefits of publishing as an article over publishing as a book?<issue_comment>username_1: As always, it depends. First of all,
>
> publishing a book was more prestigious than publishing articles
>
>
>
depends on the area. In parts of the humanities, writing a book is an almost-necessary condition for tenure, but in my area of CS, a book is viewed as best as a waste of time pre-tenure.
In terms of absolute prestige, books and articles serve different purposes. Even a 200 page article might be a technical exposition of a single result. Witness for example the ongoing series of articles on graph minors in mathematics. A book often tries to distill and put in perspective a body of work, and (sometimes) might have educational components like exercises/problems.
A well-written book gives you some cachet as an expert in an area, but a seminal journal article can do the same. It really depends on what purpose you expect the document to serve.
A final point. A book (even a technical one) may not be peer-reviewed in the same way as an article. Indeed, it's not common in my area to have brand new research appear first in a book (I'm excluding simple observations and recasting of results).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This depends on a number of factors (the field, the scope of the work, and the reputation of the publisher), but a book often summarizes the current state of a field, while an article adds something new to the state of the field.
So, one of these (the book) estabishes you as a subject matter expert, while the other (the article) establishes you as a subject matter pioneer. In institutions where research is highly valued, it wouldn't surprise me at all to find more prestige associated with article publication.
That said, there are exceptions, of course: A textbook that becomes recognized as a standard in the discipline might garner more prestige than an article in some lightweight publication. Unless the book happens to be based mostly on your own research, though, it's easy to see why a textbook might not gain you too much reputation in an environment striving to be known for their cutting-edge research. One is more forward-looking while the other is more backward-reaching.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/14 | 519 | 2,176 | <issue_start>username_0: I am about to do a Ph.D. in applied Mathematics/Theoretical Computer Science. The organization I'm going into is not a university, but a research institute in Europe. I'd like to assess my prospects after the completion of the Ph.D. So I would like to know how my Ph.D. would appear to potential employers. Will I be sidelined because I'm not from an esteemed university in the US, or will the actual contribution or my thesis be what I'm evaluated on? Will the former overshadow the good work I may have done and detract from it?
I thank you for your answers.<issue_comment>username_1: There are two issues here. The first is the importance of the institute you get your PhD from being a University. This is a non factor as nobody cares about if you get your PhD from a research institute or a university. The second issue is the reputation of the place you get your PhD from. This has some importance, but your supervisor and the quality of the PhD are generally more important.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Your PhD will be worth exactly as much as the PhDs obtained from other universities. In fact, research institutes have many excellent professors, and they are probably better in terms of the quality of the faculty than many second-tier universities.
However, you will have one serious flaw in your postdoctoral applications; namely, you will have zero teaching experience. Unless you are one of the best in your graduating year, teaching experience is absolutely necessary, and in the US, you need a letter of recommendation addressing your teaching. So in that regard, your prospects are not so good.
But just write a great thesis, and you will be fine.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: For any job where a PhD is actually necessary, it is the quality of your work that is important (it is you that they want to hire, not your supervisor or institution! ;o). In particular, if you have good papers published in top journals, that ought to count for a lot more than the university where you study, as it is likely your ability to produce top quality journal papers for which you will be hired.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2013/12/14 | 927 | 3,784 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a fresh PhD student and I need to choose an advisor to guide my research. Currently I find it difficult to choose.
One professor's current project pretty well matches my previous research experience. Although I would not say I am interested in it, at least I don't hate it. But I find most of his students will need 7 years to graduate the PhD program under his advisement. The speed of this professor's life is really slow. The most important thing is that he rarely gives his students constructive suggestions when they confront problems in the research. I know a PhD needs to have the ability to conduct experiments independently, but some kind of guidance is necessary.
As for the other professor, his project is really exciting and he published many papers with high impact factors. It is not that related to my previous experience but it may use some of the techniques I used before. I like it but some of my friends told me this professor is really picky and tough. With him as an advisor it may be difficult to get job after graduation.
Currently I am working with the first professor. I try my best to make myself get interested in the work, but I am still hesitant.
*What advisor should I choose to achieve a satisfying research experience?*<issue_comment>username_1: Ultimately, I would choose to work on what I'm interested in rather than what I have experience in, assuming that you have enough background to follow your interests (but in a 7 year PhD program, you'll have time to learn the techniques you'll need) and that there is a future for you after completing the program.
