date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2014/05/01 | 1,505 | 6,265 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm going to start preparing for GRE. I have great enthusiasm for reading novels rather than memorizing words. Will words learnt from novels be helpful for GRE vocabulary? Which novels/writers books should be read for GRE vocabulary?<issue_comment>username_1: No doubt you can encounter useful words in novels, but you will encounter them at a much slower rate than with targeted study. If your goal is to learn GRE words quickly, a simple GRE study book would be more efficient. At the least, you should take a practice GRE test and see how you do on the vocab sections. If your vocab needs major improvement, reading novels is probably too slow to be of use for passing the GRE.
In the long term, I think reading novels and other texts is a better (and more fun) way of learning how to actually understand and use a wide range of vocabulary, but for the short-term goal of improving your GRE score it may not deliver as much benefit.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In general - no. The GRE is similar to the SAT2 (is that still around). Studying for the GRE isn't fun, but the best way to do it is either to
1) purchase several study programs, books and set aside time each day to study them
OR
2) pay (usually a few grand) for a GRE prep class
Studying for the GRE was one of the low points of my life. Just focus on getting into the school you want
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It's worth considering semantics.
If in the sense that if you spend 5 hours every day reading novels, you will do better on the GRE than if you spent those 5 hours staring at a wall, then I suppose that is true.
But compared to actual methods of study, I don't think so. Hour for hour, just getting cracking with a deck of flashcards will improve your score much more. It is obviously hard to spend as much time on flashcards because it is boring - but even if you spend much less time than on reading, I would predict that the benefit to your score will still be higher with flashcards (and you can still read in all the time you aren't practicing with flashcards).
For learning words, the problems with the "reading novels" technique are:
* There's a question of what novels you actually read - if all you read is Twilight and Harry Potter, I doubt it would help much.
* Most of the words in a novel won't be new, so most of your time is not spent learning or practicing words. It is very inefficient.
* There is no guarantee that the novels you read will focus on common GRE words.
* In my opinion, GRE words tend to be deliberately obscure: Besides a core set of "basic" words, ETS includes many words which are hardly ever used and have probably went out of style, for the sake of having words that most people will be unlikely to know (unless they practice specifically for the GRE).
* Unlike flashcards or similar methods, it is difficult to gauge your progress (eg. how many common GRE words you have learned) with novels.
* It is easy to infer the meaning of a word in context (and also easy to end up with an incorrect belief about what a word means). GRE often gives words with absolutely no context, and probably sometimes in misleading context. Recalling the "official" definition of an isolated word, and having a feel for how its usually used in prose, are quite different skills - novels will train one, but the exam depends on the other.
For improving reading comprehension, books are possibly more helpful. Still, there is again a set of caveats:
* Books are often long, while GRE tests comprehension of relatively short articles.
* Books usually do not ask you explicit multiple-choice questions, where the incorrect choices are subtly different from the correct ones, and deliberately designed to be confusing.
* It is hard to gauge your progress - for instance, how fast you are able to read a given GRE-level paragraph, what sort of questions are you able to answer correctly often, etc.
For training reading comprehension, there isn't as clear cut a method as "flashcards" (flashcards are very, very effective for memorizing words). However, I would argue that simply doing hundreds of practice questions over and over is a far more productive use of your time, if the primary goal is to have a high GRE score.
If you really wanted to read something, I would say it's better to read a high-brow "culture" magazine like the Atlantic or the New York Times. Even with books, it is probably much more effective to read collected essays rather than novels - since all you will ever have to read on the GRE will be essays. Although still, the crucial feedback element is missing - it's hard to tell if you've "really" understood an essay (in the way that the GRE wants you to) when there is no set of questions with correct answers.
The last bit you could ask about is the writing prompts. Here, "just reading" (although again I would suggest essays versus novels) would probably be more helpful, at least relative to the alternatives - unfortunately, it's hard to train GRE writing skills because one cannot mass produce question banks as with other sections. Moreover, what constitutes a good essay to GRE is arguably very different from more generally accepted criteria. Ultimately, the best option is to somehow obtain a personal essay coach who is familiar with the GRE grading rubric, and write dozens of practice essays for him to grade, rather than reading novels.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If you read a lot of adult fiction then you will have a broader base vocabulary of useful words. With that in mind this is more of a 'long game' strategy than a 'I'm taking the GRE in 6 months and need words!!!' strategy.
That being said if you want something a bit less onerous than flash cards and contextless memorization I would suggest looking for novels that specifically use GRE words. When I was studying for the GRE I found several short story collections and novels that focused on telling a story using the top 350 or 500 GRE words. They weren't great stories but learning the words in a context really helped me.
That being said I'm pretty sure you could just guess 'frustrated' or 'stubborn' for every word on the GRE and get rough 75% of them right. /s
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/01 | 1,776 | 7,095 | <issue_start>username_0: Possible arguments:
Pro
* For brevity for trivial deductions
Contra
* Looks like the writer could not be bothered to write an extensive explanation
* Definition of what is trivial to which reader and what not<issue_comment>username_1: I don't agree with any of these assessments. Often the omitted deductions are rudimentary, but not necessarily trivial. The reason they are omitted is generally due to lack of space, or the fact that the omitted proofs do not add anything to the exposition, not laziness. The final point doesn't even apply.
That said, stating that something "is left to the reader" is a little cheeky. You often find the equivalent, "an astute reader will be able fill in the details", which may come across as a little pretentious.
For a paper, it is okay to use such a statement, assuming that the author has actually done the proofs.
In a thesis, it is expected that the author does the work, not the reader, so I don't think it is acceptable.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I will have to advise against it, and **very strongly so**.
I did applied mathematics in the uni, and some of our teachers were *very* keen on using phrases like that. Well, I can definitely see the point in leaving exercises to the student, however we did have separate exercise sessions where everything was *left as an exercise for the reader.* So I have always found it odd (at times frustrating) that the course book, or lectures, by which I was supposed to get the tools to be able to solve the exercises, left some of the necessary bits as an exercise.
There are two major problems with the phrasing, in my humble opinion:
1. It might not be as obvious or straight-forward as you (the author) might think. In some cases the *exercise* is practically calculations that have already been performed in the previous page or so, in that case it's understandable to omit the same calculations/derivations, but a reference to the last place these calculations, would do just as well:
>
> "... the rest of the derivations are analogous to..."
>
>
>
or
>
> "... as we have seen in Theorem/Lemma X ... "
>
>
>
2. That particular phrasing has a condescending/patronizing resonance in the eyes of the reader. This has been something practically all of my old classmates commented on. As a matter of fact, we *still* joke about the phrase *"... is left an exercise to the (ambitious) reader"*. I am not sure what you have to gain from **alienating your audience**.
Lastly, regarding the use of the phrase in articles, I have to admit I don't do any work in maths anymore, but in the fields I work with (computational biology, biomedicine, bioinformatics, ...) I have never seen something like this, and I am pretty sure it would not fly well.
If the "exercise" in question is important, you include it in the paper. If you lack the space to include it, you put in supplementary and refer to it. If it is not important you do not mention it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: I believe it's only appropriate in the type of writing where you are in a position to give the reader excercises. That is, in course books or other learning material. There, I think it's fine, assuming you've already given enough information for them to be able to perform such an excercise.
In papers or theses, you're actually trying to convince the reader that you're right - the reader is in the position of power, not you, as you want something from them (to accept your ideas) and not vice versa. Therefore, I'd never write such a phrase in a paper or thesis.
It's of course a viable requirement to leave out some parts of the work, either because of space constraints or because they're trivial, long but straightforward, would derail the course of the text, or something similar. If possible, such parts can be delegated to an appendix, or left out entirely. But I would accompany this with different phrasing, something like this:
>
> The formula (7) can be obtained from (6) using straightforward application of [insert appropriate math branch here]
>
>
> A detailed proof of statement (4) unfortunately exceeds the scope of this paper.
>
>
> The derivation of (3) from (1) is too long to present here, but it can be worked out using a symbolic computation system such as Mathematica.
>
>
> Equation (7) follows from a straightforward application of *this-or-that theorem* to equation (5); we refer the reader to existing literature on the topic for details of this.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Leaving some of the demonstration in a paper to the reader is definitely cheeky at the very least, and I for one find it quite frustrating if, for instance, I'm reading up on something and really not in the mood to have to work through it all at that point. It may seem lazy, but how fresh are you when you've got to the seventh paper of the evening?
I'd definitely suggest referring to other places if space is at a premium - to my mind, that would be the only reason for omitting something that would be important in the paper (as if it's not important, why would you mention it?) Citations would be my first port of call for this, even if it is to an elementary text book ("... for a more complete treatment of x, see <NAME> (2009, pp. 37-41)."), but if there is genuinely nowhere else and not enough space but it needs to be referred to, URLs are also an option. Ideally, there should be a relatively permanent place that you can keep the text, so that someone going to look for it in several years time would still have access.
At the end of the day, if it is in a work to be published in a book or journal, I'd recommend speaking to the editorial staff, as they may have existing policies for assessing the necessity of extensive material and placing it accordingly.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I guess this is not the popular opinion, but I have to agree with [username_1](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/20085/56207) in that I do not find the phrase in the least offensive. Even in the absence of such a phrase, many papers in mathematics have terse proofs in which a lot of detail is missing, providing ample exercise in filling in the details. I don't think this is a bad thing as it forces the reader to actively engage the material (still the best way to learn it).
There is a story, doubtless embellished over the years, about <NAME> saying in the middle of a lecture "It is clear that ... ," and then pausing. He went over to a corner of the board, worked for a time, and then continued with "Yes, it is clear ... ."
Having said this, I would still prefer to see something such as "The proof is a routine computation," or "The proof is straightforward." Nonetheless, we should not be too quick to protest an author's choice of language in these situations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The phrase about an exercise for the reader is very passé, and can only
be used in textbooks.
The normal phrase in research articles is ''we omit the details''.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/01 | 427 | 1,840 | <issue_start>username_0: I have done some work and I thought of publishing it. This is my first attempt to publish. After searching a lot, I found out that SCI indexed journals are good. But I am seeing publishing price at about $1500-$3100 which is absolutely impossible for me. (Just out of question). My work is on improvement in image processing, being specific, matrix encoding algorithms.
I am putting my question here after searching too much, so any hint would help. I am almost about $100-$150 budget. I don't understand how sharing info could be so costly. Is it not done as a service by scientists/Phd students collectively at some reasonable price ?
Its a baffling experience to me, specially this listed price on journal websites. In my country this amount means fortune.<issue_comment>username_1: Many journals do not charge any publication fees at all. For example, subscription journals often fall into this category, and in most fields there are plenty of subscription journals. If all the journals you are finding charge fees, then I'd imagine you aren't searching broadly enough (although maybe publication fees are particularly common in your field).
Furthermore, journals that charge publication fees ought to give fee waivers to authors from developing countries. Their web sites often explain the details, and if they don't you can write to them to ask before submission. They might in principle say no, but it can't hurt to ask.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You might want to take a look at PLOS ONE. See their description of their [Publication Charges](http://www.plosone.org/static/information). The journal has a good reputation, publishes research in all discliplines, has a reduced or waived fee for authors from low income countries, and a separate fee waiver program.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/01 | 989 | 3,999 | <issue_start>username_0: My case is the following, I have already got a MSc in Computer Science, but my field of specialization was Theoretical Computer Science. Actually I am really interested in the field of Machine Learning, but unfortunately I did not follow any course about that topic in my previous master's degree.
At first sight, I was thinking to follow a PhD that has some relation to Machine Learning; so in that case I should really follow some Machine Learning courses by my own. I have just put this thought for a while, mainly because I have not been so lucky in my last PhD applications.
In any case, I was wondering if I should follow another Master's degree in Machine Learning; and maybe because I have already got my other MSc, the time for completing this new MSc would be only one year instead of the two years that is the common duration of these studies.
Also I was thinking that maybe I could take some single courses, for example some online courses, even though I am not really a fan of MOOC courses.
What it would be the best course of action?
* Follow another MSc degree?
* Follow some online courses in this topic? if that is so, which university offers them that the certification is recognized?
Updated info:
About my goals are the following:
* Need of learn machine learning topics for academic purposes: teaching undergraduates and independent research
* Some good PhD positions in which I am interested require that knowledge
Any advice would be great.
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Given both of those stated goals, I would not pursue additional coursework to learn the material. Your current masters degree is likely good enough for either teaching or getting into a machine learning PhD program, and no degree is necessary for independent research. I would recommend that you use [other resources](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19187/should-i-take-every-math-course-in-order-to-do-good-research/19189#19189) to learn the material.
---
EDIT: Given that the question in the above link was deleted, I'm reproducing it here:
>
> There are many ways to learn new topics. Taking a university-level
> course is only one option. Other alternatives are:
>
>
> * read textbooks
> * online video tutorials (Khan academy, youtube)
> * online pre-recorded lectures (e.g., iTunes U, but many, many others exist)
> * talking to peers
> * reading publications (for specialized topics)
>
>
> Taking a non-required university course is usually not the most
> optimal approach, for a number of reasons:
>
>
> * You will spend a lot of time learning material not relevant to your problem, simply because it's part of the syllabus and the teacher
> found it interesting
> * The requirement to pass will require you to spend likely (disproportionately too much) time doing homework, studying for tests,
> etc.
> * It is very expensive
>
>
> This isn't to say that self-study doesn't require homework, or that
> learning topics not directly related to your research is a bad thing.
> I'm simply suggesting that by pursuing more self-directed learning
> opportunities you will be able to make better use of your time.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Getting the job really comes down to "what you can do" (and sometimes "who you know"..). Degrees are nice (and necessary), but you're current degree combined with working knowledge of machine learning and a couple of certificates from MOOCs could really go a long way. You would save time and money in my opinion.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Some universities like ETH in Zurich (Switzerland) offer the "Master of Advanced Studies" degree for the undergraduates that have finished a given minimal number of additional courses with success, only one or two of them mandatory (assigned by a mentor). This would give the wanted additional expertise over shorter time.
Taking the whole master degree second time is a huge effort that may not be worth it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/01 | 490 | 2,127 | <issue_start>username_0: I have received a Call for Presentations for a conference and I have a topic that could be interesting to present.
The Call for Presentations describe the various forms of presentations that one can submit, and then links to a form asking for a title, presenter name(s) and an abstract. This has a deadline around two months before the conference.
Now, to my questions: As I mentioned, I have a topic in mind, but unless my presentation is accepted, I would prefer not spending a lot of time preparing a good presentation of this (technical) subject. Will the decision about whether to accept the presentation be done solely on the grounds of the submitted abstract or will they be in touch before accepting the presentation?
(This is a computer science conference, in case that's germane.)<issue_comment>username_1: It depends on how close you research topic/presentation is to the conference topic. I've never had an abstract turned down, but I present in sessions with topics relevant to my research. Most conferences wan't people to come and present, in general. Worst case scenario, it get's turned down. You will have a head start on the next abstract submission.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Usually decisions on accepting a presentation are made solely on the basis of content. This is actually somewhat unfortunate, because there's no way to eliminate researchers who give horrible talks :).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Typically you will be asked to submit a short abstract (usually 300 words or less), which will be accepted or rejected. If accepted, make your presentation.
On another note, you should get accustomed to doing time consuming activities that may or may not have any real benefit in grad school...
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Make sure it is not one of 1000s SPAM mails from not-known-to-anyone or thinking-only-about-how-to-get-your-money societies or fake conference organizers. Vast majority of conference in Computer Science review full papers, not abstracts, and review of presentations is not common at all.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/01 | 253 | 996 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm preparing my application for a master degree scholarship, would it help to put the MOOC's I took in the application, I earned five MOOC certificates and expecting another two in the near future.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes! Why not? It shows that you go beyond what is required of you, and you have a genuine interest in learning. I always list certificates from MOOCs.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: FWIW, I put the MOOCs I've completed in my tenure portfolio as a professor and it actually went over really well. So yeah, go for it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Maybe mention a brief comment about what the MOOC means (and means to you and what you liked about that college that offered the MOOC) in your letter of application.
I bet, the older you get, recent MOOC completion statements will be getting more informative to any reader/recipient of your application than grades from a, say, 10 year old college degree.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/01 | 666 | 2,562 | <issue_start>username_0: I was told that universities in USA are generally better that the ones in Italy. I will take the undergraduate degree this July, and I need to decide whether to continue my studies in Italy or to move to the USA.
[This site](http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2014/computer-science-information-systems#sorting=rank+region=+country=+faculty=+stars=false+search=) reports the world ranking for computer science & information systems, and Politecnico di Milano is ranked 48th.
I'll not be able to afford an university with high tuitions like MIT (let's say 15,000 $ per year maximum), also since I may have not the prerequisites to join high selective universities, if I move to the USA I'd choose a university that is ranked below or almost as Politecnico di Milano. So the indecision: it is still worth to move to the USA? Do you think that the rankings are reliable?<issue_comment>username_1: The linked QS world university rankings are a well respected international ranking. That said, using a university's rank is a really terrible way to chose a grad school. Some of the factors which drive the rankings are important for choosing a grad school, but don't just rely on the rankings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I was told that universities in USA are generally better that the ones in Italy.
>
>
>
This statement, in its given generality, is false. The US, like most places, has very good schools, ok schools, and a reasonable number of pretty bad schools. If you explicitly are looking for very cheap schools, I would not assume that the remaining selection is necessarily any good, just because it is a "school in the states".
POLIMI is a pretty good school in CS. To be honest, if I had the choice of going either to POLIMI or to a low-ranked US school, I would almost certainly choose POLIMI.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If you are planning to pursue PhD studies in computer science, you should in general **not** have to pay tuition yourself—this is covered by either your advisor or the department as a whole (e.g., if you're a teaching assistant).
So, basically, it comes down to a question of whether or not you're able to gain admission to a school that you think is better than the one you are attending in Italy. Equally importantly, if you're looking to start *this* fall (2014), you will almost certainly not be able to do it in the United States, as the admissions "window" for fall of 2014 has already closed.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/01 | 1,389 | 6,012 | <issue_start>username_0: A good friend of mine had an interview for a psychology Masters degree. The interviewer asked my friend: **"Tell me about yourself"**.
* How should one approach such a question?
* What do the admission committee expect to hear?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> How should one approach such a question?
>
>
>
By telling them about yourself.
>
> What do the admission committee expect to hear?
>
>
>
Something about yourself.
Relax. It's not a trick question. (Or if it is a trick question, you don't want to go there.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In this occasion, the interviewers want to know your background and your motivation of further study in this particular subject. They want to give the opportunity to the right person.
For example, I was once involved in the admission interview (although I didn't have the final say in the decision making). Based on my observation, those who had strong motivation but average GPA won over those with weak motivation and high GPA.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I remember seeing this question on interview preparation articles or most asked question lists, and I must say this question makes no sense. The question seems so simple yet very hard to answer. I don't recommend replying with "Could you be more specific?" because it may seem like you are incapable of answering a simple! question. This is more likely to be the first question if you ever face it, sort of to break the ice, and you can simply introduce yourself and mention your professional interests and your purpose, very briefly. After this question, they will move to the specific questions that actually make sense.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I would recommend approaching it as your opportunity to guide the interview in the direction you want it to go. As a professional psychologist, you would often have to introduce yourself and your work to others. What any given committee expects to hear is anyone's guess, but maybe the average committee would at least be happy to see you present a clear, succinct, professional summary of your interests and experiences.
Contrary to some implications that are starting to appear between the lines of responses here, psychologists are not necessarily more conscious of or trained in interviewing than others. Some of us specialize in interviewing, self-report, [projective assessment methodology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projective_test), [psychoanalysis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoanalysis), and other forms of open-ended, qualitative research, but many (maybe most) of us do not. In defense of the extremely general, almost meaningless prompt, "Tell me about yourself," it is useful as a way of forcing the interviewee to initiate conversation on the topics of personal relevance, and may elicit those topics that an interviewee identifies with most strongly in a more direct way than other questions. Even if one were to ask questions based on prominent items from an applicant's CV, one could not be certain that those items weren't placed there after strategic deliberation or in capitulation to hiring committees' expectations. Asking a question like this that might easily be answered by glancing at an applicant's CV may catch an interviewee off-guard, forcing some on-the-spot self-reassessment in the underprepared, or giving hints of a person's true identity and interests without all the dressing and polish people usually apply to their CV entries.
Still, psychologists aren't necessarily more aware of these uses of the question than hirers of different backgrounds, and expecting these tactics to be deliberate may give too much credit to some interviewers who engage in them unwittingly. In some cases, it may just be a way of forcing the interviewee to guide the interview for lack of personal will to do so, or for lack of having had the time or desire to review an applicant's credentials directly beforehand. Either way, consider it a challenge, and come prepared to rise to the occasion on any open-ended question. Can you introduce yourself in a way that's impressive, professional, interesting, and not overwrought or revealing of personal weaknesses? Can you handle ill-formulated questions and vague statements of interest in a constructive manner when put on the spot and given an opportunity to demonstrate your expertise? The answer to these questions had better be "**yes**", because you'd certainly have to perform these functions as a psychologist.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This is your chance to take the ball and run with it. I like to give some background that shows my history as it relates to why I am the right candidate. Glib or short answers will make you less likable, and going off topic or ranting opens you up to other judgement that may not be favorable. I would start from the timeline of whatever moment started the trajectory which ultimately ends up with you being in this interview, giving more weight/time to the things that you are most proud of. For example, I have always been interested in X, ever since my father brought me to see that Y in '92. for the last year, I have been exploring the inner workings of Z, and have contributed my time to some projects that seek to improve upon ... I am hoping to continue my efforts here, and am particularly interested in working on P.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: ```
*How should one approach such a question?