(Learning how to use capital letters and to punctuate your sentences properly will also help in the future.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Always, always, always pick the advisor who is less of a jerk. Doing so serves numerous purposes:
1. The project will be more enjoyable, because you're not working with a jerk.
2. If the initial project doesn't work out it will be easier to switch to a new topic, because you're not working with a jerk.
3. Even if the whole *program* doesn't work out, it will be easier to get support for switching labs/schools/careers, because you're not working with a jerk.
4. It means fewer talented students will pick jerks as advisors, which will (hopefully) help weed out jerk advisors.
In short: talk to the students. Make sure you're not signing up to work with a jerk.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: A Professor here. In general, you want to go with the Prof. who is research active. If a supervisor doesn't provide constructive feedback, that simply means he/she doesn't care, has no idea how to do research and don't know the area. That means you're on your own. If you're lucky, you'll learn how to swim and churn out passable work.
On the other hand, the 'tough' Prof. produces world class work (based on your description). This is 'normal'. Simply look at the best chefs in the world. Do you think they sacrifice quality? Their name goes out with every dish/paper! Same principle applies. So if you want, and have the capability, to play with the best, then the tough Prof. should be the one. For sure, it'll be a baptism of fire, but if you're capable, you'll find yourself running with the best. More importantly, you'll learn why they are the best; their secret: they care very very ... much about their work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: One friend started doing a PhD under a world-renowned star, and gave up something like a year later. He told me he met his advisor twice, once when agreeing to the thesis and once crossed him casually in an aisle. As star he was elsewhere most of the time. He switched to a "second tier" advisor, and was very happy with his decision.
Upvotes: 0 |
2013/12/14 | 738 | 3,130 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a foreign student and currently applying to several PhD programs in the US. My GPA in the 6th semester was a lot disappointing, and pulled down my overall GPA and ranking significantly. The reason is that I got pregnant, by accident. I want to explain this situation in my statement of purpose or address an email to the admission committee, so I want to know how Americans, especially professors, will normally react to this explanation? Will they regard it as understandable mistake or unforgivable sin?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm going to side-step this question by simply saying: in PhD admissions, grades are not nearly as important as one might think. Far more important are 1. your letters of recommendation and 2. tangible evidence that you are capable of being creative and productive in a research environment (e.g., class projects, publications if you have them, etc.). One semester of bad grades is not going to kill your application, especially if the rest of your grades are strong.
Some even broader advice is: draw attention to the good rather than the bad. Compare the two statements:
* **(A)** *"Despite my poor performance in area X, I believe that I am still a strong candidate for the program in (your field of study)."*
* **(B)** *"My strong performance in area Y demonstrates that I am well prepared for a research career in (your field of study)."*
Both statements communicate the same idea ("I am qualified"), but **(B)** draws attention to the good, whereas **(A)** draws attention to the bad. Don't draw attention to the bad. If people think something is bad, they'll think it's bad no matter what you say about it. Get them focused on the good stuff instead.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I fully agree with username_1's answer (emphasize strengths, not perceived weaknesses), but it could be worth a brief, vague mention of this issue somewhere in your application. For example, something along the lines of "You'll notice that my grades dipped briefly during my 6th semester before returning to normal. This was due to a personal issue that has been resolved." The idea is to reassure the admissions committee that it's not a sign of flakiness or ongoing difficulties. I'm not sure whether such a statement makes a real difference, but at least you would be stating on the record that your 6th semester was anomalous for a reason unlikely to be repeated. Hopefully your 7th semester grades will be available to the committee and will demonstrate that you are back to normal.
I would recommend against going into more detail than this, however. There's too much of a risk of distracting people, since the whole topic (young mothers raising children, adoption, abortion, etc.) is emotionally charged, especially in the U.S. You don't want this issue to be the most attention-getting or memorable part of your application. It would probably not hurt your chances, but what happened is none of the committee's business and the details are not relevant for whether you should be admitted, so it's safest to keep the discussion focused on academics.