What do the admission committee expect to hear?*
```
If I were you I would approach this question like you were writing a cover letter for a regular job. Everything you talk about should always relate to why you want/qualified to be apart of this program. And you should talk about what your goals are after you have require this degree. Also,do your research on the culture of the program as well. If possible talk to a student who attended the university.
I am not an expert but this is my two cents in this matter.
Good Luck
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/01 | 959 | 4,337 | <issue_start>username_0: I work in mathematical physics. Typically, papers in my field are either published either in general math journals (Annals of Math, Transactions of AMS, Proceedings of AMS) or in specialized math physics journals (Communications in Math Physics, Reviews in Mathematical Physics, Ann<NAME>, etc.) Personally, I have had papers published in both types of journals. Yet I don't have a good sense whether a particular preprint should go to a general journal or a specialized journal, so I usually just pick at random.
What are the factors one thinks about when making a decision between submitting to a specialized journal and a general journal of similar quality?<issue_comment>username_1: I would pick the journal with the largest audience that you feel is likely to actually read your work. That is probably the generalist journal, but not necessarily. If you have a specialist journal that all of the people in your field read, your work might get more attention that way. But generally, more general journals have larger audiences, therefore, more people who might be interested in your work, and hence also a higher selectivity rate.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I tend to think that in most cases, the specialized/broad dichotomy is not very relevant. The most important point is to send it to an interested editor; if the most relevant editor for a paper happens to be at a general journal, you will often be better of sending your paper there.
I would consider two exceptions to this principle. First, top specialized journals are usually less reputed than top generalist journals, so if you get a truly impressive result, you may want to get the best of it by sending it to a top generalized journal. Second, some generalist journals will turn back papers that seems much more specialized than the average math paper (e.g. when the basic objects you study are unheard of by most mathematicians).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I don't care how important the journal is or who the editors are. The question is do I read it, or do the papers of relevance turn up in it, or do the most relevant/sympathetic authors publish in it, which means there will be relevant/sympathetic reviewers. Publish in the journals where you see the most similar papers to what you are proposing, in approach, scope, length, depth, etc. It is appropriate to publish short papers on new results quickly in the more specialised transactions, and longer papers that draw together work and provide introductions to a broader audience in the more general journals. If the work is interdisciplinary it is appropriate to present it for different audiences by retargeting to a new journal. The more ground breaking the research the more important it is rather to see what journals publish novel research as opposed to bandwagon research. If none of the reviewers understand it, a reputable venue will not publish it (although often they won't admit the problem is theirs).
But in general the story goes like this...
research --> journals that publish that research --> most appropriate journal for your research --> target that specific journal
In other words I think you have it backwards - you choose the venue and then target the paper to it. I develop repositories of knowledge for my own use (somewhere between a collection of notes and thesis-like treatise). Sometimes I publish these as a Tech.Report. but the idea is not to publish on the growing body of work, but to draw on it as it grows to target papers to particular venues (workshops, conferences, transactions and journals).
I regard general journals as the least useful kind of publication, and workshops as the most useful kind of publication, with a funnel type progression to a proper journal paper (which I my field are typically 50-100 page papers whereas the other three typically have 6-12 page papers). In the internet age, the most important thing is to publish in places that provide or allow open access, and most readers will come from a search process rather than by subscription to the journal. Subscription journals are dead - they just don't know it yet, although the publishers are scrambling to get you, your employer or oterh sponsors to continue to pay them in a paid open access model.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/01 | 2,698 | 11,663 | <issue_start>username_0: I was speaking with several professors in my department about submission to high-profile conferences like CHI in human-computer interaction. Most of the professors were of the opinion that acceptance in most of these high-profile conferences (typical acceptance rate of less than 20%) is heavily influenced by politics: even though you may have comparatively good research, the editors will most likely be more favored toward accepting papers published by Microsoft Research or Google Research or from other high-profile universities where they have close relationship with the faculty and researchers.
The professors advised me against spending time and resources on publishing to these conferences and instead concentrate on second-tier journals (like those published by Springer) for better return on investment for my efforts.
I assume in good faith that most of the editors may not reject papers without reading them, but does anybody concur with the opinion of professors at my department?<issue_comment>username_1: It is an often-heard prejudice in CS that many of the top conferences are relatively closed "boys clubs". Indeed, if one just looks over accepted papers for multiple years, one typically ends up seeing the same affiliations over and over again, strengthening this impression.
However, this could be due to a number of (good or bad) reasons:
* Papers from professors / labs that are well-known in the field may simply be of much higher technical quality, making it quite natural that they also get accepted much more often.
* Professors / labs that are well-known in the field generally know *how to write papers for this specific conference*. They know what the TPC values, and how to present their results in a way that is appreciated in the field. As these professors are typically in the TPC themselves, they know what kind of papers usually get accepted and which are rejected.
* Professors / labs that are well-known in the field often have a better grasp on the existing state of the art in the field, making it easier for them to identify what is good and novel. In my experience, "outsiders" have a tendency to overestimate the novelty of their contributions significantly. Further, well-known labs know what problems are currently en vogue in the community.
* It is of course also perceivable that papers from well-known professors / labs are just not judged as critically. For instance, a reader may very well think that a paper is not applying a given technique correctly, but as the paper comes from the group that *invented* this technique, he gives them the benefit of doubt and assumes that they will know the technique better than him. He would probably not extend the same favorable thinking to an outsider.
* Finally, for some topics, it is just easier for some labs to do good research than others. A common example are the web search tracks at the WWW conference. These tracks typically require the validation of new algorithms on real data, to which mostly only industry labs from Yahoo! etc. and their close collaborators have access.
Note that none of these reasons is really *politics*. Indeed, I would argue that all of the reasons above are significantly more likely than a paper getting rejected for the reasons you cited.
>
> I assume in good faith that most of the editors may not reject papers without reading them
>
>
>
I would say, at a top conference such as CHI, you can rely on your paper at least getting reviewed thoroughly, yes.
>
> but does anybody concur with opinion of professors at my department?
>
>
>
Well, given all the reasons above, it is indeed quite likely that your paper will be rejected. By definition, if a conference has a <20% acceptance rate, rejection is always a real possibility (clearly, it happens to most submissions). However, I am wondering why it would be better to not even try if you think your work is good enough for CHI. If the paper gets rejected there, you can still re-submit to a lower-tier venue, *and* you receive a number of hopefully helpful reviews. The only disadvantage I see is that it prolongs the publication process by half a year, but if you see *any* chance of the paper begin accepted at the top-tier venue, I think this should be worth it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I completely agree with almost everything username_1 wrote, except the conclusion. One thing that was not addressed is *why* your professors told you not to submit to CHI. It's possible that they're giving their honest opinions, or that they themselves had a bad record submitting there.
But it's also possible that they are telling you that your work is not good enough for CHI, but in a gentle manner. Also, they are familiar with where you are in your career track and may believe that losing time and effort on a failed CHI attempt is not good for you. Both of these require perspective that you cannot have on yourself.
Consequently, I would suggest that you take the advice you were given.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Politic is everywhere, of course, especially in situations where the resource giving out to people is limited. Bear in mind, taking a look at the program committee before submitting! And please don't stick to one conference! Even some well-known professors get rejection at some conferences, let alone others.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Having served on the CHI program committee, many other program committees, and having been program chair of a couple of other HCI conferences, I think your professors are overly cynical.
First, as JeffE pointed out, CHI (and many other conferences) use blind or semi-blind reviewing, so at least the reviewers do not know whose paper they are reviewing.
Second, I have never been in a PC meeting where the identities of the authors was a point of discussion. Of course that doesn't mean that the associate chair (AC) for the paper was not influenced by who the authors were, but it would certainly imply that there is no *institutionalized* bias for or against particular authors or institutions.
I would definitely not worry about your papers being rejected without being reviewed; in fact, when you submit you will get the reviews so you know why your paper was or was not accepted.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with [username_1's answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/20137/14017) and would like to elaborate on how some high-profile researchers manage to constantly appear at certain high-profile conferences.
I'd say the method to reliably appear on a given conference are resources and focus:
First, to professor X, conference A is not simply another conference. It is their subfield's "flagship" conference, their "home" meeting. They will and can put a lot of effort into making sure they get published there. Thus, they do not just submit one paper. They make sure they have at least a short paper about each of their hottest ideas to submit. With ten or more submissions, a few acceptances are likely even at a low acceptance rate.
Related to that, note that the conference topic is probably not just X's personal hobby. More likely, they have an entire research group specialized on the conference's core topic at their disposal. X is probably already involved with half a dozen projects with different members of their group at any time, all of which are thematically suitable for conference A.
Lastly, there is simply a strong overlap between X's topics of expertise and A's topics. Even if X does, somehow, not manage to publish in A, they will actively participate nonetheless (thereby adding to the impression that their name appears all the time with respect to A):
* They may be among A's chairs.
* They might chair one or more sessions at A.
* They might be invited to give a keynote talk at A.
* They might offer a workshop co-located with A. Note that even without anything questionable going on, this could lead to a certain additional bias towards contributions by X's group: While less frequently so for workshops at very large conferences, workshops often rely extensively on word-of-mouth marketing. As a consequence, people in X's direct vicinity are most likely to know about the workshop and its precise focus.
* As a well-known member of the audience whose work is being built upon by other submissions to A, they might be mentioned in some of the talks. This can happen in totally informal remarks: "Last year, Alice, who is sitting over there, presented technique Y and asked Z, so I have been looking into Z."
And even if all of these fail, X will still attend A and attract enough attention during coffee breaks to reinforce the memory: X was actively part of A *again*.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: This kind of advice is often given to people, but in my view it's fundamentally misguided.
It's true to some extent that many of the top conferences have a particular way of doing things, and that people in the community associated with a conference will often have more experience with that way of doing things and find it easier to get papers accepted there. However, it's untrue that the communities associated with particular conferences are a closed shop: it's entirely possible to adapt your way of doing things to what you know different conferences expect, and that will improve your acceptance rate at those conferences. Moreover, it's absolutely worth your while to do this, because publishing at the top conferences massively improves your chances of having a successful academic career (not to mention that it puts you in contact with a large number of good researchers in your field).
In that sense, the people who are suggesting that you eschew the top conferences and simply send your work to second-tier venues are doing you a serious disservice, because they're basically ensuring that you're not even on the pitch where you could compete with your peers (indeed, the heavy focus that top groups put on publishing at top conferences tends to mean that they are underwhelmed by people who don't compete). If you're good and you put in sufficient effort, you can definitely play at the right level, whereas counting yourself out of the game before you've even tried to succeed is deeply unwise in my view.
**TL;DR The people giving you this advice are leading you astray in my view. It's not wise to spend your time and energy submitting papers to venues that many researchers will view as being less than top-flight, when you could be refining your papers to make sure that they get into the top venues.**
More generally, people unfortunately tend to give similar advice about all kinds of things, not just academic conferences. A classic example would be applying to university, or applying for top jobs. The general form of such advice tends to be:
* This venue is biased against you specifically, or against people like you (whatever that means) in general.
* This venue wouldn't suit you if you were accepted -- you'd enjoy it way less than a lower-tier venue.
* This venue isn't all it's cracked up to be anyway -- they just have a high opinion of themselves.
There are certainly situations in which people might be a bit biased, or in which you wouldn't enjoy some place, or in which the place isn't as good as it thinks it is, but these things are by no means universally true. If people tell you "don't apply to X because I have specific, verifiable evidence of Y", then that may be one thing (check the "verifiable evidence"), but if they tell you not to apply to top venues in general, then you need to seriously question that.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/02 | 1,371 | 6,063 | <issue_start>username_0: By this, I do not mean I did not obtain significant research results. My supervisor has told me to finish up a draft of paper for submission, I wrote it, then after few months, he told me to correct some parts and did more experiments on certain area, I followed all his instructions and wrote a second draft to him. And until now, it is already one year after sending my draft to him, and still I have no idea when he will publish it.
Actually, this not only happens to me, it happens to all the members in my research group. The average time my supervisor publishes our results is about 2-3 years after we have finished all the required experiments. The results just become idle. I would like to ask, if this is a common phenomenon (and the possible reasons behind it), if not, what I (and my colleagues) can do about it? You know as a research student, having publication is very important, it is really frustrating.<issue_comment>username_1: This seems like a strange situation, since it is very counterproductive for both you *and* your supervisor. If this is indeed common in your group, I am sure several ideas have been scooped by the time they finally get submitted. Unfortunately, I really don't have any decent idea why your supervisor would act this way.
The most important thing to do is to **talk to your supervisor and don't let him/her dismiss the issue**. This may seem like an aggressive approach, but you can disguise it as a learning experience, e.g. "*Please tell me what is wrong with the current manuscript because I believe it is ready for submission, oh wise one*". Whatever you do, remain polite.
A few approaches you can try (all of which are reasonable, so don't be shy):
* Send reminders and send them often. Ask what you can do to improve the manuscript. If your supervisor has no further suggestions to change the manuscript, ask where you can submit it to directly. Don't wait for him/her to wake up. This approach may lead to your supervisor turning it into a ping-pong match, asking you to make trivial but time-consuming extensions again and again. In this case, confront your supervisor and explain your perspective.
* If you can find an appropriate call for papers, ask permission to send the manuscript there. Calls typically have deadlines and are not necessarily a downgrade in terms of venue quality. This includes conferences and journal special issues. Having a hard deadline might help.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Finish writing the paper yourself. Send your supervisor a final draft, inviting him to submit his comments on the paper and suggest some changes.
If your supervisor does not wish to collaborate on the submission, it's possible he will be OK with you finishing and submitting the paper yourself, perhaps as the sole author. Make sure to acknowledge his capacity as your supervisor at the end of the paper, if he is not included as a co-author.
>
> If it's your data, and you wrote the paper, you have every right to
> publish it by yourself as long as you offer your supervisor the chance to collaborate or object.
>
>
>
Best-case scenario? Your own paper gets published, or your supervisor gets jolted back to reality and collaborates with you on finishing the paper together. Worst case scenario? Your paper gets rejected (don't fret, that can happen often!), so you have to head back to your supervisor or Academia.SE for advice on re-submitting it or choosing another journal.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In a comment, OP added:
>
> Of course we have talked to our supervisor, he just said 'ok, I will look and see if anything to add', after few weeks we asked again, and he again said 'I will look into it'.
>
>
>
Try to understand why your supervisor behaves likes this. Some hypotheses:
* Your supervisor prefers to spent time on some other work.
* Your supervisor has to focus on some other work for external reasons.
* Your supervisor prefers to spent time working with someone else.
* Your supervisor finds the paper boring and avoids working on it.
* Your supervisor is a perfectionist and wants to avoid publishing a non-perfect paper.
* Your supervisor has bad time-management skills and forgets to look at your paper.
* Your supervisor doesn't really want to publish this for some reason.
* ... many more possibilities ...
It is important to understand why your supervisor is behaving like this, in order to react appropriately. For example, if your supervisor has very bad time-management skills and keeps forgetting your paper, it is probably better to ask about this much more often than every few weeks.
Options for understanding your supervisor better include just asking him or her about it, or asking someone who successfully collaborated with your supervisor in the past. Maybe some former grad students of your supervisor figured out how to effectively interact with your supervisor and you can learn the trick from them.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: My dear friend, I am somehow in a similar situation. I have analyzed N body simulations and have written one conference paper with my supervisor. The plan with my supervisor was to write a very good paper on it and submit it to a leading journal in the field. All is in order, I have the plots, interpretations of the results, 3 oral presentations on the results, but somehow my supervisor keep delaying apparently the publications of the paper. After I have seen this, I have approached another problems in the field and I have one paper accepted with me as a sole author, and one in review with no supervisor, maintaining some sort of liberty. The irony is that the impact factor of my of the journal where I have published is +1 higher than the usual journal the supervisor normally publish. If you wish to keep a balance with your supervisor, I would recommend leaving at it's normal pace, keeping in mind that it is only one paper, and go publishing with your peers on another papers and problems in your field. Good luck!
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/02 | 746 | 3,124 | <issue_start>username_0: I have read many questions on this site that relate to Journal impact factors, for example, in relation to how that may affect where to publish etc.
I am wondering is there an independent oversight body that regulates the area of impact factors?
I was thinking along the lines of something like the [International Organization for Standardization](http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html) that regulates the ISO standards across the world.
Specifically is there an independent body (either commercial or not for profit) that sets the standards for impact factors and audits them so as that one impact factor can be compared with another with the knowledge that they are calculated in the same way?<issue_comment>username_1: No.
---
Academic publishing is not regulated by any oversight body. There is not even a universal standard for what constitutes a *publication*.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There's multiple questions contained within your question that have different answers.
>
> Is there independent oversight of Journal Impact Factors?
> ...
> Now I am wondering is there a oversight body that regulates the area?
>
>
>
This depends on what you mean by "independent".
If you mean an official unbiased centralised not-for-profit professional organisation, then the best answer is probably **no**.
But ...
>
> Specifically is there a body that sets the standards for impact factors and audits them so as that one impact factor can be compared with another with the knowledge that they are calculated in the same way?
>
>
>
The answer to this part is definitively **yes**. The notion of an impact factor (<- [a recognised term of art](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_factor)) was invented by the founder of the **[Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Scientific_Information)**, <NAME>. The impact factor of journals has been computed by ISI since 1975 using a prescribed methodology.
In terms of comparability, the impact factor is specifically the average number of citations per publication in the journal, over a fixed time span (the two years previous, or five years for 5 year impact). Citations are collected from the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) index.
And so if you are a journal editor and you wish to have an impact factor, you need to apply to ISI (now owned by <NAME>). They oversee the computation of the official Impact Factor metrics in common use today, as publicised on various journal websites.
In fact, <NAME>ers (through ISI) *own* the concept of Impact Factor for journals and copyright said metrics.
So for sure there is a body "*that sets the standards for impact factors and audits them so as that one impact factor can be compared with another with the knowledge that they are calculated in the same way*". But I would hesitate to call Thompson ISI an *independent* body.
---
This answer is not intended to promote the idea of an Impact Factor, but merely to indicate its oversight, regulation and history as per the question.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/05/02 | 613 | 2,591 | <issue_start>username_0: I am trying to use/find the correct term for the *practice of publishing research results in academia*, mainly a reference to the practice of publishing research findings in a formal journal or conference.
The term has to have a clear contrast to the practice of *publishing full data-sets of research results (ex: in a repository)*, but which is also a sub-form of "publishing of research results"
I have started my work by using the term "Scholarly Communication" which was somehow influenced by one of my mentors. Although I was happy on the initial suggestion, I am finding myself not so keen on the use of it, as it seems cheaper in contrast to for example: *Academic Publishing* which seems broader to include more research ventures (done also by non-scholars, but still viable for academic recognition).
The problems with the term *Academic Publishing* are two for my perspective. 1) I have not been able to find a strong definition of it, and 2) it is so broad that can include the "publishing of research data-sets" which I need to reference separately.
Would appreciate a discussion for a creative term which coins the academic publishing as it has been referenced traditionally?
Update 1: Considering also *Academic Literature* referenced in a comment below by darthbith<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest "(modifier) dissemination" with (modifier) used to make things more specific. Usually I find the phrase "dissemination of (noun)", and it often refers to a formal release of information, where some semblance of validation of (noun) has occurred. You might find "result dissemination", "data dissemination", "report dissemination" useful. Of course, I'm already getting tired of seeing the word "dissemination" used many times in the same paragraph. I also suggest some synonyms to alleviate developing madness in the reader.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If a thing is publicly available, it is literally published, nevermind paywalls. It would be an unhelpful abuse of language to have "publication" mean exclusively "publication in a traditional, recognized, peer-refereed, journal". I propose (only partly facetiously) referring to the latter as "gatekeeper publications". :)
Srsly, there *is* an issue here. If the NSF or NIH require that we make our research public, but we can't get it through the gatekeepers, then what?
So, if you want to refer to publication in peer-reviewed journals, say "peer-reviewed journal publication". This might be in contrast to "internet publication". Adjectives.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/02 | 451 | 2,076 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been using some online proofreader tools for checking for grammar issues in my writing, but I have found that the solutions they give are not so good at all.
For that reason I would like to know any human-proofreader service that somebody could recommend me. Some of the characteristics of the service that I am requiring are:
* Not so expensive
* Confidentiality, I do not want my article to end up published by somebody else
* Reliable
Could anybody has experience with those services and could recommend me one? I need to review an article asap
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: Have you tried getting the proofreading done within your own university? This is not made explicit in your question, but my guess is that you are not a native speaker of English and you are writing in English. If you are attending an anglophone university there will probably be places where you can just show up and get help on proofreading your paper (the humanities version of drop-in tutoring). So I'm assuming that you are not attending an anglophone university. But at (almost?) any university there should be faculty and students who are working on English writing specifically. Can you find a student who is willing to help you? Perhaps you may even be able to offer some other academic service to the student in exchange.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It is generally not worth to use a paid commercial proofreading service, as a typical translator (unless clearly specialized in this area) does not know the necessary scientific style and terminology.
Once my laboratory relied on fully translating the article into English by the paid translations service, assuming, professionals do better. The received comment from the editor sounded "do not write English text yourself, ask somebody to do this for you". Wise.
Pay attention to grammar when reading articles and try follow the style. Most likely, nothing can do much better than you yourself. Also, the idea to ask the English department of your university seems very good.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/02 | 990 | 4,682 | <issue_start>username_0: Some journals bundle relevant papers on a currently hot topic into special issues. As far as I know, potential manuscripts must be specifically submitted for inclusion in special issues rather than the journal itself (or get selected from conference proceedings).
In my field, special issues tend to have shorter review periods which makes them interesting venues. I have heard that special issues tend to have lower impact than regular journal issues, though I am not sure if this is factual. Do special issues usually meet the same standards as regular issues?
Is there any difference in prestige in publishing in special issues vis-à-vis publishing in regular issues? Do hiring committees make meaningful distinctions between both types?<issue_comment>username_1: I have not been a journal editor. But I have dealt with many journal editors, and in my experience the kind of thing they are *most* concerned about is maintaining and elevating their journal's standards at all times. So I have to imagine that when they put together a special issue, they take pains to ensure that this does not result in any measurable lowering of their journal's standards.
In my branch of mathematics, special issues are not that common but not unheard of either. I have never noticed any difference in the quality of the papers published in these special issues. Also in my experience people may not even list on their CV that the publication has appeared in a "special issue".
I have on the other hand been on many hiring committees, and I have not heard a thing about this. Again though in my field this sort of publication is relatively uncommon and it may even escape our notice. I suppose that if a candidate had ten publications and they were *all* in "special issues" that might be curious.
All in all, in my neck of the woods there is nothing to worry about here.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In my part of CS, where like other fields of CS the conference publication is the primary delivery mechanism, a journal special issue is viewed as prestigious and is highlighted in CVs.
Typically a set of papers is accepted for publication and presentation at a conference. This conference is usually associated with a specific journal. Editors from that journal prowl the conference checking out the papers and presentations, After the conference is done they will then send out invites to selected authors inviting their paper for publication in a special issue of the journal.
This is considered prestigious because it's viewed as a 'cream of the crop' selection. It's also easy for authors because special issues normally have expedited refereeing.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: My own experience of special issues in Computer Science journals is that they are typically considered the same as regular issues. There are two types of special issues: one is (as username_2 notes) invited extended versions of the best papers from a conference. Another is just based on open calls for guest editors to propose special issues. Indexing services do not typically note that the paper was part of a special issue. I have not highlighted special issues in my CV.
Whether or not the review process is expedited depends on the guest editors. From my own sample set of journal papers, the fastest turnaround for reviews was on a special issue (three months for acceptance after one minor revision, six months to publication). However the slowest was likewise a special issue (eighteen months for acceptance after one major revision, over two years until publication).
The risk with a special issue (timewise) is that all the papers of the special issue have to be accepted so as to be published on slices of the same dead tree. So one paper that lags behind will slow down the rest of the papers from being finally published and indexed.
In terms of acceptance rates, again it can be risky. If your paper is on topic for a special issue that does not receive many other submissions, your chances of acceptance may be slightly higher since the guest editors will be anxious to fill out the special issue. Likewise if your paper was solicited (e.g., from a conference) it would stand to reason that you would have better chances since the editors have already expressed interest in publishing the paper. On the other hand, the space for a special issue is more rigidly bounded than the more elastic regular call (which spans multiple issues). Hence if you submit an unsolicited paper to a special issue that receives lots of other submissions, the special issue could be a lot more competitive than the regular issue.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/02 | 295 | 1,225 | <issue_start>username_0: When a professor goes on unpaid leave from her university, can she normally continue to use her grants to fund graduate students and postdocs? Or, do all grants "freeze" until the professor returns?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see any reason that a professor wouldn't be able to continue to use grants while on leave. In fact, I'm on unpaid leave from my home institution right now, and have been able to use my grants (for travel support for myself), so that's one data point.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The answer is "yes". For instance, I was on unpaid leave this academic year, and used my grant to support a graduate student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It depends on the breakdown of the grant. If there are students or staff who were hired to do the proposed work then I don't see any reason why they wouldn't continue being paid if they are continuing to work. The same goes for research related services and products. Sometimes sabbaticals are unpaid, but that doesn't mean that the work stops. Most grants are on a schedule, so PIs need to be making some form of progress on the project (whether or not they are getting paid from it).
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/02 | 688 | 2,871 | <issue_start>username_0: I am about to apply for a Master program in U.S. as I am about to graduate in Bachelor of Engineering. Though I heard that all my grades during all my academic life is taken into consideration (GPA). Here in Brazil is very common to have a huge gap between universities both in teaching level and avaliation process. So, holding a degree from a weak college may be much easier and thus helping you to get a higher GPA while a well-known college will be much more difficult and probably your grades will be lower. Even though you have a degree from the very best college and you do have a good knowledge of most subjects, the GPA from the person who came from the weak college may be higher.
This also extends to the outside world (comparison between GPA's from different countries). So, how is it really done in practice? Do I still hold a reasonable chance of getting into a nice college with not a so high GPA?<issue_comment>username_1: We have the same phenomenon in America, of course. All other things being equal, a 3.5 GPA from Princeton is much more impressive than a 4.0 from some random state university. The whole idea of GRE scores is to provide a metric that isn't confounded by the difficulty of different programs at different colleges in these ways. An additional difficulty you face is that your American evaluators won't know how good or bad your university is. This makes your GRE score doubly important.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can add a note in your statement or supplemental materials that "At my university, **\_\_\_\_**, the mean GPA was 3.5 with an sd of **\_ and in my department, the mean was xyz with an sd of \_\_**" so that it's clear that you are two sigmas above average, etc.
That assumes that you are above average. You should be able to get this info from the university registrar or office of institutional research.
But you should know that GPAs as a whole are deprecated in the application process. Individual grades (how well did you do in computer science, for example), some test scores in some disciplines, and your statement is much more important. As well as your letters of recommendation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In general 3.4 or 3.5+ is considered a good GPA, and you won't need to explain why it isn't higher to any reasonable admissions board no matter where you graduated from. Well know schools want a diverse grad student body, and will look to pull students from prestigious schools as well as smaller state schools and international schools.
No matter the GPA, I would apply a prestigious "dream" program or two and see what happens. This is especially true if you can line up excellent recommendations. While it might be a longer shot, $50 application fee isn't much, and you will not be left playing "what-if" with yourself.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/02 | 522 | 2,201 | <issue_start>username_0: Would it ever occur, historically, that a PhD student could not obtain his degree from a university due to the high costs of publishing his thesis, such that he would have to publish it at another university and get his degree there instead?<issue_comment>username_1: Emphatically, I don't see how this could happen in any subject in the U.S., nor, to my knowledge, in Europe, though I understand that there, in some cases, the actual work can be viewed as somewhat disconnected from a university.
But the point is that, in most subjects in the U.S., for example, one is not required to "publish" one's thesis in any fashion that would incur great expense. A handful of required copies, often printed nearly-for-free, and everything else is optional. *Not* "page costs" to journals, for example.
Further, in the U.S., it would be essentially impossible to "change universities" for any reason whatsoever, without re-doing many required activities, time-in-residency, and such. So whatever other advantages, there'd be something like a two-year delay, tuition, other things.
I really think that the question's hypotheses are iffy, possibly due to a misunderstanding of how things work. Certainly in the U.S., most likely in Europe, and I'd be surprised to hear that the questions implicit assumptions made sense anywhere in the world (though I'd certainly be interested to hear about such a thing).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When my parents were students in Germany (1930's and 40's) and probably for a long time before that, doctoral theses had to be published, either privately at the student's expense or in a journal. Because of the cost of private publication, students had a strong incentive to write a thesis good enough to be accepted by a journal. (And there were far fewer journals in those days.)
That information came from my parents. I don't think they mentioned how many copies would be required in the case of private publication, but I'd expect it would be enough copies for quite a few libraries. Journal publication was not associated with a university, so there was nothing to be gained by changing universities.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/02 | 313 | 1,133 | <issue_start>username_0: Is there anything like a directory or list of notable leading living figures based on subject area or research concentration?<issue_comment>username_1: I think the American Academy of Arts and Sciences might be a good place to start, at least if your focus is primarily on academics in the U.S. Two criticisms of the academy: it tends to be clique-y. Harvard is always going to have the most new fellows every year because they've already got the most fellows. Second, not everybody who deserves to be a member is one. They're really good about not giving memberships to people who *don't* deserve them (at least in my field, Philosophy), but there are some people who clearly should be members but aren't.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Another online resource (although last updated in 2008) is the list of ISI highly cited researchers at <http://highlycited.com/browse/>.
A google search returns also this "preliminary" [list](http://community.thomsonreuters.com/t5/InCites-Customer-Forum/Preliminary-publication-of-new-lists-of-Highly-Cited-Researchers/td-p/36685) from December 2013.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/02 | 486 | 2,114 | <issue_start>username_0: Should I modify my CV to emphasize certain traits before including it in my application for a master's degree or just include my usual professional CV?<issue_comment>username_1: An academic CV typically contains items you wouldn't want to list in a professional resume, such as a complete publishing history. Your resume may list as a bullet point that you are published, but they don't want 20 pages listing each publication, for instance. So, yes, your academic CV should be different.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it's a good idea.
It's a good idea to tailor your CV and/or resume to each position you apply for. Keep two copies of your CV:
* comprehensive (academic) version that has everything you've accomplished in academia and your profession, and
* short version that only contains pertinent information.
Some applications require you to submit a short (2 page or less CV). You might consider submitting both a long and short CV to your program.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A CV is very different from a professional resume. Your CV should emphasize those elements that pertain to the Master's program that you are applying to. For example, if you've been working in a biotech lab and are applying to a bio MS, then filter that up to the top.
Academic publications should also rank very highly -- but deprecate most non-academic publications such as novels, unless you are applying to an arts or literature related MA>
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: You should always modify your CV to emphasize certain traits. If a decision maker is sorting CVs, you want yours to be noticed. Citing specific and credible experience directly related to the program (or company for a general CV) to which you are applying, gives you a much better chance of getting noticed.
I personally re-work my CV for each opportunity I ever applying for. It takes 15 minutes, and can make a huge difference between where you will spend the next few years of your life.
Take the 15 minutes to rework your CV and make it specific to the desired opportunity.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/02 | 325 | 1,507 | <issue_start>username_0: Completely unrelated to my field (I do not work in languages) but I have written a small piece of software that proof reads my work for grammar and syntax. I'm interested in finding a few documents (ideally from a range of academic disciplines) that I can use to check my proof reading software.<issue_comment>username_1: I am unclear how this would differ from the grammar and spell check in a word processing software such as Microsoft Word; but presume it must differ or you wouldn't have created it! Perhaps as an initial trial for proof of concept, you could compare how yours competes with Word or other similar programs. This would provide some preliminary data with something most researchers are familiar with so can relate to it. If it compares well, it would also allow you to begin telling the story of your tool in that context, which is valuable in gathering support, and even funding if there are grants out there for this you may want to seek. Next, (possibly the beta stage for the new grant!) you could design a study using professional human (teachers, scientists, etc.) reviewers to compare against. The student papers suggested in another post may provide material for this.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you perform a search for "examples of bad student papers" or "examples of bad writing" you should find many examples. As an added bonus, many of the examples are then analyzed to provide suggestions for improvements.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/03 | 1,705 | 7,311 | <issue_start>username_0: Say you have a homework assignment and you're struggling with it. You ask a question about some portion of it on a site like physics.stackexchange or math.SE or stackoverflow.com, etc.
You then cite the help you received in your homework, as well as including a link to the post which helped you.
Given that you are removing the "dishonesty" part of the equation, is this still considered cheating? Or would a professor just not give you credit for the part which they feel you didn't do on your own?<issue_comment>username_1: This depends a great deal on the professor and course in question. Better to ask first if you plan to do this. Also, check the syllabus if there is a stated policy regarding help on homework.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 says, it depends on the professor.
What I have done in the past (when outside help was not expressly forbidden) was write that I obtained help from someone on the internet or the tutoring center because I was stuck. Then I would go to great lengths to explain the concept in such a way that the professor could see that I had gained mastery of the concept, and I put some work into the problem. Sometimes I would do additional problems too. Other times I would turn in problems I had worked several times, never arriving at a reasonable answer, and ask the professor for help. As I recall, I was always given credit for doing the work. Your mileage may vary.
There is a difference between asking for help and cheating, and I think it comes down to ones motivation. By doing the additional work, it should show that your goal was not to just get an answer to turn in, but to gain understanding of the concept.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think it is acceptable, but you might considering asking your professor first.
I have cited help from cross validated and stack overflow before with help on modeling in R. I tested my data for heteroskedasticity using a test (Breusch–Pagan)that the professor did not mention in class.I provided a link to the discussion in my assignment. I did not receive negative marks, in fact, he actually **complemented my work** in front of the class for "going the extra mile" and using alternate resources and finding a test he did not mention in lecture.
I think most professors want you to learn, it shouldn't matter how. Now if you post you data and someone does all the work for you, that is a different animal..
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I would say that it also depends on how you asked your question online. You should demonstrate in your homework that you have understood the procedure you're outlining as your answer, and then acknowledge that you received help online by providing the link where you asked your question. If I were the professor, I would click the link to see the question. If it were a question along the lines of "Here's a problem. What's the answer?", then I would give you no credit. If your question clearly showed some effort and understanding, and that you made sure you properly understood the answer(s), I would say it's ok. But most importantly of all (I think), you should admit in your question that you're working on a homework problem. That way people will try to *help* you rather than just give you the answer.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: *Asking* for help on the internet may be considered cheating, depending on how much help you got versus how much of your own research you did.
*Not crediting* help received on the internet may be considered even more unethical, verging on plagiarism.
If you're going to incorporate other folks' answers in your own, it's polite to acknowledge their contributions. At the very least.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: I think that the other answers do not quite answer the question that was asked. My answer is no, it is not cheating to turn in a homework assignment that cites a website like Math.SE. (This is assuming that you put quotation marks around any text that you copy; otherwise it could still be plagiarism.)
Of course it would be a good idea to ask the professor beforehand whether this is allowed, but failure to do so would not constitute cheating any more than attempting to turn in a homework assignment late without first determining whether this was allowed would constitute cheating. As long as the student makes it clear that the homework uses outside sources (or was turned in late,) the professor has the choice to accept the homework or not according to his or her policy.
Keep in mind that if citing outside sources in your homework is a violation of the professor's policy, then the penalty could be significant (just as for failing to turn in the homework on time.) However, it is still not something that the professor could reasonably report to the university administration as cheating, nor is it something that a reasonable university would consider to be cheating.
According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, the relevant definitions of "cheating" are
>
> 1a: to practice fraud or trickery
>
>
> 2b: to violate rules dishonestly.
>
>
>
In both definitions, dishonesty is a crucial element (and one which the OP has explicitly ruled out.) In fact cheating, plagiarism, falsification of data, *etc.*, are often collectively termed "academic dishonesty," making this condition explicit.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I think that there are two dimensions to this question:
```
- 1) Would it be considered cheating by your professor?
- 2) Should it be considered cheating?
```
The answer to 1) depends on your professor, university, curriculum, etc. If you are unsure, it's probably best to ask your professor. My personal experience is that lecturers actually like it when a student stuck with some homework exercise approaches them (as long as you show them that you actually thought about the problem and tried different things and don't just ask them for a solution). At my university most professors state at the beginning of the course how they expect the students to do the assignment - e.g., discussing it with colleagues is allowed (but you have to be able to explain your submitted solution in detail); using other sources than the course material is allowed (but you have to cite it properly), etc.
The answer to 2) very much depends on the personal code of ethics. I strongly think that it should not be considered cheating, as long as (i) the student can explain the solution in detail (ii) other material is cited correctly, and (iii) the student didn't use the solutions of other students from previous semesters. After all, the job of a student is to understand things - being able to ask the right questions at the right places is actually a very important skill.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: According to my understanding, this is not consider as cheating if student explore and search by the help of second tutor or professor. There are many websites offering the same services and provide your proper platform for online tutoring and homework help like udemy, tutorvista and StudentLance.com Actually, some time student could not get the teacher point of view and needs something different for better understanding especially in Mathematics.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/03 | 1,027 | 4,262 | <issue_start>username_0: I have recently completed a manuscript and I want it to submit to the arXiv. But there I find that there is an endorsement requirement. But since I am quite new in this field (and this is my first time wanting to submit to arXiv), I don't know how to find an endorser myself. I have mailed the *admin* also but in reply they also told me that *searching for an endorser is a responsibility of the author himself*. So, can anyone help me regarding the process as to how to find an endorser?<issue_comment>username_1: If you go to a paper on the arXiv (for example, this one of mine: <http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.7357>), at the bottom, there is a link that reads "Which authors of this paper are endorsers?" If you click through, you'll see something like
>
> username_1: Is registered as an author of this paper.
> Can endorse for math.AG, math.AT, math.CO, math.CT, math.GR, math.GT, math.QA, math.RA, math.RT, math.SG.
>
>
>
which means I can endorse submitters in algebraic geometry, algebraic topology, combinatorics, category theory, group theory, geometric topology, quantum algebra, rings & algebras, representation theory and symplectic geometry.
Presumably you know of some papers on the arXiv related to yours, so look at their authors. If you don't know of any, then maybe you should rethink whether the site is a good fit for you.
**EDIT:** I wanted to comment: I've now received several emails now based on this post asking for endorsement (maybe 1 a year or so), but *never* for fields I can actually endorse in. So, please, pay attention to that detail if you are going to send someone an email and ask for endorsement. Try looking at papers which are in the correct subject area.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The following order of steps seems reasonable to me:
1. Do you personally know any other researchers in the endorsement domain? Consider in particular former colleagues, former advisors, anybody with whom you communicated about your research.
1. Check whether any of these people already can endorse. To do so find an ArXiv publication by them and check the *Which authors of this paper are endorsers?* link at the bottom of the page.
2. Check whether any of these people may become an endorser by claiming ownership of their publications. If somebody co-authored Arxiv publications in the endorsement domain in the last five years, all they may need to do is claim ownership (which is comparably easy) to be able to endorse. Note that the number of required publications depends on the domain. (More details [here](https://arxiv.org/help/endorsement))
3. Check whether any of these people may become endorsers by publishing one or more existing peer-reviewed publication on the Arxiv. Again the publications must not be older than five years and they must be published in a journal whose copyright agreement allows this. Be aware that preparing papers for Arxiv publication might involve some time and work. Therefore this would be asking for more of a favour than just endorsement. On the other hand people who personally know you do not have to read your paper, so you might still cause less work than asking somebody else for endorsement.
2. Is there anybody with endorsement capabilities (see above) in the direct vicinity of your topic, i.e., somebody who might be particularly interested to read your work and can easily read it? Consider people whose work you cited or whom you would suggest as reviewers for your paper when submitting to a journal.
3. Finally, consider other people who can endorse in the respective domain. The closer they are to your subject, the better. Also you are probably more successful with lower-ranking academics as they are less flooded with requests and have more time on their hands.
In all cases, heed [the Arxiv’s guideline not to “email large numbers of potential endorsers at once”](https://arxiv.org/help/endorsement).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you are a registered student in a recognized university or institute, you can register in arXiv with your school email address, then you do not need endorsement. After submission, the moderator takes charge and decides if acknowledging your paper to publish.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/03 | 1,105 | 4,758 | <issue_start>username_0: *I tried to search in the previous Q/As, but I do not think my case falls in any of the previous entries.*
While looking for a certain topic in my field, I found two papers.
The first paper was authored by authors A, B, C, and D and published in some conference proceedings. The second paper was published in a journal in a year after by authors A, E, D, and C. That is, the second paper lost one author and gained a new author.
The two papers report the same research hypotheses, the same data collected, the same data analysis, the same results. That is, the "numbers" in the papers are the same (even the table contents).
The texts differ in a subtle way. The first paper is entitled "Studying topic T in the domain D". The second paper is entitled "Using Measurement Instrument M to measure T in the domain D". The second paper somehow avoids copy/pasting of the paragraphs from the first paper-they rewrote the sentences. It is a little bit longer than the first one. The authors actually spent some more words talking about measurement instrument M, which is taken from another discipline and it takes 3 minutes of Google Scholar searching for learning more about it. There is even a Wikipedia page about the instrument.
*I think* that this is a case of self-plagiarism. The second paper does not add anything useful to the first one. Additionally, *the second paper does not cite the first one*. This ringed a bell.
Please note that in my field, conferences are archived and are often considered more important than journals. Regardless of which venues are more important, both papers are formally considered publications.
Now, am I morally obliged to contact the editor of the journal where the second paper was published? This is not precisely a double publication, nor are the authors damaging me nor anybody else. Still, *I feel* they did something wrong. Should I instead live and let die?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a grey area in my opinion. Findings were published in proceedings, and then a journal. Technically, they should have cited themselves. If this had been two journal publications of the same work, I would argue you should bring it the editors attention. However, in this case, I'm not so sure..