Upvotes: 4 |
2013/12/14 | 2,751 | 11,499 | <issue_start>username_0: Quoth the [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle):
*"The Peter Principle is a proposition that states that the members of an organization where promotion is based on achievement, success, and merit will eventually be promoted beyond their level of ability. The principle is commonly phrased, 'Employees tend to rise to their level of incompetence.'"*
In academia, we have a tendency to promote brilliant and productive young researchers (e.g., grad students and postdocs) into positions with a large management component (i.e., assistant professors who must run a research group). God willing, I will get promoted. But during my PhD,
***I was not trained as a manager!***
The conventional wisdom is: it doesn't matter! No professor ever took management training, and, hey, everything "works out" in the end. The main problem I have with that statement are the quotes around "works out." I have seen friends suffer through horrible, painful, sad grad school experiences as a result of having advisors who are brilliant researchers and *terrible* managers. Likewise, the advisor suffers because she/he is investing time/energy/money in a student that doesn't produce anything. So my question is
**Q: How do I avoid becoming a terrible manager?**
In particular, what kinds of activities have you seen successful leaders of large-ish research groups engage in? Did they take training specifically targeted at managing groups? Read certain books? Talk about it a lot with senior colleagues? Make lots of posts on academia.stackexchange? Or did they really all just fly by the seat of their pants, and let natural selection take its course?
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer: Know when to turn down a promotion offer.
In the meantime, seek out mentorship opportunities, and learn what you can. Does your institution have a faculty development office? See what kinds of workshops they offer. Not all of that is about teaching techniques. If the faculty development office doesn't plan to offer any kind of training on managing a research group, request that they do so. Faculty development offices are often underutilized on campus, and if the people running that office are worth their salt, they will go out of their way to give you the assistance you are requesting.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Based on my experience with faculty, if you care about managing well, and don't want to be a bad manager, you are already doing better than many people. Again, in my experience, the worst offenders along these lines are those who think they are God's gift to their graduate students and postdocs, and cannot bear to hear any criticism.
So, if you want to do a good job managing:
1. Keep caring about doing a good job and encourage constructive
criticism/suggestions.
2. In particular, talk to the people you are managing, and find out
what they think. Lots of junior people are scared to even give
constructive advice to their seniors, because they don't know if it
will adversely affect them. It is obvious to say that you can often
learn a great deal from the people around you, but people sometimes
forget that this is very much true of the junior people you work
with as well.
This is only tangentially relevant, but [this blog post by <NAME>](http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2013/11/07/management-a-rant/) is quite good.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Since this is a site about academia, I believe it is worth pointing out that Management as we perceive it today, has no more than a 60-70 years history as a body of knowledge which is (attempted to) be systematically taught (it started out as in-house seminars in General Electric corporation), and even less history as an academic, research discipline. Of course texts about leadership are scattered throughout human history -but they are more of a deontological nature, focusing on how a leader "should be" rather than on how they can help the reader be that leader.
This does not mean that being trained as a manager is worthless -there *are* general conclusions about Management that seem to stand the test of time, of activity field, and even the test of culture.
From my 20-years experience as a manager, I have two pieces of advice for someone inexperienced like you say you are:
a) Be available
b) Criticize the act and not the (professional or personal) character.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are worried that you aren't trained to manage the humans under your direction go to Human Resources and ask them what "early management development" support they offer. These are the type of afternoon or day long seminars on things like employment guidelines, university policies about being the supervisor for a bunch of people. You would be surprised how useful it can be to understand how departments like Accounts Payable work (reimbursements come much faster when the paperwork is done the first time). There should also be opportunities for them to help you develop the kind of workplace leadership skills that you may feel need sharpening because they aren't the same as research leadership skills.
One thing though, most of the development opportunities will be focused mainly on staff, not faculty. But once you start talking about managing employees much of it carries over. Of course, simply talking with other folks who have run large groups before. But always press them for specifics of what they wish they had not done.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: It's a great question and one that is not asked often enough, inside or outside of academia.
In my experience, all first time managers suck at it. Likely you will too. Don't be disheartened, just understand that proper management technique has a large artistic component and you just have to learn by doing (and usually by making mistakes).
I do not think this is a good excuse to turn down the job. If you take a management job later you will still likely start off as a poor manager. That said, starting too young will make it more difficult (on you and on those you manage) simply because of less life-experience.
The key is to be open minded and, as teachers always tell students, read more. In your case, read as much as you can. There are so many great management books out there from very well respected writers (Drucker, Covey, etc.). Read, experience, reflect. As you learn you will be more competent and that is, in the end, how you avoid the Peter Principle.