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This is an interesting case that you cite. I think it falls somewhere between 'standard behavior' and 'clear misconduct' (though I am sure others will disagree). Some thoughts and facts:
* In Computer Science, even though both journals and conf proceedings count as papers, it is common accepted practice to submit extended versions of proceedings papers to journals. Typically, journals expect between 30% and 50% new content for such papers.
* Realistically, many journals (especially ones that are not exactly top quality) are not super-strict with what they consider "additional content". Describing only their methodology in more detail, without providing new insights or results, is certainly very little new contribution, but I am not sure if that already qualifies as misconduct.
* That one of the original authors was missing in the journal version is curious, but there *may* be reasons for that. Presumably, something a little shady has happened along the lines, but it is impossible to tell from the outside. One realistic possibility is that first author A has submitted the conf paper while at institution (1), with help from B and C. D was the supervisor and contributed little to nothing at all, but was added due to lab policy. Now, before submitting the journal version, A moved to institution (2), and has replaced lab head D with lab head E.
* What strikes me as *very*, *very* odd is that the journal paper does not make clear that it is an extension of an earlier conference paper by citing it (and saying so explicitly in the introduction). **This is the one thing that I certainly agree has a very bad smell to it**. If I receive such a "hidden" journal extension for review, it is an auto-reject for me.
>
> Now, am I morally obliged to contact the editor of the journal where the second paper was published? This is not precisely a double publication, nor are the authors damaging me nor anybody else. Still, I feel they did something wrong. Should I instead live and let die?
>
>
>
In summary, I would say the entire case certainly does not look good. That being said, I do not think that the case is blatant enough that you need to feel required to report to the journal editor. To be honest, even if you did, I think not much would happen. Likely, it is not a paper that the journal feels overly proud of, but I do not think that the case is bad enough to warrant formally retracting the paper.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/03 | 364 | 1,476 | <issue_start>username_0: I need to add a photo with some additional data drawn over it to my thesis in computer science. But the photo is large and I want to crop bottom half of it. But then it could be misleading, that there is a part of the image missing.
I will write it to the image description, but I want it to be obvious at first sight without reading the description. Is there some standard way to display that part of the figure is cropped?<issue_comment>username_1: Usually this is shown in biology/biochemistry journals by a solid border around the cropped image. This is fine to do only if, like you say, you are not removing meaningful data or hiding potential confounding results. If in doubt, ask your advisor.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: What kind of a figure is that? If it is a plot, and you want to zoom in to a particular range of it, then you may want to include full plot, then a zoomed in one. For the latter, you may mention that "plot of y from x{a to b}" in the caption. Plus, it would be much better if you say a few lines about why this particular range is important to be emphasized this way, in between your text.
This is not a symbolization, but an effective one to crop something out of a drawing. Thus, I'd prefer this if I were to read your thesis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: You can show it is cropped by having a lined/**dashed border** around the edges this will show that it is cropped.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/03 | 648 | 2,765 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm wondering whether there's any way to enter the academic world, do research at a university for a living, without an undergraduate degree, but instead with several years of experience in industry (the same field of the research).
This is actually my situation. After 8 years of software development in several professional environments, I want to enter the academic world. But I'm frustrated about having to go back to the basics.<issue_comment>username_1: Academia is a circle. Normally you need an outstanding work during your PhD and Post-PhD to get a university position. Without these, the possibility of getting an entry-level long-term (not tenure) position in the university is near to 0, let alone without an undergraduate degree.
But your situation won't prevent you from doing some serious research work yourself, in an UNUSUAL way. I'd suggest you give up seeking any normal recognition in the academia circle (like a long-term position or a title) until you've achieved something obviously awesome.You have to understand it's hard for people to view you as an exception unless they are surprised by what you've achieved. People would doubt, if this guy is awesome enough, then an undergraduate and PhD degree are like a snap for him, why he didn't just get the degree.
If you insist on not pursuing a degree and go for an usual way, that would be very hard. But maybe you are indeed an exception. Wish you good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm sure it varies by country, but in the US you would not have a good chance of getting an academic position.
However, you might find a position at an academic institution as an OPS (other personnel service), which is considered equivalent to a "contractor" position with no benefits and hourly wages.
I'm by no means a degree snob, but getting a degree is akin to getting a ticket to an event. If you don't have one, though shall not pass..
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It depends on what you consider *academia*. It is very unlikely that you will be able to become a professor. However, working in an industry research lab is always an option for computer scientists, for instance at Microsoft, IBM, Intel, or SAP. I do have collaborators at these places that are working in research in reasonably high positions, and which at least do not have a PhD. Whether there are people that do not have an undergrad degree either I am less sure, but it is not entirely inconceivable.
That being said, not having any degree will be a **huge** disadvantage during your entire career. I presume the number of doors you will find closed due to your background will significantly outnumber the opportunities where people do not care.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/04 | 1,731 | 7,226 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been teaching a humanities course at a higher education institution for about more than three years now. I am expected to get full tenure this year. Perhaps it is the only chair dedicated to my field in my country; it is certainly the only one in the subfield I teach. In other words, yes, I am the only professor who teaches that subject in the whole country, and the only professor totally dedicated to teaching and researching in the broader field of study. However, before I took the position, I was not specialized in the subfield I teach now. At the moment, my research and publications in field A are split between subfields A1 (in which I pursued research for my MA and PhD) and A2 (my new teaching position). To complicate things, I am in a multidisciplinary department in *another* field.
There is no available teaching position in my whole field (A) in the whole country in the foreseeable future (say, 10-15 years, unless a miracle happens). I could teach in related fields, and that is what I am doing (and plan to do in better conditions in the not-so-distant future).
The conditions under which I work might be described as both appalling and depressive. I know there are worse conditions in my country; and I know that I earn just as much as anyone else, but that is not the issue. The issue is having no perspective of future research; virtually no intellectual life; almost no contact with other faculty. There is only one room for more than 18 professors in the department; in it there are some 5 computers, 3 of which do not function. The library does not have the books I need for my basic, mandatory course -- in fact, it only has *one* textbook I use in class! I have to make do with articles and books from the Internet, when and if available. Grants and funding are virtually non-existent. I am in debt because of a conference in which a paper of mine was accepted. After that, I could not attend 3 international conferences because there was no funding.
So, in the end, my question is this: is there any way (attitudes, habits) to make academic life more bearable under these circumstances? Should I give up research and focus on teaching basic subjects, at the risk of fading into oblivion for not publishing?
A note:
I cannot just "run away", because, as I said before, there is no way I can find a similar job anywhere. I have been trying to busy my mind with other part-time activities, so as not to worry or stress too much, but that also leaves the feeling that my "real" job is useless, or worse: a fake.<issue_comment>username_1: This question is very specific to your circumstances so it is hard to respond with solid advice.
Your problem is not unique. By the time most faculty get tenure, they are extremely specialized in a single field or have huge sunk costs that make it very hard to move geographically or topically.
There is also the issue of post-tenure blues (or in your case, pre-post-tenure blues) which you should explore.
In any case, you should remember that your university is just one part of your intellectual and personal life. If you don't find your university stimulating, then you could be more active in your academic association's activities -- or be more active in your local community, etc.
Getting tenure is a perfect time to withdraw a little bit and discover new things. People generally expect the post-tenure blues so they won't be surprised to see less of you for a while.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you seem to have decided that you must accept the situation where you work, let me make some suggestions to make it less depressive. Some of these might not be good ones for you, so pick and choose those that appeal.
* the room. One room for 18 people? They don't seriously expect you to use it. What can you use instead? Do you meet students there, or write conference papers, or prepare coursework? Can you do those things somewhere more pleasant? Your own living room, a coffee shop, a park bench, a table in the library, a classroom that's empty more often than not? Do you have to sit in a crowded place jammed with broken things, or can you go somewhere nicer and get more done?
* no funding for conferences. Good for you managing to get a paper accepted and managing to get yourself there. That's probably one more conference than many of your peers. If there is someone who goes to more conferences than you, go and ask them how they do it. They will probably be happy to show you the tricks. In the same spirit, if you can get your own computer you won't care that the department can't provide decent ones.
* intellectual connection. The people in the depressing room are half of your peer set - the other half is the A1 and A2 people around the world. Find them! Follow them on Twitter, read their blogs, download their conference sessions and papers, email them with questions about something they published. Use the internet to forge ties with these people - you aren't a moonstruck teenager, you're their peer and they will be happy to hear from you. Who knows, this activity might even lead you out of your current situation some day, but more importantly it will help you grow and solve a pain point for you.
* the rest of your life. It's common to push everything else aside while chasing tenure. Do you have any hobbies or habits? Even just following a sports team? Try to ramp up that side of your existence, make some friends who don't work at the university, spend some time cooking or hiking or reading the latest celebrity gossip or watching that tv show everyone watches. Do some fun stuff, whatever fun is for you. Meet some people who can bring you joy.
* find a way to be more connected to the university as a whole, not just your department. Join a club or team that has profs from all faculties, or even better has faculty, staff and students from all faculties. Attend (if appropriate) religious activities that happen on campus. Go to the "our university day at X" events. Help with fundraising or political activities that will let you meet people from all over the campus. You're going to be here a long time right? Get to know the place and the people and weave it into your life.
* if the tenure you're expecting comes with a raise, start working out now what the consequences of that are. Will you be able to move to a nicer place? Get specific about looking for that place now. Imagine being able to have a lovely view, or a spare bedroom you can use as an office, or quieter, safer nights. The hard work you have put in will be bringing you benefits soon, start to think about those now.
Your department would be amazing if they handed you a bright sunny office, a delightful collection of peers who you enjoy talking to, plenty of important work, a steady stream of bright students, a fully-equipped working environment and a library that's the envy of everyone in your field. But very few places are really like that. So roll up your sleeves and get yourself what you need to excel, and fill your days with work and not-work that make you happy. Your department is never going to do that for you, but you can do it for yourself.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/04 | 1,863 | 8,293 | <issue_start>username_0: In short:
I have ported a package in another programming environment, and I want to write a paper of my ported package. Would it be considered cheating?
In details:
I have implemented a package in Python, that is modeled after an R package, which means my package has the design and APIs similar to original's.
The authors of original R package has published an official paper about the package on Journal of Statistical Software. And now I want to write a paper about my python package.
The point is, since the design and APIs are similar, the structure and content of the my paper would be similar to that of the original package's paper. For example, in the original paper, the authors explained what `Corpus` class is, and in my paper, I would explain that my python-version `Corpus` has similar attributes.
The biggest differences are brought by the environments and dependence, and some language-specific details.
So, would it be considered cheating if I write the paper of ported software? Of course, **the relative sections of my paper would include the comparisons between two packages and I would cite the original paper as appropriate as I can.**<issue_comment>username_1: Your paper must clearly delineate what is your original contribution and what is the same as, or based on, the previous package. So if you write about your Corpus class, for example, you must say that it is modeled after the R package's Corpus class. Otherwise it *is* "cheating," as you put it.
(It's also not clear to me that a straightforward port of an existing package would be considered a novel research contribution by most venues for publication. But that's an entirely different question.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Every scientific work is normally always based on some previous works.
These previous works must be cited. Cite paper, conference thesis or in the worst case website or "personal communication" of the original software saying that this is the initial version that you have ported. If you do this, it is completely honest to write the article.
I am not sure if just porting to another language brings enough scientific novelty but say porting the old forgotten 1965s piece of code in FORTRAN into C++ using object oriented design and some new advanced algorithms probably is.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Just to add to username_1's answer, the *Journal of Statistical Software* (JSS) does have precedence for publishing articles that are simply "ports" of other current software. For one example see *An SPSS R-Menu for Ordinal Factor Analysis* ([<NAME> & Pereira, 2012](http://www.jstatsoft.org/v46/i04)). This article doesn't rewrite the package in a new environment, but simply creates a set of GUI menu's in SPSS to call the R package - which is considerably less work. (This would be equivalent if you simply used [RPy](http://rpy.sourceforge.net/) to call the R libraries directly from Python.)
It is hard to say whether you could get such a paper published in the JSS or somewhere else. As a positive, I would imagine there is a large user base (not necessarily statisticians) that are using Python for text processing that could use such a library. On the downside as others have mentioned its original scientific contribution is questionable in light of its redundancies with the R package. (I personally would rather do such things in Python, but you need to remember the editors of JSS are statisticians who may not hold the same views.)
I would suggest you write the paper anyway and post it publicly online, as in a paper form it tends to be a gentler vignette to using the software than the doc's typically afford. Even if you can't get it published it still provides positive exposure for your work - and will still be cited if someone uses your library for academic work.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If it is considered cheating or not depends on the field of work. In my opinion the fact that you implemented their algorithms in a new language confirms that the algorithms work. Regarding originality, what you should do is offer more than a simple explanation of why you did this in the first place: for example, Python is a faster language than R, or the way it is implemented in Python offers significant speed improvements due to the fact that certain data structures are faster, and come up with some numbers, tables, and charts that prove this assertion. Even if the code is basically the same in pseudo-code, therefore no novel contribution, the additional information about why you did this porting and the data that confirms it is faster (at least in some cases), should be enough to warrant an original contribution. This original contribution is typically required in Computer Science papers (maybe not in Statistics papers), even though it's not required in Physics (you can publish papers that reproduce certain experiments and confirm them or not, or just add small twists to them).
After looking at your library, I see some things that are lacking in order to make it a good proposal: a good documentation, examples. It just says you can implement term-document-matrices with it. Please have a look at numpy or scipy or pandas packages how they present themselves to the pubic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: As long as you give proper credit (cite the previous work and make clear that your package is based on it), I do not see how publishing a paper could ever be construed as “cheating” on your part. The more likely question is *if* and *where* you could get it published. It is not dishonest to try and publish something even if you are not sure it is “worth“ a paper. It is the journal's (i.e. editor's / referees') job to judge that.
That said, in my field (physics), what you describe would likely *not* be considered “enough” for a paper. There are journals that publish papers which “only” introduce a new program package (Elsevier's [*Computer Physics Communications*](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/computer-physics-communications) comes to mind), but I do not know if they would accept a “translation“.
Again, all this would depend on your field, but in my environment a typical approach would be to include some applications of your program, and try to publish in a “standard” journal (i.e., one not focused on software).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: As username_5 says, assuming you cite your sources appropriately, no it would not be considered cheating, but it might be difficult to publish a paper about it.
In general, an article about porting an existing package to another language *might* be publishable (in some computer science-related journal) if you discuss the challenges you faced and how you overcame them, and perhaps made recommendations about enhancements that you think should be to the language. This would be of more interest if the language is still evolving. Python is a fairly mature language, so it might be more challenging to find an audience.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: I'd counter some of the other answers and say not only should it be fine, but there's a range of avenues you could explore for publication, *as long as* you consider the type of publication and journal carefully. (As well as following the advice already given about citing the original work thoroughly and highlighting differences in your implementation.)
Consider that many journals may have additional manuscript types that authors can submit instead of a traditional *Research Article*. They're often called *Technical Communications* or similar, and are intended to be short articles on a technical development that is novel and useful to research. This type of article might be best suited to your contribution.
The [Software Sustainability Institute](http://www.software.ac.uk/) also lists a [**whole range of journals appropriate for publishing scientific software**](http://www.software.ac.uk/resources/guides/which-journals-should-i-publish-my-software).
Software (including ports, new versions etc.) may not be "pure science", but it is certainly useful for researchers to know about, and I feel it should definitely be written about and published where appropriate. (And not just on github or on blogs!)
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/04 | 303 | 1,255 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to apply for a scholarship, but my TOEFL score is 81 and I think it is not good enough. Sending language proficiency scores is not compulsory for scholarship application but it is encouraged. I am indecisive to send it. What is your idea?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are not satisfied, take the test again to improve your score.
If not, a score of 81 is good enough to get you into many schools. However, some schools require higher scores. Is there a minimum TOEFL score for the school you're applying to?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, test scores are only used as the minimum requirement for the scholarship. High scores don't help but a score much below median would likely hurt you. If your application statement was well-written and your other materials (letters, grades) were good, I wouldn't worry. If the accompanying materials were weak, then you have much bigger things to worry about than your TOEFL.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Presumably winning the scholarship requires evidence of your fluency in English. If your test scores do not provide that evidence, you should *not* send them. (But then the rest of your application still has to provide that evidence.)
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/01 | 948 | 4,244 | <issue_start>username_0: Can anyone recommend an open source system for students to submit programming assignments? Ideally it would be something that would run on the web, do some level of testing on the server side, and provide feedback to the students based on testing.<issue_comment>username_1: I've never done this myself, but I think the following system could work using [GitHub](https://github.com/) and [Travis CI](https://travis-ci.org/):
* Create a repository for the homework where students can submit pull requests to.
* Make scripts to run and test the solution and put them on the repo.
* Students would then fork the repo, add their submission, and make a pull request.
* [Setup Travis CI](http://docs.travis-ci.com/user/getting-started/) to run the test scripts on the solutions. This will require some form of standardization for the commands to compile and run the solutions.
The nice thing about this system is that the pull request page on GitHub reports the status of the Travis CI run. You can then leave comments for the students and they can iterate until Travis gives them the green light.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The open-source web program [CMS (Contest Management System)](https://cms-dev.github.io/) was created by people at my university (CS institute, university of Pisa). [Screenshots here](https://cms-dev.github.io/screenshots.html).
It has been used also in the international informatics Olympiad and several other international programming contests, so it is mature and well tested.
It is in use since a few years in the [undergraduate course on Algorithms](http://dijkstra.di.unipi.it/#/lessons) in our CS degree. It allows students to submit their source code online, where it is executed in a sandboxed environment and scored automatically on the basis of some test cases. It supports out of the box C, C++, Java, Python, Pascal, PHP, and other languages can be added (although I don't know how easy it is).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Github classroom provides a free place to make and submit assignments and you can set up autograding. One thing is that in github with github actions you can also build tests right into the push process. However, I have seen some people on the forums for teachers say that they run out of free processing time during busy parts of the semester.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: I can strongly recommend [PASS](https://www.dickimaw-books.com/software/pass/) (Programming Assignment Submission System), which was written by <NAME> to support my teaching on first and second year programming modules (Java and C++). It formats the code into a .pdf document using LaTeX, but it also compiles and executes the program and adds the compiler messages and output to the .pdf file (and any output files that the program is supposed to produce). The .pdf file includes an embedded .zip file containing the code in a standardised format in case further inspection/testing is required. The requirements for each assessment are provided in an XML file for each module that specified expected files, input datafiles etc. We have done some experimentation with automated testing, the simplest approach would be to include a Makefile and test harness in the metadata and PASS can add the output of the test harness. However, for the modules I teach I am mostly interested in the structural side of the program design and whether the program is maintainable, so I tend just to have output specifications that show the program basically works and then mark by annotating the .pdf file on my ipad.
We have been using PASS for quite a while at my institution and it has saved a lot of unnecessary admin and hassle. The major benefit is that there is a well-defined target environment (eliminating the "well it works on my computer" complaint) and the students get to see exactly the output of the program as I see it when it is marked. Unfortunately students have to formally submit the .pdf file via BlackBoard at my institution, but another useful feature of PASS is that it provides a reliable independent time-stamp that can be used to determine whether an academic advantage has been gained by a late/failed BlackBoard submission.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/04 | 1,233 | 5,315 | <issue_start>username_0: I started a PhD program few years ago. My first PhD supervisor decided he wanted to quit university and stopped supervising PhDs (he was 70 years old). I lost about a year trying to convince this supervisor to continue, and another year trying to find another supervisor when he quit (he pretty much left all his PhD students in the air).
I transferred to another university, but nobody counts the missing years and I should finish in few months. The condition put by my new supervisor in order to be allowed to present my thesis was to come up with at least 2 new contributions in addition to my previous contributions (I have published some papers with some contributions, but many of them were group research and this supervisor said that only 2 or 3 of them really count as mine).
Now the problem is that during the last year I have worked a lot both at the university and at the PhD, but only during last weeks I started to have some ideas about what these new potential contributions could be. Considering the lack of time, there is a high chance that I won't finish on time (due to the regulations from this country you have to finish in 5 years, nobody takes into account the fact that you lost several years with other problems like replacing your PhD supervisor).
I'm not a lazy person, but first time I really had no luck, and with the second supervisor it took me a lot of time to play in the league he wanted ... Basically all articles discussed with him about Machine Learning were from MIT, Carnegie-Mellon, etc. Essentially I had to spend about a year and a half to get my knowledge to the level where I can design new algorithms or create new things that would get accepted to top journals reviewed by people from these institutions.
Of course, I can register again for the PhD, take the exams again, and present my contributions in a new thesis. The problem is when I will add all these years it will result a large interval for Europe: 7-8 years, instead of 4-5 years. My question is this: how will a potential future employer from both Academia or Private Company look at this time interval? Is it ok to try 2-3 times to finish your PhD? Will the fact that it took to long finish the PhD affect my career?<issue_comment>username_1: The fundamental issue here is that your first advisor left academia altogether—by retiring before his students were done. This is an awful thing to do to the people one is supervising—leaving them completely in the lurch in such a manner is **unacceptable behavior.** The advisor should not have taken on new students if he was planning on retiring.
As a result of this, it is obvious that some allowances for this will need to be made. The way to signal this is through your CV: list *both* advisors, including the dates for which you worked with them. If your first advisor is well-known enough, then this will automatically clue in others about what happened.
Overall, though, so long as the time required isn't too unreasonable for your discipline, an extended stay in graduate school isn't problematic. However, if you have mitigating circumstances such as these, it makes such problems a lot easier to overlook.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: At least twice is absolutely for sure normal, but probably also more is normal, even if there are no any obvious reasons. And in your case the reasons are.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: What country are you in? I'm also from Europe (France) and with a letter of motivation, special circumstances, and proof that you will be funded, it's possible to do more years, although I'm not sure what the limit is (may depend on the institution).
I'm in Japan right now, and here it's possible to present your thesis at a later time, even though officially you may be on leave from the University (this allows you to skip paying tuition for many more years, which can be helpful, as tuition is several times more expensive than in Europe).
It may depend not only on the country but also on the specific University you are enrolled at. I don't recommend asking the administration yourself, as they may or may not be very receptive to your specific case. I suggest your advisor inquires for you, and if that's not possible, you can try asking for an appointment with the head of your department or doctoral school.
[edit] To answer the OP's final question, I think you can list both advisors on your resume, with the word "retired" next to the first one. I know quite a few people with successful careers in academia who took 5+ years to complete their PhD, and being 30+ years old upon graduation is not unheard of, even in the hard sciences. The race starts after you complete your degree.
PS/ saying that your first advisor unexpectedly retired in the middle of your degree would be enough to get the message through, even during an interview. You could even try throwing in some positive comments, something like, sure it took you longer but how it was actually an opportunity to gain high-level working knowledge of algorithms. :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I am from Europe. Here 5-7 years for finishing a PhD is quite normal if you are working under a full-time work contract with your professor. I don't think it's a problem.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/04 | 687 | 2,882 | <issue_start>username_0: Everybody I have met in academia uses recently-published journals entirely through electronic means. They may print out articles for their own use, but they will not receive printed subscriptions.
Does *anybody* receive modern journals in printed form nowadays? If so, who and why?<issue_comment>username_1: Very few individuals receive printed copies of journals anymore, but many institutions pay for print copies as well as online access. In part, I suspect this is because many publishers make this part of the sold "package." However, an additional motivation for keeping a print copy is that most publishers do not allow for "archival" downloading—libraries cannot maintain their own copy of the publishers' website. Thus, if anything happens to the website, the institute would temporarily or permanently lose all access to the information if only an online subscription existed.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I do.
I have print subscriptions to three major journals in my field, all through optional add-ons to society memberships.
I do so for three reasons:
* It forces me to read and interact with the literature. Online tables of contents, journal RSS feeds etc. can be ignored because another staff meeting is coming up, I really should submit an abstract, etc. The arrival of a printed journal gives me an excuse once a month/quarter/every two weeks etc. to sit down and engage with my field.
* I read articles I would not otherwise read. General society journals have papers in areas that are not strictly my field. Sometimes, I read these, because I know the authors, liked a particular plot while I was flipping through, or because it pings my curiousity. I *rarely* read PDF papers outside my field.
* Journals are more durable than print-and-staple publications. They live in my bag. I read them at lunch. I read them in the bathroom. I read them at the gym. I do things to them that I wouldn't dare do to either an iPad or other electronic reader or a few flimsy pieces of copier paper.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I wish all questions here were yes/no questions.
Answers:
1. Yes.
2. Most of my colleagues.
3. Presumably for the same reason that most people prefer physical books to e-books when they read. It's also much quicker and easier to browse through the volumes of a journal on your bookshelf than to do so online.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: My library receives print copies of about 300 journals; I do browse new issues almost daily, and it has happened more than once that I found papers that did not reached me through other means (arXiv, bibliographical searches, toc alerts, etc.)
However, in my department (pure maths) we seem to be little more than two people doing this. The other one is retired. I might be a romantic when it comes to scientific journals.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/04 | 1,197 | 5,232 | <issue_start>username_0: I was wondering what I should do in this situation as an undergraduate student:
About a month ago, I applied for and did not get into a program that allows first-year students to work on research projects that professors put forward, with the intention of introducing students to research, which included a research stipend, housing, etc.
I was very interested in the professors topic of research, and was wondering if it would be okay for me to ask the professor for the opportunity to work with him essentially as an unpaid intern, as I would really like the opportunity to learn more about the topic.
Would he view this attempt to do research under him as desperate? Or would he appreciate the opportunity to have an extra research assistant?
I know that the answer would depend on the professor himself, and on my relationship with him, but how do professors in general feel about students coming up to them and asking to be a part of their research?<issue_comment>username_1: Personally, I am **always** happy to talk about possibilities for working in my research group with a student who's interested in the group. The challenge is that most first-year students might not have the background to understand what's going on in the research, so they end up being more "technicians" than researchers.
So I don't think it's a problem for you to discuss the possibility of doing the "internship"; your university may even offer an opportunity to get course credit for it as an "independent study." However, you should be prepared for the possibility that the professor feels you're not quite ready for the work—but he may definitely suggest ways to overcome that deficit.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Absolutely, with no qualifications, approach the researcher and ask what it would take to do research in his/her lab. As a first-year undergraduate student, it's very likely that you don't have the knowledge to contribute to the projects. So approach humbly, asking what you can do to prepare yourself. Ask for suggestions for a review paper or a few research reports that would bring you up to speed. Ask if you can attend lab meetings as a fly-on-the-wall to absorb the controversies and decisions being made day-by-day. The very worst possible case is that you're told, "no." If so, you're already there. Next worst is that you invest your time and get only an education out of it. That's not so bad. You'll be positioned very very well for next year.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: There are basically two strategies to get a research opportunity in university. By
excellence or by motivation. For both situations, you have to find a way to show your excellence or your motivation to the professor. Working as an intern for him is a good idea. It gives the professor an opportunity to know more about you. If you are excellent enough, the professor will ask you about your plan in the future (to see if you're going to pursuit a PhD, probably with him), show his interest in you or even offer you research position in this team.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: It is worth noting that etiquette in approaching a professor to discuss research opportunities can vary by institution. At the university I currently attend it is considered **extremely** poor form to approach a professor out of the blue and ask them if they have any opportunities for research. This includes professors you are taking a course with -- rather, it is expected that you will work with your advisor to go through established channels to find research opportunities.
At my undergraduate institution this was not the case, and reaching out to professors to discuss research opportunities was strongly encouraged. I suggest discussing this with your academic advisor and seeing what he/she thinks just to be on the safe side.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Here's another option: *email or talk to one of the professor's graduate students*. By working with the graduate student, you'll be working with the professor anyway.
For context: I'm a computer science PhD student at a large United States research university. At my school, most professors are bombarded with emails and requests from undergraduates (in addition to, of course, PhD and masters students, and postdocs). Indeed, my PhD advisor told me that he/she gets about one email *each day* from an undergrad requesting research opportunities.
I've worked with roughly 20 undergraduate researchers to some extent. About half of them got in our lab by emailing PhD students, who then recommended him/her to the professor if the undergraduate's resume exceeded a certain bar. The other half emailed the professor directly, but often in those cases, the professor ended up forwarding the undergrad's resume to the PhD students. While I don't have hard statistics on what this is like throughout my entire department (let alone university) I think this is a common strategy that students pursue, and the one I would begin with if I were back in my undergraduate days.
As another positive note, sometimes graduate students' research websites are more up to date than those of the professor's!
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/05 | 595 | 2,455 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it plagiarism if I copy several paragraphs from another's source (let's say a CS paper) into my work and then footnote `Source: ...`, for example, as background information?<issue_comment>username_1: If you copy something verbatim, you are required to put quotations mark around it, and also cite where the quotation came from. Anything less could be construed as plagiarism.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: So long as it is *obvious* that it is another's work then it is not plagarism. However, depending on the amount copied and a lot of other factors, it may be a copyright violation, and it may break other rules of your school/journal/whatever. Or simply be marked down by your examiners/reviewers, unless there's a good reason for such extensive quotation.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The original author owns two things:
1. the ideas in their work, and
2. the language they used to convey those ideas.
Plagiarism occurs when you use either without proper attribution. If you paraphrase another author's ideas in your own words (i.e., use #1 only) then you need a citation. If you copy verbatim another author's words (i.e., use #1 and #2) then you need to put the copied text in quotes and include a citation.
Generally if you are quoting the original author's language then the *way* that the author communicated their ideas is part of the argument you are making in your article. If this is not the case then it is better to paraphrase, since your reader will be expecting some discussion of the original author's language and changes in tone can be distracting to the reader.
In your specific case, it sounds like paraphrasing would be more appropriate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Another thing to consider, even if you correctly quote and cite the source, it may still be considered a form of plagiarism if
1) A signification portion of the paper is made up of quotes (especially 1 quote).
2) There is no original research presented in the paper.
3) If the quote itself provides significant argument towards your point, and you fail to add your own supporting arguments.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Copying verbatim a paragraph or more of research is considered plagiarism. When more than two words in a row are used from the source that is considered plagiarism. It probably would be better to change it up by extensively paraphrasing through synonyms, etc.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/05/05 | 1,116 | 4,366 | <issue_start>username_0: I am planning on applying to a Master's degree program (in Canada, if it matters) and I've noticed that there seems to be quite a few grade cut-offs for applications. I've [read](https://www.quora.com/Graduate-School-Admissions/If-I-contact-a-professor-for-research-graduate-school-and-he-asks-for-my-resume-transcript-what-should-I-do-if-my-transcript-is-embarrassing) [elsewhere](https://www.quora.com/Graduate-School-Admissions/If-I-have-good-research-projects-and-publications-but-a-low-GPA-will-top-grad-schools-accept-me) [that](http://3dpancakes.typepad.com/ernie/2005/03/re_phd_with_low.html) these are not set in stone, however, how important are they compared to other criteria such as references and research?
In my opinion, which I have no proof for, it seems almost absurd to put an emphasis on grades without knowing a class average or having a detailed knowledge of the course when examining a grade. However, this is my personal biased opinion, so I would like to see the rationale behind the opposite view. One argument I have heard is that school build up a database of GPAs from a certain school and classes (from the comments to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/802/how-to-assess-the-chance-to-get-accepted-to-a-masters-program-in-the-united-sta)), so I can see how this might be considered mildly accurate.
This is similar to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/10314/phd-admissions-importance-research-vs-grades), consequently if the response is similar, I will not be surprised. I'm applying to a researched focused engineering program, but a developed answer with respect to multiple faculties and multiple types of programs would be ideal.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, admissions to master's degree programs are quite different than PhD admissions. Doctoral programs are research programs, and therefore promise as a researcher is perhaps the most important criterion of all to satisfy.
However, at the master's level, this may or may not be the case—many master's programs feature no research (purely coursework), or only a small amount of research (for instance, a one-semester research project, or a lab course, or something similar). In such cases, research is not emphasized nearly as much, and undergraduate track record takes on greater significance. Similarly, "terminal master's" programs—ones that represent "end degrees" in their own right—will likely have less of a research background focus than degrees that are intended to prepare a student for doctoral studies.
The other issue is the style of admissions: for "US-style" admissions, research will likely be more important than it is in "European-style" admissions, where research plays essentially no role at all in admissions to master's programs (although research is a prerequisite for PhD studies!).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Grades are important, but not the only thing taken into consideration. It varies from school to school and field to field. Three things to take into consideration (IMO).
* Field:
In engineering, grades might have more weight or importance. In other
fields, they may not be as important, but still taken into
consideration.
* Competitiveness:
It may depend more on how competitive the school or department is. If the school/department is hurting for students, then they may take anyone. If they have a surplus of applications, they may be very selective.
I think it's fair to say that if you have a D average you will not be as competitive as someone with an A average in a highly competitive program.
* Supporting material:
Typically, you will need to write a SOP (statement of purpose), have 3 letters of support from undergraduate supervisors/mentors/instructors, and include a resume or CV. In my opinion, having a strong letter of support from 3 professors and a solid resume and/or CV is more important than grades, at least in my field. Now if you have crap grades, that won't look good and you will likely have a hard time finding professors to vouch for you.
If you're grades are in doubt, I suggest you write a really strong SOP (have someone (career resource center or a professor) look it over, and create a really nice looking resume. Find advisers who will write strong letters of recommendation.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/05 | 758 | 3,400 | <issue_start>username_0: Some time ago I contacted a professor at another university and, after some discussions, he agreed to supervise me and told me to make a formal application to the department. Unfortunately, the admission committee rejected my application. I asked that professor why, and he said he had no idea and I don't know if he tried to follow my application.
I am sure I meet the program's minimum requirements, submitted all necessary documents and even indicated that professor as a supervisor in a dedicated field. I would like to ask if I can do something, like making an appeal (although the department has no such thing), or keeping on sending email to the professor? Is this situation common?<issue_comment>username_1: No PhD program that I am aware of guarantees admission to every candidate who meets the minimum requirements for admission. Moreover, an agreement to supervise you is not a guarantee of admission, either.
Most likely what happened is the usual in such circumstances—there were enough other qualified candidates that the admissions committee did not choose to extend you an offer. I'm afraid that there's not really much you can do here. Writing the professor will be a waste of your time, and filing an appeal isn't likely to get you anywhere, either.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One of the possibility is that the professor is not that keen on having you on board. Otherwise, as far as I know, professors have some influence on the selection process if he really needs you to carry out his project and you meet the minimal requirements.
In this case, it makes no difference you send an SOS to the professor.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Selection can sometimes be very political. I sat in on a board meeting recently while selection was being discussed. I was really surprised at the "selection process". The selection committee is not allowed to use a quantitative assessment, it has to be qualitative, which seemed absurd to me, especially considering grades and GRE scores are quantitative measures. Additionally, although my department is comprised of a majority of international students, none of them count as minorities, because they're not US citizens. Taking that into consideration, we have a very low minority student body (in this case, minority is anyone that is not a white male). Therefore, our department has received less funding from the college (which also seemed absurd, if not discrimination)... to increase funding from the college, we need more minority students. So I was not surprised when the minority students were accepted into the program.
I don't believe you have many options. I would at least follow up with the professor, he may know of other opportunities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Try again next time
-------------------
Technically, you can try various things right now. In practice, most of those things will simply harm your chances of admission in the next session, so IMHO you shouldn't do anything about this particular rejection.
Instead, work on making sure that your application is more attractive next time, keep in touch with that professor, work on research in your spare time, look for relevant seminars/workshops/etc there that are open to general public and not only to students, perhaps study some relevant topics in MOOCs like Coursera.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/05 | 739 | 3,256 | <issue_start>username_0: How should one go about trying to teach students to "unlearn" a previous skill/principle they believe is correct but is actually wrong?
Hypothetically speaking as a really basic situation, if your student was adamant that the formula for the area of a rectangle is 2\*l + 2\*w, even though you tried to explain that is instead the formula for the perimeter, and explained to them the definition of area vs. perimeter, but they are overly confident that they are right, how can you gently guide them to the right direction? What is best practice?<issue_comment>username_1: No PhD program that I am aware of guarantees admission to every candidate who meets the minimum requirements for admission. Moreover, an agreement to supervise you is not a guarantee of admission, either.
Most likely what happened is the usual in such circumstances—there were enough other qualified candidates that the admissions committee did not choose to extend you an offer. I'm afraid that there's not really much you can do here. Writing the professor will be a waste of your time, and filing an appeal isn't likely to get you anywhere, either.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: One of the possibility is that the professor is not that keen on having you on board. Otherwise, as far as I know, professors have some influence on the selection process if he really needs you to carry out his project and you meet the minimal requirements.
In this case, it makes no difference you send an SOS to the professor.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Selection can sometimes be very political. I sat in on a board meeting recently while selection was being discussed. I was really surprised at the "selection process". The selection committee is not allowed to use a quantitative assessment, it has to be qualitative, which seemed absurd to me, especially considering grades and GRE scores are quantitative measures. Additionally, although my department is comprised of a majority of international students, none of them count as minorities, because they're not US citizens. Taking that into consideration, we have a very low minority student body (in this case, minority is anyone that is not a white male). Therefore, our department has received less funding from the college (which also seemed absurd, if not discrimination)... to increase funding from the college, we need more minority students. So I was not surprised when the minority students were accepted into the program.
I don't believe you have many options. I would at least follow up with the professor, he may know of other opportunities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Try again next time
-------------------
Technically, you can try various things right now. In practice, most of those things will simply harm your chances of admission in the next session, so IMHO you shouldn't do anything about this particular rejection.
Instead, work on making sure that your application is more attractive next time, keep in touch with that professor, work on research in your spare time, look for relevant seminars/workshops/etc there that are open to general public and not only to students, perhaps study some relevant topics in MOOCs like Coursera.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/05 | 623 | 2,316 | <issue_start>username_0: I was wondering whether existed some software that would take as input a text file bibliography (for instance a bib file if you use bibtex), and that run it through google scholar (or any other database), so that it can return a uniformized bibliography.
As an example, suppose you have two items from the same conference
```
@inproceedings{mpi,
author = {Surname1 Name1 and Surname2 Name2},
title = {Some nice work},
booktitle = {Editor of the Name of Conference},
year = {2004},
}
```
and
```
@inproceedings{RRnrj,
author = {Name3 S. and Name4 S.},
title = {Some nice work},
booktitle = {Name of Conference (Acronym)},
year = {2020},
publisher = {Editor},
}
```
and you would want it to return:
```
@inproceedings{mpi,
author = {Surname1 Name1 and Surname2 Name2},
title = {Some nice work},
booktitle = {Name of Conference (Acronym)},
year = {2004},
publisher = {Editor},
}
```
and
```
@inproceedings{RRnrj,
author = {Surname3 Name3 and Surname4 Name4},
title = {Some nice work},
booktitle = {Name of Conference (Acronym)},
year = {2020},
publisher = {Editor},
}
```
(or whatever is the norm on the database).<issue_comment>username_1: I think what you are looking for would be a [reference manager](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_reference_management_software). There are a number of commercial and free software available, many of which also support BibTeX files. I'm not sure what you mean precisely by "uniformized," but I take that to mean that some style guide was applied to them (since only the "Publisher" field was added to reference "mpi" in your desired output). Many of those software programs will also allow you to choose a particular style of citation, and export the references to a BibTex file again.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: If you have the DOI codes, the best thing is to use the API and get the references yourself:
```
curl -LH "Accept: text/bibliography; style=bibtex" http://dx.doi.org/[DOI code]
```
If you have them (and you should, for any modern article), parsing the bib to get them and getting the data can be done in a very simple script.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/05 | 1,389 | 6,109 | <issue_start>username_0: I failed to complete my research project (undergraduate) in the time I said I would, because of overconfidence. It seemed like a quite simple project to both me and my advisor initially considering that it was very similar to a project another student of his had worked on, however for some reason (much of the blame is my own) I ran into countless difficulties and now I will not finish in time. How do I get past something like this? I do not know how to continue after such disappointment.
As an addendum: How does one develop an "aptitude" for research? I would like to go to graduate school, but a lot of the advice hinges on whether one not only enjoys but has an "aptitude" for research. Based on my minimal accomplishments this year, it seems clear that I do not currently have an aptitude for research. Can I ever develop such an aptitude?
Edit: I do not feel that this question is a duplicate. This is about UNDERGRADUATE research. Undergraduates have a very different situation - I cannot simply take another week and work on it as the semester will end soon, after which I will undertake an internship, and I have commitments to my courses and other things.
Also, this is not a case of me getting data that don't support my hypothesis - I do not have any data. Or rather, I have data, but it is meaningless until I finish my current project. Which I was supposed to do today.<issue_comment>username_1: “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”
― <NAME>
You should not let one failure hold you back. I would also like to add that there is a difference between having a general interest or liking in something (i.e. research) and being passionate about it. In grad school (especially at the PhD level) you need to be passionate about your work to be successful. You have to look in the mirror and ask yourself if you truly enjoy doing research. If the answer is yes, then pursue it with vigor.
Let this set back be a learning experience, and grow from it. Just remember, "if you're not failing, you're not trying."
I could go on and on...
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think one of the most important things you learn as a PhD student (or Master's) is to deal with research that doesn't quite pan out as you'd expected. Because guess what, that's not the exception. That almost always happens. If research always conformed to our expectations, we wouldn't need to do it.
The trick is to learn to look at it with fresh eyes. **The main problem is not that the research did not conclude as you had hoped, the main problem is that you're letting it affect your confidence**. Find a new perspective. It may not have yielded what you thought it did, but you did the work and you found stuff out. Now figure out how to present it:
* Forget about the original expectations. Those tend to make for bad science. Look at your research so far, and pick out what's interesting, and why it's interesting. Let go of the original story.
* The fact that it was more difficult than it looked is a good indicator that you may have found out interesting things. Don't think of them as difficulties you created for yourself, think of them as results.
* What would you tell someone starting this research tomorrow?
* What's the shortest route to a publishable result? You may have learned many interesting things, but you need to find a single compelling result that you can explain in an abstract. Once you have that, you can fit all the stuff you learned into the story of that result.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Regarding your first question: undergraduate research projects are a great way to experience some aspects of doing research, but deadlines are one way in which they differ from research in graduate school or beyond. So you shouldn't worry about the mere fact of not meeting your deadline. I can tell you that I set deadlines for myself all the time, and they always seem easily achievable, but then I often don't actually achieve them. Also I often think I should be able to prove some result in a certain amount of time, but then for whatever reason I'm not able to. So I turn that around and decide that my intuition must have been wrong, and in fact the result is more difficult than I expected; and I see this as progress since I've advanced my understanding, and I further try to identify what was the specific reason why my intuition was wrong.