Another key I had always thought relevant to avoiding the Peter Principle was that you should never accept a job that you cannot already do 50% of. The same is true when recruiting - never offer a position to someone unless they can already do at least 50% of the job.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Let me add a few scattered points to the answers that are already here.
* First of all, I'm not sure your question is about Peter Principle. As I understand it, the Peter Principle is about ending up with a position that you cannot and *will never be able to* cope with. I think this is very different from not being a good manager because you're just at the stage to start learning management skills.
From that point of view, there's nothing wrong with trying to learn management. If you are afraid that management isn't your thing, make sure you have a way out at least every once in a while. This also means that you need to stay at the top of your 'primary' profession (I consider full-time management a different profession!).
* Find yourself a good mentor. Personally, I'm lucky: in one of my former positions I had an exceptionally good leader. We're still on good terms, and I know where I can ask for advise on leading. I do so, too.
Of course it helps if the mentor is from academia, too. But this is not necessary. Look around not only with colleagues but also with friends, acquaintances etc.
* Maybe your partner or a good friend is in a similar situation, and you could discuss and reflect every once in a while what you've encountered.
* Side note: There's a saying that on average a human needs to exercise a profession 10 to 15 years to arrive at the top of the personal performance in that profession. I think this also applies to management, though there are counter-examples. All in all, it means that your first students will suffer from your lack of experience.
* However, I try to be open with students about the fact that I'm learning these skills, and also when I don't know how to teach them something. As others have already said, being aware of the potential problem is probably already more than half of the solution: It is one of those points where those who are concerned would not need to be concerned, and those who aren't probably should be.
If you are open about learning your part, it is easier for students to give you the feedback you need. It is your step to *mutual* openness.
In my culture (German) it is up to the senior (position) to offer the [Du](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%E2%80%93V_distinction#German). Likewise, I think the supervisor should make the first step in being open about the soft skills. If this is about criticizing your leadership, you'll normally have to repeat this several times until a mutual level of trust is established that allows students to give you feedback.
=> Look around you what is going on. Try to find out what goes well and why, and what went wrong and why.
* A bad enemy of learning these skills is being assigned too many students, and being assigned students where you did not participate at all in the application/selection process (I'm in a close-to-academia institution, but with us, students have to apply for research topics.) IMHO this can lead to serious trouble between the supervisor and the students, and backfires already in the mid-future (some improved skills pay off very quickly I think).
I'd like to encourage you: keep fighting that your needs (time, space, ...) for improving these skills will be met somehow.
Of course, one also needs to learn how to cope with the more difficult situations...
* Last but not least, probably you did have *some* training on this:
+ Likely, you have been looking already after undergrad/practicum students.
+ Possibly, you have (unofficially?) supervised Bachelor's / Master's theses already. Or at least helped with the supervision.
+ Likely, you have been attending meetings already.
Possibly, you have already been leading meetings.
+ Possibly, you have been in charge already. For sure, for your thesis. Maybe also for other projects.
+ Also, you probably have by now some experience in managing the managers. ;-)
---
Disclaimer: I'm not in a management position. Though I try to learn it while working in my primary profession. I actually think switching over to management too early too much is a waste of all the training and learning. Personally, I want to see some fruits of the highly productive phase that I think I've reached now after some 10 years in my profession -- I like that far too much to leave it completely for management. But I see that it is basically impossible to be a good group leader and do substantial amounts of scientific work yourself. So I try to slow down the changing sides to management. On the other hand, I've done quite a bit of leading students behind the scenes. And I've been responsible for several projects on a volunteering basis.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/14 | 573 | 2,345 | <issue_start>username_0: I was recently admitted to few universities for my master's program and I narrowed the university of my choice down to two. The options are:
Option 1: A Mid-ranked public university in US (around #160 among the US National Universities,around #500 in World ranking ), where the potential supervisor is believed to be a good fit for me
Option 2: A top ranked university in US, here I am mostly going after the prestige, but supervisor is not as good as the university mentioned in Option 1.
If I am planning to get a job directly after my master's (i.e. without doing PhD, although I might go back to school for PhD after gaining some work experiences on my belt), which option would you take? I have very good GPA from my undergrad years (4.0), and my parents want me to take the second option, but the first option is considerably more affordable and plus I like the fact that the first university has a good potential supervisor...
any thoughts are welcome
:)<issue_comment>username_1: I understand your point,
Now the question comes since the option 2 is a top ranked university there is a very slight chance the supervisor will be really bad because they have some minimum standards for their faculties etc.