Also, one great feature of the long-term research that is done in graduate school or beyond is that there is lots of flexibility to change the direction of a project mid-stream, or to pause the work on a project and finish a side project, or to split a large project into several papers, or to decide at a certain moment that the work has reached a stage where it's natural to publish what you've done so far, even though you'll keep working on it further. This type of flexibility is missing in a short-term project like one typically does in undergraduate research.
Regarding your second question about developing an aptitude for research: keep in mind that there are many different types of research projects, which rely on different types of talents. For instance, some people are great at big-picture thinking, some people are great at clever solutions to tricky questions, some people have the patience to do enormous amounts of seemingly routine things which put together can yield great results, and so on. The main thing you should strive for is to find some area of your subject, and some way of working on that area, which you love to do and which matches your particular talents. Don't get discouraged about not having great success in one particular project -- maybe that project just wasn't the right fit for your particular skills. I can tell you that one of the keys to "aptitude for research" is to have a kind of psychological toughness that enables you to keep working on a problem for a long time, despite setbacks. If you love what you do, and you have that type of resolve, then good things will happen.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/05 | 566 | 2,573 | <issue_start>username_0: I am pursuing a PhD (computer science) from one of the reputed Indian universities. I have prepared some white papers for publication in coming journals. I prepared these papers by myself. I referred various links and study guides, books etc.
After getting these papers published, I received one notice from the editorial staff of publication that I have violated the contents/copyright law. They provided me some contents and images (they said violated areas).
I am surprised because I prepared all the things by myself. I have already mentioned the referred links, books etc. in the publication.
How can I avoid content violation in my own written material?<issue_comment>username_1: For what I read in one comment you draw also the images, but still if the figures appears somewhere else you should reference them. For example put something like:
Figure 1: Description... (based/largely based in Professor X)
Try to make those changes.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Copyright protects not only the original content itself but also anything which is clearly derived from the original content. That is why plagiarism doesn’t depend on whether you copied, retyped, or minorly reworded.
If you created a figure using a figure that somebody else drew as a template, then it does not matter if there are minor differences between your figure and their figure. Because your creation is closely deirved from their creation, then it is still their copyright, from both a moral and legal perspective (personally, as a scientist I find the moral perspective more compelling than the legal).
If you had simply created a figure from scratch, then it is highly unlikely that it would appear closely similar to another person’s figure – there are simply too many possible personal choices in how to diagram the same ideas, even for fairly simple ideas.
At this point, there are two ways to proceed (assuming that the rest of your content is intellectually honest):
1. Create your own diagrams from scratch with significantly different *content,* reflecting the different ways in which you think about the area.
2. Obtain rights permissions from the original publisher, and include “(figure adapted from […])” in your paper. Many publishers have an automated online method for obtaining fragment reuse rights, which can then be sent to the publisher handling your paper. If the original figure was posted in a free-reuse medium (e.g., a US or UK government report), then you may not have to do formal obtaining of rights.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/06 | 1,670 | 7,055 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate writing a paper for a philosophy course in logic. My paper is exploring a relationship between Leibniz' logic and graph theory. In writing the paper, I've found some material in Leibniz' work on combinatorics that (to me) strongly resembles graph theory. However, I can't find anything that seriously discusses Leibniz in relation to the history of graph theory --- everything seems to start with Euler. (Most read "Leibniz made early contributions to topology. Later on, Euler developed graph theory" and continue onward from there)
I'd like to be able to say "I looked around on Google scholar, etc, and I couldn't find anything about this topic" by way of suggesting "It's possible that the midterm paper that you're reading is bumping up against an original area of research."
What kind of evidence is appropriate in this situation? Would providing something like the number of results of a search on Google scholar be worthwhile? In general, is there a technique to demonstrate the absence of literature about a certain topic?<issue_comment>username_1: *(disclaimer - I come from computer science, and the little I know about conventions in philosophy is from hearsay)*
>
> I'd like to be able to say "I looked around on Google scholar, etc, and I couldn't find anything about this topic"
>
>
>
The usual expression for this kind of thing in my field is "to the best of our knowledge, this topic/idea has so far not been considered in literature". It tells the reader that you think that nobody has published this idea yet, but clearly the *absence* of existing literature is something very difficult to be sure about. Hence the rather defensive formulation.
>
> In general, is there a technique to demonstrate the absence of literature about a certain topic?
>
>
>
Nope. How would you do that? It's a bit like proving a hypothesis - you can only find counterexamples (papers that *do* cover the topic), but you cannot prove that in some weird journal nobody reads somebody has expressed your thoughts already.
>
> What kind of evidence is appropriate in this situation? Would providing something like the number of results of a search on Google scholar be worthwhile?
>
>
>
The accepted convention in my field is to explain the methodology of how you searched for literature (you had a defined methodology, right?), and then explain / list / discuss what you found. Be specific - which keywords did you use and why? Why Google Scholar and not something else? Can you be sure that all papers that you would expect to be relevant are indexed by Scholar (some of those should be pretty old, long before the Internet was a thing)? Did you also check your library for dead-tree literature? Number of results and or similar metrics seem pretty much useless to me and would likely not improve your paper in any way.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *The most relevant works we found are* (cite the publication where the water first have been mentioned when your publication is about the invention of the submarine) *however they* (and say why actually not **too** relevant).
This will not protect from the deserved criticism if the relevant publications do exist.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I actually wrote something similar in a recent paper. I wrote "The author is not aware of any work that is directly comparable to the current paper." I'm not suggesting this is the best phrasing.
After some further details, I then added some specific publications. "Of the many publications relating to x, two representative papers with roughly similar aims to this paper are x1 and x2."
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: I phrased a similar idea in a published paper (in a computer science conference) like this:
>
> Although it is well known that space-filling curves can be applied to the problem of approximate nearest neighbor searching, we are not aware of any extension of space-filling curves to approximate range reporting.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This is not a direct answer to your actual question. Such has been well provided above. Rather, I humbly suggest, as someone who majored in philosophy and has been burned repeatedly by the notion of originality, that when you are tempted to think "it's possible that the midterm paper that you're [writing] is bumping up against an original area of research," refresh yourself with a jaunt to your school's library. There you might find such gems as <NAME>'s *The Fractal Geometry of Nature* (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman, 1982) and *The Philosophy of Leibniz: Metaphysics and Language* by <NAME> (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), both of which treat, at least briefly, Leibniz' historical contribution to the development of graph theory. Your library may also have less widely distributed journals and "unpublished" works which are not yet well cataloged on them interwebs.
You might also find that some good scholarly work is done in introductions to collections of original writings. <NAME>'s intro to *Philosophical Papers and Letters: A Selection*, <NAME> (Dordrecht, Holland; Boston: D. Reidel Pub. Co., 1976, 1969) is one such which just so happens to mention your topic. You might also find inspiration in proximal works on such topics as Turing, computational logic, machine theory, and linguistics, to say nothing of the huge body of literature dealing with the interrelationship of analysis situs, graph theory, topology, and calculus.
At the very least, the ability to reference prior works that broach your subject will lend legitimacy to what you might build upon them.
If you're really interested in this subject, though, your best bet is probably to check your syllabus for your professor's office hours, and then drop by for a few minutes to briefly explain your topic, along with your difficulty finding references, and ask her if she has any suggestions as to where you might turn. But I wouldn't mention google.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: I know my answer is late, but this is for those who are recently looking into this topic:
You can claim that you couldn't find enough relevant literature, although, you need to provide proof. The best method used in this situation is systematic literature review (SLR). Using this method you should record everything about your search process such as keywords used, years covered, libraries included, inclusion/exclusion criteria, statistics of results and selected studies. You should record everything, keep in mind that it should be repeatable, meaning that if anyone tries to follow the steps that you recorded he/she will get the same outcomes. Using SLR you make sure that your claim is backed up with evidence, this way you can defend your claim with numbers and facts.
Edit: You can search for Systematic Literature Review or SLR online and you may find a lot of sources teaching you how to conduct it and the required steps.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/06 | 1,296 | 5,126 | <issue_start>username_0: There are essentially two ways for plotting three-dimensional data:
* Colour maps (or heat maps)¹:
* Surface plots:
While surface plots are quite nice to visualise data if you can interactively move the perspective, they often obfuscate aspects of the data if you only have one perspective at hand – as it is mostly the case in papers or presentations. And even if the data is benign for surface plots, I have not yet met an example where it adds anything to the colour map, at least in my opinion. This holds for the case where the two are combined, i.e., the surface is coloured (as in the above example).
As surface plots are still used, even by people who are otherwise making very good plots, I wonder whether I am missing something here. Thus my question is: Given that I have evenly sampled, three-dimensional data and that I can only show one image to visualise it², **is there any argument or situation due to which I should use a surface plot instead of a colour map?** In both cases, assume optimally chosen plotting parameters, such as the colour scheme or the viewing angle. Also, you can assume that the plot is being used in an academic context, e.g., a paper, presentation or poster. In particular, the audience can be expected to be able to read such a plot and things like fanciness should not be an argument.
---
¹ This example is just to illustrate the types of plot. I am not asking about how they specifically should be presented.
² And thus, showing a video or multiple perspectives is not an option.<issue_comment>username_1: As everything, it depends. Here is a 3d plot of a mass-spectroscopic peak in time and mass to charge:
You can get a pretty good idea of its shape and how important noise is. Also, as it is a wireframe, you can see what is behind. If you want to see several of them I can show you too:
Now the thickness is not so obvious, but still, you get a nice idea of the whole thing. You can immediately see the relative intensities, and patterns like the uppermost corner, where there are several peaks parallel to each other (which is an important feature of my data), with falling intensities.
For the show off, I generated a bigger slice with Blender, that gives a nice feeling of how the data looks like, including the long "ridges", parallel peaks, noise, and profiles:
In this case, I don't care some peaks are covering each other because the exact positioning is quite random. If I do a heatmap I get this:
I can overlay more information, like the red lines on top, but now we have lost track of the relative intensities, actual shapes, and level of noise.
In my case, the 3D works because the position of the peaks is quite random, and the exact shape varies from experiment to experiment. Also, intensities and noise are important, and one needs to keep them in mind. But if you want to plot a function (say, a kernel density), where the exact shape is important, and relative values are not so much, a heatmap or a contour plot are usually a better choice.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There are four questions, in the order as below:
* what you want to show or put the emphasis on?
* which visualization makes the data as clear as possible to read and interpret?
* what is typical way of showing data in your field (to reduce confusion)?
* (optional) does it make sense in black and white? (some people print papers; sometimes displays have poor color display)
In the case you have shown, [**heat map**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_map) looks much more clear; **surface plot** may have some visual appeal (arguably), but obfuscates the data (some places are hidden, it is harder to read numerical values and see symmetries). Also, it may be good to consider [**contour plot**](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contour_line) with values on contours as it is printable in black and white.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the choice here is mainly a question of taste. Personally, I always prefer the the colour map type plots but I know some people who strongly prefer surface plots. The brief arguments for each are as follows:
Colour map:
Pros:
* Less possibility of hiding or misleading data by obstruction.
* More accurate representation of the data (no perspective effects).
Cons:
* Can be hard to plot selected areas and similar things (although not impossible).
Surface plot:
Pros:
* Look nicer (I strongly disagree)
* Can be useful if you want to show multiple things on one plot, e.g. height with one area selected (you colour the selected area but put the height surface)
Cons:
* Very easy to hide some data behind something or make it unclear.
* I find it sometimes difficult to "unwrap" the image to get back to the height.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/06 | 1,594 | 6,937 | <issue_start>username_0: I know you should build a good network with your professors as early as possible, not only it will help your study, but also you can get great recommendation letter from them.
But not all students aim at graduate school when they start their undergraduate, for example, I only became interest in research and decide on going to graduate school after my third year of undergraduate. At that time, I have done a research project with a professor and certainly I can ask him for one. However, most schools require 2-3 recommendation letters.
I know a good recommendation letter should speak about the candidate research potential instead of 'did well in my class', but in my case, only my undergraduate adviser can speak about that. What should I do besides asking recommendation letter from professors I get A grade in their classes?<issue_comment>username_1: I decided I wanted to attend grad-school at the end of my junior year - here is what I did
1) I had done research with one prof, so I had one good reference in the bag.
2) My senior year I was voted president of the ACM, and had a faculty advisory (2nd reference). Knowing I wanted to attend grad-school made the extra time I put into this make sense.
3) Third reference came from a prof I had taken several classes with and who worked with the other 2 references on several research projects.
4) Due to an incompetent class adviser (not academic) incorrectly signing me up for the wrong class, I had to wait an extra year to graduate. This gave me extra time to strengthen my application. Look around for a summer research opportunity.
NOTE: I'm not suggesting delaying graduation for a year to get into grad-school. There were several downsides to having that happen to me. Just start looking at everything more strategically, and if a situation presents itself to allow you to strengthen your application take it - even it it means sacrificing in the short term.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Here are some thoughts. Figure out what classes you took that
1. are most similar to the type of graduate school you're applying for, and
2. you did well in.
Then set up a meeting with your former professor(s) of those classes to tell them a little about yourself, why you're planning on going to graduate school, and the situation you're in. I think any professor, and especially those in your future area of study are going to be very understanding of your situation and happy to help you out. It might help to talk with them a little about your research experiences and/or furnish them with a CV/resume detailing those and other experiences so that they may write a nice letter for you.
I think short of taking off some more time, doing research in a second lab, etc, you don't have much choice in this matter! But never fear, I think the letter from your advisor is going to be the one that carries the most weight.
EDIT. Just wanted to add, in the process of deciding which professors to talk to, take a gander at [this post about getting a 'strong' recommendation](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9341/how-do-i-make-sure-i-get-strong-recommendation-letters-for-faculty-positions). Lots of good advice there. One idea that might be particularly applicable to you is asking whichever professor you talk to about where they think you should apply, etc.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Of course, the best solution to this problem is not to have it in the first place. Being proactive and thinking about the future is sometimes a rare talent, especially in 18 year olds fresh out of high school, but then again grad school is supposed to select the exceptional individuals.
There is a world of difference between a recommendation from someone you worked with, and from a mere acquaintance. The latter kind rarely benefits your application in a meaningful way, and can sometimes even hurt it. No matter how enthusiastic your instructor is, unless the course is at least a project-centric course (eg. grade is based entirely on your individual term project), they will not be able to make a good, in depth argument for your abilities, and the recommendation will therefore be weak.
The point of the recommendation is that the admissions committee will read it, and decide whether you have potential to be a good researcher. How can they, if the recommendation does not talk about your research at all? And how much better if instead of hinting at your potential indirectly by citing course performance, the recommender can just say "this person has potential to be a great researcher because I have personally seen that they are good at research"?
This is why there is a qualitative difference. This can be a big problem when applying to a very selective program. What if you apply to a program where the committee has a philosophy that "an application is only as strong as its weakest link"? Even if you are quite exceptional otherwise, you can get eliminated early on because there are many other applicants who are also exceptional, but don't have a recommendation problem.
Also, similar to how a lukewarm recommendation can mean "I think this person is a bad candidate, but I am not being negative out of politeness", a recommendation from someone who only taught a course can mean "this person is a slacker who never bothered to do real work, so they can't find any supervisors to recommend them".
The best way to remedy is really to obtain more "good" recommenders. Because you want people who supervised you, the solution is obvious: You haven't been supervised by enough people who will vouch for you; you must undertake more projects and be supervised by other people whose recommendation will carry weight.
If still in school, look for faculty whose lab you can work in. If that is difficult, try approaching a former (or current) instructor with an idea for a theoretical or computational project (this requires less commitment from them, so they may be easier to convince). It doesn't necessarily have to be original research, so long as you can come up with a relatively long term (at least half a year) project where you are the primary contributor. It could also be (more) valuable to spend a summer working in a lab at a different university.
If out of school, delay your application by 1-3 years, and look for work as a lab tech at a university, institute or private company. Make sure not to displease your boss.
A related problem is working for a long time with the same person, for instance an undergrad who spends 3 years in the same lab. This is actually better, because you can accomplish much more in 3 years, and you can have a very impressive project to sell yourself with. The issue is that you will have only one supervisor - but hopefully after 3 years, you will have networked with collaborators and other scientists and will not have a problem there.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/06 | 573 | 2,566 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a PhD candidate in Computer Science and I'm working on my first paper that should be published in a peer-reviewed journal (until now, I published only papers in conferences).
My project is a FPGA memory module, which uses a specific approach (the main idea) to obtain better performance in terms of access philosophy and capacity.
Now, the mentioned idea is naturally the bulk of the paper, with the math, proofs, algorithms, etc. behind it. But, since the module was synthesized and tested, I feel obliged to address its obtained "measures".
The process generated quite a lot data which become even more after the simulations were done. So, I'm not sure what charts/tables are appropriate to analyze and publish in a paper? (e.g. input->output delay for a range of inputs; parameters like max clock, number of logic elements; perhaps even (parts) of the schema; etc.)
As this seems a bit specific, I would like to broaden the scope of the question. Namely, the general issue here is how to filter data which does not directly contribute to the understanding of the main idea, but is the result of a finished project and can be used to reinforce the researched concept with practical measurements and simulations. This obtained data is large, so I'm asking for guidelines what could be considered concise enough to put into a paper.<issue_comment>username_1: Read a couple of dozen papers that are similar in nature (that is, in terms of the method and how the research question is addresssed) to yours and are in your target journal. Look at how they've supplied the sort of detailed information you're talking about.
As a rule-of-thumb, put it all into supplementary information. And then follow the advice of your edit and peer-reviewers, if they advise moving things. If there are particular numbers that contribute to your main narrative, put those numbers in the body of the paper, too.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Use the Internet
----------------
Put the raw dataset in an easily accessible format (and it's description) on a public online repository, preferably in one actively maintained by your institution - most of them seem to have such resources.
If it "does not directly contribute to the understanding of the main idea", then simply refer to the relevant URL in your paper - the data is still useful in verification, replication, and further analysis by others.
Do make sure that the repository and URL is one that would stick around for decades, not only a couple of years.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/06 | 321 | 1,379 | <issue_start>username_0: I am analysing data from a commercial instrument. I need to set a threshold that has to do with the precision of the instrument, so I looked up the value from the manufacturer's online specifications. How do I cite it?
The university does not have any official policy, and other papers in the field either don't mention it explicitly, or give the value without citation, but I believe this is actually a quite relevant number, and thus should be specified and quoted.<issue_comment>username_1: Basically, you can cite this user's manual just as you would any book-like publication. The only difference is that you don't cite the name of an author:
>
> *User's Manual for Foo Instrument, Model Bar*. Random City: XYZ Corporation (Year).
>
>
>
or whatever is the appropriate reference style for your work.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Adding to the existing answer, in some cases citing documents that are not accessible to the research community is discouraged (e.g. a manual that is delivered with the equipment). In this case you could also say: 'We used the Foo Instrument (Manufacturer, City, Country) and set the threshold to 0.86 according to the manufacturer's manual'.
If the manual is accessible online, which seems to be the case here, you should cite the url with the date and time you accessed it.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/06 | 634 | 2,578 | <issue_start>username_0: I am seeking some help to find research papers (preferably in the area of Markov chains) for my undergraduate research for reference. Any guidance on how to find research papers in general for undergraduate level research will be much appreciated. Thanks in advance<issue_comment>username_1: The most useful advice I've ever gotten about finding research papers: Book an appointment with a research librarian.
Get in touch with your university's library and see if you can make an hour or so appointment, or if they offer workshops or classes on searching the literature. There job is, quite literally, to know how to find information, and generally they're more than happy to share their expertise. Even as an experienced graduate student, I got things out of my visits with them.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Academic knowledge is connected through a web of citations and references. Once you have a piece of that web, you can follow the threads towards other papers.
Start at the [Wikipedia Page](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain), specifically the [Notes](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain#Notes) and [References](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Markov_chain#References) sections.
See if any of the links there take you to a PDF... look for DOI numbers, or PDF in the link. If not, use Google to try to find a paper. Start reading it.
Look for a word or phrase you recognize, and want to know more about, or something seems about the direction you want to go. Likely, this will be cited... look in the references section of that paper, then google that paper (or follow the kindly provided [links](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001870870900344)).
You're traversing a web of references, so you'll come back to the same papers sometimes. If I were you, I'd keep notes about each of the papers I look into.
* Title
* Authors
* Link to PDF
* Single sentence summary.
Once you've been doing this for a day or so, you'll notice that there are some authors who have a good connection to the topic you're interested in. Look up their university web page; Often they'll have a list of their papers.
Essentially, you are crawling the web of references yourself. Keep following the links, keep track of where you've been, where you want to go.
---
Oh, one other thing: Google Scholar is a decent choice for getting an overview of a topic because it will sort papers by reference count: Highly cited papers often contain important information; Be it an excellent summary or a novel insight.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/06 | 240 | 1,000 | <issue_start>username_0: My graduate program is a non-research based. However, I am interested in writing and presenting a conference paper. Is it possible for me to do this even as I am not into research work?<issue_comment>username_1: Of course you can submit any paper you want. There are a lot of people, for example in the industry field, that submit papers to conferences.
But as they have stated in one comment, as soon as you start preparing a paper, that per se converts you into a researcher.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes - I've attended several research presentations by people who are not "academic" researchers, and who just wanted to present the results of an interesting project. Several companies encourage workers to submit papers as this
1) Increases the prestige of the company
2) Even if you do not patent, by publishing you have made your idea un-patentable by creating prior art. So you've also protected your IP. (NOTE: I'm not a lawyer)
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/06 | 1,948 | 7,801 | <issue_start>username_0: I am writing a paper describing some of the research I have done. As part of my work I have developed an open-source library and made it available on Github.
How should I link to it?
Should I cite it in the bibliography or make a footnote with the link to the software?<issue_comment>username_1: Such resources, especially if they are a supplementary to the paper, i.e. in some sense a part of it, should be referenced in a footnote and not in bibliography.
Do include not only the URL but also a short description; and do try to keep that URL valid - once you publish that link, it's frozen forever.
It also helps to include the opposite citation. In the readme file of that library, include full citation information of your paper. This will allow others to gain extra information about the methods, and also give you citations if/when others build upon your work.
Some publishers also support binary attachments for supplementary information. If they do, you should use it - prepare a package of the current stable version and upload it there. It allows for reproducability, as a specific version is referenced which relates to the actual paper, and not some improvements done in 2020 that change everything; and it also attaches all relevant information together with the paper at the publisher's site, which will stay valid even if that github repository goes away for whatever reason.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In previous papers, I've used something like (source code available at github.com/fomite/brilliantwork) when describing the software methods used.
*However* [Figshare](http://figshare.com) now allows you to directly import a repo from GitHub, which will give you a DOI you can reference as a citation. This also provides a benefit for having a "snapshot" of the repo at the time of publication, for repositories that will continue to be worked on. That, plus the ability for me and other people to cite the repo directly (and thus be able to get some traditional citation metrics to show the impact of the software), is what I'll be doing in the future.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The specifics depend on your field, and I think most areas have very loose guidelines as to what to do in these situations. The only hard-and-fast rule is that you need to get it past your reviewers and your editors, who will tell you if the style is inappropriate. Other than that, the most important thing is that you yourself are happy that the citation is getting your GitHub repo the most visibility possible. Finally, you should consider your paper from the perspective of readers that may want to use and cite your code, and who will naturally look to your writing for how to do that.
In general, I would recommend citing the code in the bibliography, as one more reference. The advantage of this is that your article's references will be listed and indexed separately, and (with luck) this will register as links pointing towards your repo, which will become more of an advantage if more people cite it. Such a citation should have
* the name of the programme,
* the URL of the repository, and
* a clear indication of the version cited and its date.
An example citation is
>
> <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, and <NAME>. The MCTDH Package, Version 8.2, (2000), University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. H.-D. Meyer, Version 8.3 (2002), Version 8.4 (2007). See <http://mctdh.uni-hd.de>
>
>
>
You should also describe the code within the text when you first cite the code, and provide a complete enough description within the paper that readers do not need to go read any additional information to continue reading your paper, because it needs to read like a single, coherent piece of work.
Alternatively, you can cite it in a footnote, indicating the name of the code and its location. This would be a good place to include the description if it is brief. Another choice is to do this in the acknowledgements, as giordano [points out](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20358/how-should-i-reference-my-github-repository-with-materials-for-my-paper#comment42538_20358). However, I think these make your code less discoverable to both humans and search engines.
As I mentioned before, you should mould your citation of the code in the way that you'd like others to cite it. It is also desirable that you include, within the pages describing code online, a description of how you want people to cite the code. Some examples are [GAMESS UK](http://www.cfs.dl.ac.uk/licences/serial_licence.pdf#page=3), [MCTDH](http://www.pci.uni-heidelberg.de/tc/usr/mctdh/guide83.pdf#page=9) and [MOLCAS](http://molcas.org/documentation/manual/node10.html), or the ones in [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15374/should-i-cite-conference-papers-to-acknowledge-usage-of-tools). Having such a description will strengthen your position should referees or editors not like your preferred style. You set the terms on which your code gets cited!
Finally, as others have mentioned, you should make sure that the URL you point to is stable, as you will be unable to change the link in the published paper once it goes out. This is a separate question altogether, and there are a number of ways to do this - including supplementary information to the article itself, separate repositories for academic code, and of course GitHub itself - and you should strive for the most stable solution possible. Is it likely that the repository will someday get closed or moved? If so, you should consider alternatives.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: A citation is a reference to a research object. Prior to the DOI, this reference contained the information somebody would need to physically locate the research object, whether it was a book, journal article, or dissertation. Although the jury is still out on how to provide general references to digital research objects, a Git repository contains a canonical reference, the SHA1 hash of the commit.
If you would like to refer to your Git repository in such a way that it is easy to locate in the future, you should provide not only the URL where it is now, but also the short name for the repository, the lead author[s], and the SHA1 hash of the commit that you produced your results with.
Here is an example URL from GitHub that contains the commit: <https://github.com/hashdist/hashstack/commit/4c72950a0f6eb9cc1cf63cd640f3e6b82c9ce9c0>
I don't recommend uploading your code to Figshare until they've fixed their ability to accept code licenses.
**Update 14 May 2014**
GitHub and ZENODO have partnered together to upload code for a DOI under a flexible license. Obtaining a DOI for your code should be as simple as following the instructions on the GitHub Guide to [Making Your Code Citable](https://guides.github.com/activities/citable-code/). Here's an overview of the instructions:
1. Choose your repository
2. Login to ZENODO
3. Pick the repository you want to archive
4. Check repository settings
5. Create a new release
6. Check everything has worked
7. Mint a DOI
It's really that easy. There's no current reason not to use this as a default approach for citing your software.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: In addition to referencing the repository within the paper, you should also make sure that the link between the paper and repository is part of the paper metadata. Specifically, if you are depositing the paper on [arXiv](https://arxiv.org), you can use the latest [feature](https://blog.arxiv.org/2020/10/08/new-arxivlabs-feature-provides-instant-access-to-code/) that integrates with [Papers with Code](https://paperswithcode.com/about) to record the link between your paper and its implementation.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/06 | 663 | 2,508 | <issue_start>username_0: I remember of some article that was published in which the author showed a world map with circles that represented the number of articles published by country and their frequency in which a groundbreaking academic work was released in each country(One of them was represented by the size of the circle, the other by the color of the circle). But I can't find it now, could someone help me find it? I've googled some things but was unable to find it - my native languange is not english, so I ran out of permutations of words to find the article.<issue_comment>username_1: I can picture the image you are talking about, but I'm having trouble finding it as well. There is however an interactive world map here, which is broken down by institution, rather than country: <http://academic.research.microsoft.com/AcademicMap?TopDomainId=2>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Perhaps you're thinking of the map below? It's Figure 1 of the paper [Global Multi-Level Analysis of the `Scientific Food Web'](http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130130/srep01167/full/srep01167.html).
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5kRzm.jpg)
(source: [nature.com](http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130130/srep01167/images/srep01167-f1.jpg))
The caption is "Figure 1: World map of knowledge production and consumption in 6 major geographic areas of the world (North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Australia and Africa)." An additional note: "Circle size reflects the number of papers $P\_i$ produced by the corresponding entities $i$. The inner circle is for 2000–2002, the outer one for 2007–2009. The size of the pies represents (A) the relative proportion of citations $C\_i$ that the entities earned in the 6 geographic areas, (B) similar for references $R\_i$ recorded in the Thomson Reuters Web of Science database. The number of papers and citations have increased over time in all geographic areas, but their shares of references and citations have changed. For example, Asia reaches higher shares recently, characterizing it as an emergent scientific power, which has become almost comparable to North America or Europe. Note that, in the three leading knowledge producing areas, the majority of references cites papers published in the same geographic area, i.e., proximity matters."
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/07 | 1,102 | 4,684 | <issue_start>username_0: I was working with my advisor on a research topic for six months and we had some results. The important idea was his, but the initial idea was mine and we worked on it together. Now my advisor has published the results without my name in the authors. The paper is in an important conference.
What do I do ? Is this normal ? Should I talk to my advisor about how I get my name in a paper ? How do I approach that topic ?
I'm his only PhD student and he has joined the department recently.
Edit : The paper was written by my advisor but we derived the results together, although his contribution was more important. He included my name in acknowledgements. Should I risk upsetting my relationship with my advisor over this ?<issue_comment>username_1: You asked,
>
> Is this normal?
>
>
>
The answer is **no, it's not normal**. If two people work on some research together, the "normal" thing is for them to write the paper on it together, and for both to be authors on the paper.
It's possible that you seriously overestimated your contribution to the work and don't actually deserve authorship. Even in this case, it's clear you were involved in the research and it's **not normal** for your advisor to go ahead and publish it without discussing it with you first.
(When I publish work that involves students whose small contributions do not warrant authorship, I always discuss it with them first. I explain why I don't think they can be an author, give them a chance to state any disagreement, and also tell them what additional work they could do in order to merit authorship.)
However, the latter (your contributions did not merit authorship, and your advisor failed to discuss this with you) is somewhat more forgivable than the former (your contributions did merit authorship and your advisor published without you anyways). (You do say your advisor is new, and probably inexperienced in advising.)
To answer
>
> What do I do?
>
>
>
You should **talk to your advisor**. This is the only way to really understand which case you are dealing with.
You can bring this up in a non-combative way without upsetting your advisor; for example, you can ask "What do I need to do in order to deserve authorship on future papers?" This gives your advisor an opening to discuss why he thinks you didn't deserve authorship on the conference paper, and for you to respectfully state your perception of the situation.
There may still be a chance for you to get some credit for this work, if you come to agree with his point of view that you didn't do enough to deserve authorship on the conference paper. For example, once you and your advisor have come to an agreement on what it takes to get authorship, you can propose that the two of you work together on an extended version of his conference paper for a journal - on which you will be an author :)
Unfortunately, it's also possible that after this conversation you believe you **did** deserve authorship, and that your advisor published your joint work without you for no valid reason (i.e., committed misconduct). In this case, the best advice I can give you is to start looking for another advisor.
Finally, the lesson for the future is: **talk to your collaborators about authorship early and often.**
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: A previous answer here (now deleted) states an unfortunate truth of the matter—what your advisor did was wrong, but rectifying the situation could be very complicated.
The primary issue is whether or not the paper has been formally published in the conference proceedings. Once that has happened, it's too late to change the authorship credits. Basically, any such move would lead to retraction—which, as has been established on this site and many others, such as [Retraction Watch](http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/), is a huge black mark in the career of any academic.
We don't have all the information here, so it's impossible to say for certain if you've done enough work to merit co-author credit, but let us assume for the sake of argument here that you do. The challenge here is that, unlike username_1, I do not believe that there's likely to be any sort of positive resolution here. Not including you as a co-author on a publication (conference paper) is either incompetence or unscrupulous. In either case, the relationship between you and your advisor is probably not going to be a fruitful one in the future. (If your advisor is incompetent, you shouldn't be working for him; the same applies double if your advisor is unscrupulous.)
If it's possible, I would suggest finding yourself a new advisor.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/07 | 517 | 2,123 | <issue_start>username_0: I am just finishing my PhD and I have now been on the job market and started to speak at many universities. I have realized it is a time commitment for a person to host a seminar speaker and am really grateful for the experiences that many of my hosts have given me at these universities. For this reason, I have made a policy of sending thank you notes to those that host me when I visit another university's seminar. These notes that I write typically just say thank you for taking time to host me and funding my visit (if they funded it). It also thanks them for their input and questions about my work if they gave me a useful idea. One of my colleagues has told me this is odd, so I wanted to ask:
Is writing thank you notes to someone for inviting me to speak and hosting me at their university overkill? Is there any negative outcome that can happen from doing this?<issue_comment>username_1: I agree that sending a *paper* thank-you note is a little unusual. There's nothing wrong with it, of course. You may come across as slightly eccentric, but academia has plenty of people like that!
A thank-you *email*, on the other hand, is perfectly usual.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I have had the pleasure of taking a few courses with [the most thanked man in computer science](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olivier_Danvy). I think part of the reason so many people have thanked him in their papers is that he consistently teaches his students to show appreciation for people's help and to be helpful themselves. The students he advices also tend to do well in their careers. I think there is a causal relationship (although he also picks good students).
By all means, keep showing appreciation for people's help. Even if paper thank-you notes are unusual in your field, just send them anyway.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If I share my knowledge to people in my seminar, why should I be thanking them? They should thank me.
Is this correct or should I stick with the formality of putting a "Thank You" slide in the end of my ppt presentation.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/05/07 | 2,917 | 11,501 | <issue_start>username_0: This question has two parts. First, a comparative question. Second, a broad question about why PhD students get so stressed and complain so much.
**Do PhD students complain more than people in other professions?**
In my limited and biased experience, yes. More generally, there are so many websites about how hard life as a PhD student is. So many memes. These are clearly all composed by current or former PhD students. My cohort's facebook feeds read like journals written in prison. Party conversation demonstrates [a general obsession with complaining about life in a PhD program](http://www.buzzfeed.com/jessicamisener/25-deeply-painful-phd-student-problems-besides-your-thesis). People often half-joke about how starting the PhD program was [a horrible mistake](http://whatshouldwecallgradschool.tumblr.com/post/84928585186/my-advice-to-prospective-students). PhD students have even been [roasted on *30 Rock*](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXvv5sTqNa4). And they're often [weirdly nervous about trivial stuff](http://www.phdcomics.com/comics/archive.php?comicid=1047). Yes, these are online comedy bits, but they are funny because they capture something *true*.
Many jobs are stressful and I believe that people in other fields handle their stress better *or, at the very least, feel compelled to maintain that appearance*. I started my PhD a bit later than average. Before doing so I worked in a few other fields, some of them more stressful than academia by reasonable standards (higher consequences of mistakes for oneself and/or for others, faster pace work environment, higher likelihood of being insulted/embarrassed by supervisors, what have you).
**Why do PhD students complain so much?**
I see a few reasons why PhD students have such a hard time.
Admittedly, there is a lot of work. But there are lots of jobs where you need to work very hard for long hours.
In many disciplines, there is no clear management structure where someone can tell you *what* to do when and *when* you are done. Of course, this can be stressful.
Because of the nature of theoretical innovation and research, one is never "done" with work. There is only a choice of when one is going to *stop* for the day or *stop* on a particular project (e.g., by submitting for publication).
Many PhD students have spent little time outside of school and academia. Most of their schooling until the PhD program was very structured with short-term goals. In a PhD and now they are responsible for defining their own projects.
PhD programs may attract uniquely stressful, driven people.
Maybe the idea of being a "student" fosters immature attitudes about the work environment, even though PhD students must deal with real adult workloads. People in many other lines of work have no illusions about their obligation to handle their workload.<issue_comment>username_1: Two factors that I think are the most relevant:
* PhD student is one of the lowest salary/education ratio. The best students, with highest grades, doing the highest level coursework get fairly crappy salaries (when any). In Spain, where I am from, getting the best grant the Ministery offers barely allows you to rent a shared flat and eat cheap. Sweden, where I am now, is one of the best countries to be a PhD student regarding salary and conditions. One salary is enough to provide a living and housing for two people. Still, a first job for a STEM graduate usually means three times more salary.
* Uncertainity. A junior in a company is assigned a clear task with a goal, where the manager, seniors, etc. are sure are achievable goals. In research, no one can know this. You don't really know what you are doing is even possible until you get it. Sure, you have advisors, but they can only guess what is going to be. In short: nobody really knows what they are doing.
Also I think there is a sense of unifying community. People that make land surveys and mapping (for example) may be subject to similar conditions, but they will feel no sense of familiarity with the perks of the life and work of a librarian. Grad students, no mater what is their field, have something in common, and thus a sociologist can very well relate to a mathematician as well as an slavic philology expert. So, a map maker can whine as much as a grad student, but they will not see the same echo.
Also, anyone who has gone to university knows a bunch of grad students. That is much more reach than aeronautic engineers, that are mostly related with other engineers. Grad students in a general term are much more common that many other particular professions.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: *(one important comment - this all relates to PhD students in Europe, where you usually get an actual salary while doing your PhD. I have no experience about grad student life on a stipend, as in the US)*
>
> Do PhD students complain more than people in other professions?
>
>
>
No, I don't think so. Sure, PhD students complain about their job. So do all other professionals. I have been in software engineering for two years before my PhD, and people have certainly complained a lot there as well. My non-research friends just as often bitch about their jobs, bosses, work conditions, salary, etc. as my fellow researchers. Just a peek at workplace.SE already gives you a confirmation that being dissatisfied with your work conditions is not a thing specific to PhD students.
>
> I believe that people in other fields handle their stress better or, at the very least, feel compelled to maintain that appearance.
>
>
>
I do not agree at all. I have seen so many people act unprofessionally inside and outside of academia (due to stress or personal issues), it is not even funny. Your perception is entirely opposite to mine.
My favorite story in relation to that is that of a very senior full professor storming out of a meeting with tears of anger in her eyes, because she felt than another professor in the meeting was not valuing her experience in a topic sufficiently). She has later excused herself and stated that she was going through a personally hard time. Unprofessional behaviour is not inherently a grad student thing.
>
> My cohort's facebook feeds read like journals written in prison. Party conversation demonstrates a general obsession with complaining about life in a PhD program. People often half-joke about how starting the PhD program was a horrible mistake. PhD students have even been roasted on 30 Rock. And they're often weirdly nervous about trivial stuff.
>
>
>
Yes, the complaining PhD student is a meme by now. That does not mean it has to be true, although such memes tend to have a bit a self-fulfilling nature. The question is, when you look at the prison-like FB posts of your cohort, how many complaints are tongue-in-cheek, and how many are serious "this is all so f\*cked up" statements. I should also add that looking at only your cohort may give you a false impression of generality, as you all attend the same school, maybe are even advised by the same professors. Basically, if something is "off" in your environment, it would explain why your cohort complains, but says very little about other universities (like the ones I have experience with).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Do PhD students complain more than people in other professions?
>
>
>
No.
---
To quote <NAME>:
>
> Oh, you hate your job? Why didn't you say so? You know there's a support group for that. It's called **everybody**. They meet at the bar.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Do PhD students complain more than people in other professions?
>
>
>
I very much doubt it. See username_3's summary. There are dozens of memes about complaining - law students, med students, engineering undergrads, administrative staff, IT people...seriously, just about every profession has its memes about how much their jobs are terrible.
>
> Why do PhD students complain more than people in other professions?
>
>
>
* They're not being paid very much, and for many of them, their friends - who had similar educational backgrounds - who didn't go to grad school are now making money, and the opportunity cost is pretty vivid.
* The PhD is a problem that requires unbounded effort. Until the day you defend, there's always something you should be doing. At the same time, there's rarely something you *need* to be doing *that day*. Handing someone a years long, unstructured time management problem is going to cause some stress.
* There's not necessarily a way out. For CS, Physics, Math etc. there may be escape hatches into industry, but for many STEM PhDs, and almost all humanities PhDs, there's really no net-benefit for your degree outside of academia. You've got an expensive (in opportunity cost and time), specialized set of knowledge that no one cares about. You can see this reflected in some surveys - Physics PhDs tend to be somewhat more happy than their Biology counterparts.
>
> How can I handle this socially and professional?
>
>
>
You can try to avoid it, although do realize that "shared suffering" is a social bonding experience, and these people will be your colleagues. You will be missing some of that.
>
> I certainly hope that this climate does not continue into faculty life
>
>
>
I have some bad news for you.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: *(As suggested by jabberwocky, I have moved the last part of my answer to <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/20482/13852>).*
While I don't think the question is worded constructively, this is a relevant and prominent issue in academic life. First, the question whether PhD students complain more than other professional groups is not really helpful, so I will ignore it (others have given enough counterexamples) and instead focus on the other part, namely "why do they complain?"
As has been noted, doing a PhD is a time of uncertainty and huge external and/or internal pressures, on a scale -- both in time and magnitude -- usually unprecedented for the student. Complaining about it is a coping mechanism (one of a range of possible mechanisms, whose efficacy will vary from person to person). It is also a valuable bonding activity. This is a crucial point, since your research as a PhD student is often so specialized that you can't profitably talk about it to anyone outside a small circle of fellow specialists. On the other hand, the external circumstances of doing a PhD (deadlines, interactions with your advisor or lack thereof, run-ins with the administration) will be instantly familiar to any graduate student, no matter what the field (witness the popularity of PhD Comics, which is not limited to mechanical engineering). Add to that the fact that many graduate students are pursuing their PhD away from home and thus their social circle mostly consists of fellow students, and it's not surprising that most interactions outside possibly a small circle of close personal friends are dominated by this topic. (In fact, complaining around your personal friends as you would among peers is the fastest way of losing them.)
Regarding your comment
>
> My friends who are in PhD programs complain much more (or at least
> more publicly) than my friends who aren't in PhD programs.