Now since you are planning to directly go for a job I would suggest you to go with option 2 definitely, since companies will definitely give weight-age to the rank of the university.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Go for option 2.
When it comes to an MSc the role of your supervisor is less important than that in a PhD. Yes, you have to do some research (not always) and working with a "great guy" if far better than working with an "OK guy", but remember you are doing an MSc and planning to go to industry. People will care more about your grades than your research potential (short-sighted but true in my experience).
In addition, being in a more prestigious institution opens you more avenues; it will be a better selling point 5 years down the line and the top-ranked US university will probably have a better alumni network than a mid-rank public university.
In general, MSc studies are a way to *buy* some credentials to use either in the job market or as stepping stone to move to a better institution for your PhD than the one you are already. Get the best possible.
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/14 | 471 | 2,071 | <issue_start>username_0: I wonder if anyone in graduate school in mathematics had managed to improve considerably his/her speed of problem solving.
I had failed to get my PhD pass and obtained only Master Pass on my qualifiers. I have been trying to increase speed of solving problems but alas, achieved only slight improvement. I know that most problems on these exams are manageable and may be few are hard. Problems of similar level of difficulty would take me days or even weeks of solving. Any suggestions and especially real life examples of improving problem solving speed would be highly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think speed of problem solving is a criteria for graduate school in mathematics. You're doing research and inventing new mathematics, and that usually requires slowing down, not speeding up. If you're in a graduate program where not solving problems quickly leads to failure, I'd say you're not in the right program.
This is not to say that slower is better. If you're unable to solve problems relating to your subject area, that might point to deeper problems. But *speed* of problem solving should never be a goal (unless you're competing in a math competition like the Putnam)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Success in well-designed qualifying exams in mathematics will depend very little on "problem-solving" speed or talent, but, rather, will depend on whether you've already done problems nearly identical to the problems which appear.
That is, as you observe, it would be prohibitively slow to "solve" many of those problems "in real time". Thus, that is not the expectation. Rather, the "test" is whether examinees have studied sufficiently broadly so as to have seen examples resembling the instances occurring in the given exam.
And, no, it's not about "memorization", either, which tends to be insufficiently flexible to allow easy adaptation to slightly changed situations.
So, really, it's not about "speeding up in problem-solving", but to be able to merely "remember" instead of "solving".
Upvotes: 3 |
2013/12/14 | 654 | 3,019 | <issue_start>username_0: Suppose multiple students have asked me for letters of recommendation to the same graduate department in the US. Am I expected to explicitly compare the students to one another? Am I supposed to do this in both letters (assuming they haven't been submitted yet)? Do I need to explicitly state a preference for one over the other, or can I just get away with listing relative strengths and weaknesses (for instance, "X is stronger academically, but Y has more research experience and is a stronger programmer")?<issue_comment>username_1: While writing recommendation letters, you can write about each applicant's strengths.
You do not need to compare them to each other, but you can say whether you consider them in to 10%, 20% etc (some schools explicitly ask for this information).
More than one student can be in the top 10%, for example. If you have a good formula to calculate this, you should just follow that. It will make your letters easy and consistent.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: While I agree the students are competing they can still both get in! Especially if we are only talking two students applying to a cohort. Schools will remember students from particular institutions, and more quality students is a good thing as it suggests they were better prepped for grad school.
On the flipside, I fail to see how providing potentially disparaging remarks (even if indirectly in saying I would choose A over B) provides help to the student getting the positive hand. That is, if you say `A is a better student than B` I don't see how this helps A against any of the other competition applying to the program besides over the B individual. Your creating a false dichotomy in doing so.
IMO the letters should really be orthogonal to one another (that is A's actions should have no bearing on B's letter) and you should focus on the individual in the recommendation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Since each individual student is asking for a letter of recommendation it would be appropriate to approach each letter as an individual task and not implicitly cross-reference between the letters by making comparisons. Direct comparisons between the specific students should not be made. It is after all the person or committee admitting the students to the program that will make decisions who may fit the best and their criteria may not be the same as yours. It is, however, reasonable to make implicit comparisons such as ranking each in relative terms to, say, all students you have encountered or some other frame of reference. This way each student is compared to a group and not each other. This is what one commonly does anyway.
I can imagine that you may get a request for more details by the person/committee if there is a difficulty in separating students. You could if you are willing, add a comment to the fact that you are willing to answer any questions that may arise during the process regarding the student in question.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2013/12/15 | 1,370 | 5,733 | <issue_start>username_0: There are two loosely related questions here:
1. What is done about academics who do not do any research anymore?
2. What is done about academics who teach badly enough that it shows up?
I insist that I am asking what **is** done, in your department or institution (or in your country if it is uniform). I'll ask a separate question about what **should** be done. I would also like to distinguish between status (e.g. if you are talking about tenured faculty, please say so), and I am mostly but not only interested in tenured faculty.
**Added:** implicit in the question, as was mentioned in an answer, is the way an institution measures the research and teaching activities. Answers are welcome to describe the way these are measured to decide whether to take action, but please stick to what *is* actually done.
To give a little context, from 2009 there are recurring discussions about the teaching duty of academics in France, and whether it should be adapted to their achievements. I would like to have a broader view of the various answers actually given around the world to this issue.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer to both your questions will, from my perspective, be "not much". So this answer describes the view from my local point.
As a basis, university positions in my realm are teaching positions, 70% teaching and 30% for admin, personal development and research. The 30% is very quickly consumed by everything but research. On top of that one can "buy" oneself out of teaching so that the research time essentially is based on soft money. If you do not do research well, then no money comes in and your teaching load increases towards the 70%. So as long as you do your job in some way there is no mechanism for "correcting" a lack of research. On the other hand senior academics often get involved in higher and higher level administrative work at university, governmental, etc. level so a lack of research as such may be replaced by benefits gained in other ways. But, basically, a lack of research simply means teaching more.
If your teaching is very poor there is not much that can be done. Employment laws are very strong. The only way to sack a person would be if they, for example, drink at work, or blatantly refuse to accept orders from the "boss" (head of department etc.). It is also possible to remove someone if it can be shown that there is no need for whatever profile the person was employed under. I really cannot provide a detailed description of employment laws here but they make sacking people a difficult way out. Persons failing with teaching will most likely first be placed to do other duties. I have experience with one such person and it is hard to find tasks where this person can function and contribute.
So the "not much" is largely explained by employment laws in "my" case. The problem cases, which do not easily contribute in alternative ways, will cause lots of work for the department to find ways in which they can be made productive to the department. This will be successful in most cases but not so in the odd case.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is true that it's very difficult to fire someone based on "bad" teaching or "bad scientific results". However, in some countries and institutions, an evaluation/audit by an external comitee is done on the level of institutes, departments, but for each person seperately as well. If this comittee concludes that a person is not worth the position, the head of the institute can fire him.
However, this applies only to a small number of places, and even then people don't get fired as much as they should, IMHO.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Before quibbling with some of the implicit hypotheses of the question: In my observation in the U.S. at top-20 places over the last 30+ years, official steps are rarely taken against post-tenure faculty on grounds that their "research" is in decline, much less that their "teaching/mentoring" may be in decline (if it ever was good).
In a few cases, teaching loads have been informally increased, or service loads informally increased, but often the dynamic that led to decline in research or teaching causes people to be unable to take up other responsibilities reliably.
In principle, in many places in the U.S. now there is "post-tenure review", pushed onto faculty by administration. But this is viewed by faculty as unsavory and contrary to the spirit of things. In particular, short of gross malfeasance, an excellent research and teaching record for some decades is viewed as earning a spot until one chooses to retire, rather than being forced out either unofficially or officially.
This does partly return me to questioning some implicit hypotheses of the question, namely, the short-term measurability of "research" and/or "teaching", and even the desirability of taking short-term samples. For that matter, foolishly idealistic though it may be, isn't the idea of "tenure" that one has indeed earned a spot, and one now has license to exercise one's own judgement, rather than be constantly and indefinitely concerned about external critiques?
Nevertheless, of course, administrations do tend to create ever-greater pressure to do more with fewer resources, thus indirectly pressuring faculty to "do something about" the (relatively few) faculty who are "not helpful". But I think most of us recognize that this is a potentially dangerously subjective question...
In the U.S., again, even faculty acknowledged to be "unhelpful" are not railroaded out, somewhat on the same grounds that we think of "free speech" as including, as a matter of principle, speech that we disagree with, etc.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2013/12/15 | 570 | 2,405 | <issue_start>username_0: I had worked on a computer vision problem three years ago, drafted a journal paper and submitted it to a top-tier journal. My rebuttal to the reviewers answered most of their concerns except "more results required" comment, so got rejected. By then I had changed jobs, but wanted to get this paper published, so quickly made some changes and submitted to another journal, after two rounds of to-fro with the reviewers, the editor rejected it saying, "come back with more results". I don't have access to data as I have changed jobs, so "more results" is out of question.
I am now toying with the idea of getting this paper published in an open-access journal (where I believe, my chances of getting it published is high) or Arvix.org.
Should I go for a low-quality open-access journal or arXiv.org? I want my work to be out there. It may not be award-winning work but it's research and I want it out there.
How does publishing in a low-quality open-access journal (or arXiv) affect a candidate's chances when applying for a job? I know some people who hire use a point system i.e. A-grade journal = 5 points, etc. Do they have a "negative point system" for low-quality open-access journals?<issue_comment>username_1: First: Put your paper on the arxiv. It's a preprint server. Then the work is "out there" and you are still free to submit it to any reasonable journal (as noted in the comments, not every journal takes papers that are already on a preprint server, so check that in advance). So my short answer is: do both.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Are your results only reproducible on one specific data set (the one you no longer have access to)?
If "more results required" is the comment you got from two different journals, I suggest you try to provide exactly that. Of course it's understood that having access to a suitable data is not always easy, yet often a requirement. Hence I think it would be worthwhile if you could try to get your hands on *a different* data collection on which you can perform further experiments. Also, if you repeat the ones you already did on the first data set, this can only strengthen your results.
This may be a lot of work, but remember, if your findings cannot be applied to anything but a data set that almost nobody has access to (including you), then there's little value to your results.
Upvotes: 2 |
2013/12/15 | 795 | 3,506 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student of Industrial Engineering at a US university. The IE grad department has about 11 graduate level courses listed in their catalog. However, insofar they have offered only 2 of those courses. One in fall, and one for the upcoming spring semester.
I spoke with students who are graduating this year learned that they have been in the same situation. The department has been offering the same two courses repeatedly for the past couple of years. Courses with which my interests align aren't being offered at all. With no choice, I am having to take up undergrad courses (one level lower) to keep up with credit requirements. I wanted to know whom I could approach in such situations. Who should I contact?
My options are limited since I am an international student. Moreover, my tuition fees are higher, and for that cost, I feel my educational needs aren't being met justly.
How can I approach this problem? What are the possible solutions?<issue_comment>username_1: In most science-technology-mathematics-engineering departments in the U.S., there are many more courses in the catalog than are offered in any year. There are typically pressures (from above, or from faculty) to offer fewer, rather than more, courses, so things may default to reduced graduate course offerings. Nevertheless, if many grad students explicitly request (to the department) a given course, this greatly increases the chances it'll be offered. Certainly if you don't ask, things will probably continue to be the same.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A couple of other possibilities come to mind, particularly with my experience at a couple of smaller universities that are *marginally* terminal-degree-granting, but only by the narrowest of number-of-degrees-awarded margins:
1. The courses may be listed in the catalog only because of past offerings, largely driven by the highly specialized expertise of a faculty member no longer at the university (to wit, I would have been *less* impressed had a university tried to force a *non*-expert in African history to teach a highly specific course in one particular focus of African history, and more impressed that they were tacitly admitting their (hopefully temporary) shortcomings), but cannot reasonably be offered at the present time while that niche in the department is re-filled.
2. That shortcoming may in fact be so acute as to be threatening your department's graduate-degree-granting status--that they are keenly aware that they need more graduate courses in your discipline, may even be aware that there is a widespread desire by students to take them--but the department may in fact be in danger of withdrawing this particular graduate degree from the list of available options. Given the long pattern of unavailability you have described, it could hardly be considered inappropriate to make inquiries with the chairman about the long-term future of the department and/or this particular degree, especially given the time you have already invested with no (apparent) warnings of what thin ice your career plans may be treading on.
Of course, it's also true that we're overlooking one incidental but critical issue regarding the graduate curriculum: no student has an automatic right to a full plate of courses "that align with their interests." It's loverly when it happens, but we've all had to take courses that didn't especially thrill us while waiting for the chance to take those that did.
Upvotes: 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.