>
>
>
They probably complain much more *to you* about their professional life, since you're a professional peer of the former but not of the latter.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/07 | 1,173 | 5,077 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student halfway through my journey. After I published a few papers, I am getting review requests from some medium rank conference and journal editors. While certainly it is an honour for me, doing good review takes some time since I am not an expert of my broad field with everything at my finger tip. Does review experience add something to my CV particularly if I want an academic career? I am really sorry if the question sounds too shallow or cynical but I want to know whether I can cite the review experience to prove my worth as a researcher to a prospective hiring committee.<issue_comment>username_1: An important part of an academic career/CV is *service*. Reviewing, editing, hosting conferences, ... falls under this category. So yes, it is important.
You seem to consider it to be a potential waste of your precious time. This is false. Depending on your field, reviewers have earlier access to new work than others which is always beneficial.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 says, it does give you earliest access to new work, and it is a chance to give back to the academic community, and boost your CV at the same time.
But the usual caveats apply:
1. This would be a significant chunk of time, so discuss it with your supervisors / advisors before agreeing to take it on, and listen to their advice.
2. If you do it, do it in moderation: don't let it displace your core work, which is getting the PhD finished.
3. Do it only if and while it contributes to your PhD: it can do this by honing your research skills, and/or by increasing the body of relevant literature that you're familiar with.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Doing reviews is both a necessary contribution to the publication system and a merit carrying with it several positive aspects. As a scientist you are expected to contribute and, thus, you have to start at some point. To start reviewing lower profile publications is a good thing and you should of course think about whether you can contribute good insights or not. There is nothing wrong with declining a review stating you feel it is outside your expertise. That said you may provide a different angle on a problem and your name has hopefully been chosen because you have become known for good work.
In the beginning reviews probably take a very long time to complete as with everything new. But, as you read other peoples work you have an opportunity to look at how others write and express science (not necessarily in a good way). This can help you develop your own skills. I also find that reviewing papers give me an opportunity to read about new science and think more deeply about a specific problem than what I usually have time to do with a published paper. Thus, I would stress the learning opportunities in the review task as important. That it takes time is a given, a review that does not take time is either sloppy review work or because of a really terrible paper to review.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are several reasons, as a PhD student, that you should consider spending time reviewing papers, even if you view it as an unrelated demand on your time:
1. It helps you know, and shape, your field. When you graduate, you will supposedly be an expert in your field. Being able to critically engage with the research being done in it, not only as a reader but as a reviewer, is an aspect of that.
2. It gives you a glimpse into the other side of peer review. It's easier to engage with reviewer comments, in my experience, if you've been on the other side of the process as well.
3. As some people have mentioned, service is an important aspect of your CV, and having done reviews not only checks that box, but adds a list of journals who consider your expertise important enough to have you act as a reviewer.
Reviewing papers won't be the reason someone hires you, but it is a component of your professional development.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I referee papers if one of the following conditions holds:
1. It's something I know well and can quickly evaluate the paper
2. It's something I want to know more about, and will learn something by doing the review
3. I owe the editor or author a favor
It is good experience for graduate students to do this, but it should not distract you from your own scholarship and coursework. So yes, by the time you complete your degree, it would be good to have done this a couple of times.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Doing reviews at your stage for sure helps you a) to better understand the review process, b) see how other researchers deal with your comments in the revision letter and c) it identifies you potentially already as a scientist in a certain field.
Besides that, as a Ph.D. student you should rather write papers, instead of reviewing them. Also, they eat up quite some time if you do it right. Hence, my advise would be not to spent too much time on reviews, let it be only two or three maximum. Save your time for better, you will need it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/07 | 1,311 | 5,687 | <issue_start>username_0: My primary interest is in Data Mining. Secondary interests are Intrusion Detection and Energy Efficient Buildings.
I have done projects in data mining approaches for intrusion detection. I have also done research in data analysis on energy consumption patterns in smart-buildings.
I will be applying for graduate school (MS) shortly. Now, how do I proceed writing my statement? Should I lay more emphasis on Data Mining? Which professors should I mention I want to work with? Ones doing data mining research, or the ones doing network security/sustainable energy research?
My main concern is finding potential advisers. I believe if I can find some before the application, I can find out their requirements and write a statement accordingly. This in-turn might help me get admission in the desired school as well.
My question here is whether I should look for researchers in data mining (which I have applied in my works) or intrusion detection/sustainable energy (the domain where data mining technique was applied)
I understand that chances of me finding advisers that share interest in both data mining and (intrusion detection/sustainable energy) is very less. So which advisers should I target?<issue_comment>username_1: An important part of an academic career/CV is *service*. Reviewing, editing, hosting conferences, ... falls under this category. So yes, it is important.
You seem to consider it to be a potential waste of your precious time. This is false. Depending on your field, reviewers have earlier access to new work than others which is always beneficial.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As username_1 says, it does give you earliest access to new work, and it is a chance to give back to the academic community, and boost your CV at the same time.
But the usual caveats apply:
1. This would be a significant chunk of time, so discuss it with your supervisors / advisors before agreeing to take it on, and listen to their advice.
2. If you do it, do it in moderation: don't let it displace your core work, which is getting the PhD finished.
3. Do it only if and while it contributes to your PhD: it can do this by honing your research skills, and/or by increasing the body of relevant literature that you're familiar with.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Doing reviews is both a necessary contribution to the publication system and a merit carrying with it several positive aspects. As a scientist you are expected to contribute and, thus, you have to start at some point. To start reviewing lower profile publications is a good thing and you should of course think about whether you can contribute good insights or not. There is nothing wrong with declining a review stating you feel it is outside your expertise. That said you may provide a different angle on a problem and your name has hopefully been chosen because you have become known for good work.
In the beginning reviews probably take a very long time to complete as with everything new. But, as you read other peoples work you have an opportunity to look at how others write and express science (not necessarily in a good way). This can help you develop your own skills. I also find that reviewing papers give me an opportunity to read about new science and think more deeply about a specific problem than what I usually have time to do with a published paper. Thus, I would stress the learning opportunities in the review task as important. That it takes time is a given, a review that does not take time is either sloppy review work or because of a really terrible paper to review.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are several reasons, as a PhD student, that you should consider spending time reviewing papers, even if you view it as an unrelated demand on your time:
1. It helps you know, and shape, your field. When you graduate, you will supposedly be an expert in your field. Being able to critically engage with the research being done in it, not only as a reader but as a reviewer, is an aspect of that.
2. It gives you a glimpse into the other side of peer review. It's easier to engage with reviewer comments, in my experience, if you've been on the other side of the process as well.
3. As some people have mentioned, service is an important aspect of your CV, and having done reviews not only checks that box, but adds a list of journals who consider your expertise important enough to have you act as a reviewer.
Reviewing papers won't be the reason someone hires you, but it is a component of your professional development.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I referee papers if one of the following conditions holds:
1. It's something I know well and can quickly evaluate the paper
2. It's something I want to know more about, and will learn something by doing the review
3. I owe the editor or author a favor
It is good experience for graduate students to do this, but it should not distract you from your own scholarship and coursework. So yes, by the time you complete your degree, it would be good to have done this a couple of times.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: Doing reviews at your stage for sure helps you a) to better understand the review process, b) see how other researchers deal with your comments in the revision letter and c) it identifies you potentially already as a scientist in a certain field.
Besides that, as a Ph.D. student you should rather write papers, instead of reviewing them. Also, they eat up quite some time if you do it right. Hence, my advise would be not to spent too much time on reviews, let it be only two or three maximum. Save your time for better, you will need it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/07 | 928 | 3,770 | <issue_start>username_0: This topic has already been described to some extent, e.g. here:
[Is verbatim copying several paragraphs of text with citation considered plagiarism?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20270/is-verbatim-copying-text-with-citation-considered-plagiarism)
But I do no think that it has been completely discussed, especially in the context of related work and abstracts.
When I am writing the section about related work in my papers, I tend to describe the work of each other related researcher in a few sentences with my own words and referencing their papers. However, in a current paper that I am writing I have realised that the abstracts of more than a few papers that I want to mention are so well written and are so concise that I cannot do any better. Writing my description would be just a waste of time, and result in a less concise text.
So I am thinking about copy-pasting two or three sentences from the abstract of each referenced paper. And possibly adding, removing, or changing a word or two that may not be relevant in the context of the paper that I am writing, so it's not really a plain copy paste.
I have read that it may be a good idea to put quotes, but I find quotes, especially their immoderate use, as bad style.
Can I get in trouble for this? I would not go that far in considering anything of this as plagiarism, as the work is referenced and I am not taking credit for someone else's work.
Personally if one would do the same with my work, I would not be concerned at all, on the contrary, as long as not more than a few sentences are taken and the work is properly referenced, but you might have a different view.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> So I am thinking about copy-pasting two or three sentences from the abstract of each referenced paper.
>
>
>
This seems absolutely appropriate, as long as you quote them correctly. Which brings us to:
>
> I have read that it may be a good idea to put quotes, but I find quotes, especially their immoderate use, as bad style.
>
>
>
It is not only a *good idea* to do that, it is required. You *need to* make explicit that those are verbatim copies. The semantics of copying text from a paper and summarizing the key points yourself are different for a reader, and you need to make this difference explicit by demarking which parts you have taken in verbatim.
>
> Can I get in trouble for this?
>
>
>
Yes.
>
> I would not go that far in considering anything of this as plagiarism, as the work is referenced and I am not taking credit for someone else's work. Personally if one would do the same with my work, I would not be concerned at all, on the contrary, as long as not more than a few sentences are taken and the work is properly referenced, but you may have a different view.
>
>
>
This reminds me a bit of a few high-profile cases of plagiarisms that were going around lately in the german-speaking areas. Often, the excuses presented by the accused authors were similar ("hey, the text I copied wasn't really that important - it was just the introduction after all!", "I cited it anyway, I just did not make clear that the text is actually copied from there", etc.). These excuses never fly. Be rigorous with your handling of sources. Everything else is just playing with fire.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You can quote of course, but if you copy-paste without making clear this is a citation, then not appropriate. The smallest copyright unit is normally a sentence that must be rephrased.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I cannot see that there is any exception to using quotes and providing the full, correct citation. It is honest and correct, anything less just doesn't cut it.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/07 | 1,375 | 6,064 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been trying to write a paper. Reading the introduction part I am getting different behaviours from different papers.
Some papers cover themselves more than 50% with introduction content as if they are the only source of information present anywhere while some give it very briefly expecting user to be well aware.
As a reader I never expected to learn the concept from paper intro part itself but from books and then read papers. I rather think that introduction section shall be used to provide very brief intro and references for further understanding. Repeating an algorithm that's present in 500 books makes no sense.
I need some tips on writing introduction part that its just about enough or is it mandatory to repeat info to make it somewhat complete in itself ?<issue_comment>username_1: How much detail to provide in the introduction depends on the circumstances. The minimum requirement is to give enough context and references that a diligent reader could fill in any missing background, at the cost of some extra work. However, that's a pretty undemanding requirement; a few papers fail to do this, but they generally fail by not even trying. It's often valuable to do more to make life easier for the reader. How much more depends on who you expect will read the paper, and on what you believe they want or need from the introduction. (Some papers are read only by impatient experts, while others attract a broad audience.) What's considered appropriate may vary between fields or even subfields, but here are a few general principles:
1. Targeting an audience for your papers can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you aim at a very specialized audience, it becomes much less likely that anyone else will read your papers. Attracting a broader audience is on the whole a good thing, both for scientific progress and for your own career, so it's best not to limit your audience unnecessarily. If modest changes will make your writing much more accessible, then they are probably a good idea.
2. It's easy to overestimate how much readers really know. In an ideal world, every researcher would remember all the details of everything they ever studied, but life doesn't work that way. Of course you can't re-teach things from scratch (and shouldn't even try), but sometimes a brief reminder can be really helpful. This is particularly true when the details matter: if the reader really needs to know exactly how a certain algorithm works to understand your paper, then restating the algorithm can be worthwhile even if you suspect most readers will already be somewhat familiar with it. Those who already know the details can easily skim just enough to convince themselves that their version is the same as yours, while those who don't can read more carefully.
3. The introduction plays a crucial role in describing the context and explaining why you did these things and what the consequences are. It may not be the part of the paper that most excites you, but it will almost certainly be the most-read section (not counting the abstract). The purpose of your paper is to communicate your discoveries, and making the introduction more accessible is sometimes the best way to achieve this.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The general guideline is "just enough." However, the "enough" differs audience to audience, even the article is on the same topic.
Knowing who are going to read it would decide how broad and deep the introduction should be. Say we are writing about [Olestra](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra). In a more general publication like a magazine or a blog the introduction may need to include what it is, how it is being used, its chemical properties, its impacts on health, and perhaps some controversies surrounding the compound. In public health or nutrition journals, it may just merit a parenthetical explanation. However, in a food industry journal, the name itself is sufficient.
When in doubt, err on telling more. A well-structured but slightly longer introduction is far less offensive than a cluster of very well selected but illogically laid out arguments.
Another point worth mentioning is that length is perhaps a proxy of the breadth and depth of the introduction, but I think the overall structure of the arguments surpasses length. Generally, I'd focus on an engaging *opening* that summarizes what is known. Use proper languages here to hint the level of the article. Then, discuss the *problems or challenges*. Afterwards, how would your work *act* to address the aforementioned problems and challenges. And lastly, how would your work *resolve* the suggested problems.
As a reviewer, I'd look for the interconnections between all these components rather than focusing on the length.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As <NAME> wrote [on about.com](http://homeworktips.about.com/od/paperassignments/a/introsentence.htm):
>
> The introductory paragraph of any paper, long or short, should start with a sentence that piques the interest of your readers.
>
>
> ...that first sentence will lead into three or four sentences that provide details about the subject or your process you will address in the body of your essay. These sentences should also set the stage for your thesis statement.
>
>
> The thesis statement is the subject of much instruction and training. The entirety of your paper hangs on that sentence, which is generally the last sentence of your introductory paragraph.
>
>
> In summary, your introductory paragraph should contain the following:
>
>
> * an attention-grabbing first sentence
> * informative sentences that build to your thesis
> * the thesis statement, which makes a claim or states a view that you will support or build upon.
>
>
>
You can check this link for more about each section of the paper.
[http://abacus.bates.edu/~ganderso/biology/resources/writing/HTWsections.html#introduction](http://abacus.bates.edu/%7Eganderso/biology/resources/writing/HTWsections.html#introduction)
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/05/07 | 784 | 3,339 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergraduate in Computer Science who's has just completed his 2nd year. However I could not get an internship for the summer leaving me extremely tense about the future since there would be only one summer left (i.e., the summer of 2015 since I graduate in 2016).
I intend to apply to graduate schools in North America and Europe after my UG. However since I will have only one internship under my belt (assuming I bag one in summer 2015) will it put a damper on my prospects? Or is it the place of and quality of work done in my internship (coupled with good recommendation letters—which I doubt I will get) that would be far better than the number of internships under my belt?
I'm in the process of building a portfolio of real-life projects to demonstrate my skills and capabilities. I am also contributing code to open-source organisations in the next two months à la Google Summer of Code (however without the formal recognition) on a totally voluntary basis. Will that help in overcoming lack of an internship between my second and third year? What else can I do that can help me build a better application for graduate school?<issue_comment>username_1: If you are applying to a PhD, that portfolio of real life projects might not matter much.
In Graduate programs, they are very interested in proof that the student is capable of pursuing research, which is usually proven via a BS Thesis or a couple of Publications. Here in the US, many take a year off to work in some lab to get both a letter of recommendation and at least a publication in some conference.
I'm evaluating having a Grad student right now, and I would certainly would be more interested in him/her having proof that they know what grad school is all about rather than showing that they are good programmers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is a lack of internships is not a problem.
The long answer has two cases:
1. MSCS programs in the United States are profit makers for
universities. It is much easier to get into an MSCS program at a
top university than the PhD program at the same university.
Research experience is a plus, but I don't think industry experience
matters. Grades and recommendations from professors are most
important.
2. CS PhD programs in the United States almost exclusively admit
students that they are willing to fund, so they are much harder to
get into. In addition to strong grades and letters of
recommendation, schools want to see that you are capable of working
independently at research. The best way to do this, as username_1
answered, is to have research experience, including a thesis and/or
publications. Next best is to have completed projects not required
for any class. That shows you are capable of doing a project
without its being broken down into lots of steps with intermediate
deadlines. I'd say Summer of Code-like experience is at least as
valuable as an industry internship. It shows passion and the
ability to work independently. Incorporate that into your essay,
and get a letter of recommendation from someone on the project (or
from a professor at your institute if one is nominally supervising
your work for internship or independent study credit).
I am not knowledgeable about admission into programs outside of the United States.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/07 | 667 | 2,906 | <issue_start>username_0: I am from engineering, and I would like to know if I am able to find a job in industrial research lab after finishing my master, will there be any advantage or disadvantage compared with entering the same lab after finishing PhD? Possible advantage may be that I have more industrial experience as I enter the lab earlier, and possible disadvantage may be that without a PhD position I cannot be promoted to certain senior positions or lead a project. Are these true? Are there more advantages or disadvantages for this?<issue_comment>username_1: These are some experiences I've seen with people with similar dilemmas.
In my area, computer science, many people used to go to Yahoo after their Masters or BS, and for a time it was well.
After the Yahoo huge layoff, I met many people who were being denied high level positions because they did not have a PhD, we are not talking entry level position, but people with many years of experience in the industry.
I do not think a PhD is essential to move ahead in the company, but it sure is a huge help if you have one. Also, I'm not sure the research experience you will have in an industrial research lab will be comparable to the research experience you will have as a PhD student. Not that one is better than the other, but Grad school has certain liberties that industry does not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: For many *research* positions in industry, a PhD is a requirement to apply for the job. With just an M.S., you simply cannot be considered for these positions. Some research jobs I have seen in industrial labs *are* available to candidates with either a PhD or an M.S. with several years of industry experience, but I don't see as many of these.
Industrial research labs often also have non-research positions (e.g., staff programmer) that do not require a PhD. However, these positions tend to not be on the research "track": you cannot easily be promoted from "staff programmer" to "junior member of technical staff" in many companies. If you are interested in doing creative research, staff programmer jobs are not a direct path to research scientist jobs.
Smaller companies tend to be more flexible, so that it may be easier to get a research job without a PhD in a tiny company than a large global one.
Of course, this can vary by industry and geographic region. (My experience is in the field of telecommunications and computer networks, in the United States.)
You can find out more about your particular field of interest by going to the "Careers" page of the labs you are considering, and looking up the requirements for the jobs that you would like to do.
However, as a rule, if you are interested in doing creative research (and not just working in a support position in a research lab), you will have more opportunities available to you with a PhD than without one.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/07 | 3,334 | 14,579 | <issue_start>username_0: My research group has regular group meeting but I usually think it is not effective. In particular the research area of the group is very diverse, every time I just listen on something I cannot understand and have totally no interest on it, and I believe other members think the same way as I do when I am presenting. While it is a good way to expose to something new, and know other group members what they are doing, **this is not effective for my own research**. I know group meeting has its point ([What is the purpose of the weekly research meetings that advisers often have with their research group?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2785/what-is-the-purpose-of-the-weekly-research-meetings-that-advisers-often-have-wit)), but how can it be conducted in a more effective way?
As a supervisor:
1. How frequent should a regular group meeting be? It depends on the field, and I hear something like daily to three months.
2. When should a regular group meeting be? I know some groups insist on Monday morning, some groups choose Friday evening which is terrible.
3. How long should a group meeting be?
4. What level of detail should a supervisor comment to one's work? From every experimental concepts, to a vague conceptual suggestion?
As a student:
1. What should a student prepare before a group meeting to have an effective meeting? To present every problem he/she faces, or just some significant results (if there is)?
2. Should a student question other's member work? Sometimes it may be constructive, but it can also be an interruption.
If you are a faculty, how do you conduct your group meeting? As a research student, what can you suggest for an effective group meeting? An effective group meeting can greatly help on one's research work, otherwise it is just a drain of energy, time and motivation.<issue_comment>username_1: You have a lot of questions interspersed within your question, but it sounds like the main issue is
>
> the research area of the group is very diverse, every time I just listen on something I cannot understand and have totally no interest on it, and I believe other members think the same way as I do when I am presenting.
>
>
>
I have had the same problem in the past. I'm a professor who works in a variety of related subfields, some very theoretical and some fairly applied. Most of my students and postdocs have been focused exclusively on either something theoretical or something applied, and their backgrounds range from computer science to mathematics to electrical engineering, so there is often a disconnect when they try to communicate what they are doing. Here is my advice.
For students:
-------------
1. **Try to broaden your focus and interests.** It is natural that you have a very narrow research focus as a grad student, but if you want to get and keep a job afterward you'll almost certainly need to broaden your focus. I find that in general the best researchers almost always have broad interests (though they are able to focus their energy narrowly when needed). Group meetings are an opportunity to become acquainted with topics that are on the horizon of your current knowledge.
2. **Use group meetings as an opportunity to improve your communication skills.** Teaching non-experts about your work is a critical skill in any research career. Other students in the group do not know nearly as much as you about your research topic, but that doesn't mean that you cannot make it interesting and accessible to them. Often this means leaving out the "details" and explaining just the essence of a problem. Trust me, some day soon you will need to make your work interesting and intelligible to people who are much further removed from your specialty.
For advisors:
-------------
1. **Help students to present their work in a way that the others can understand.** Often this means prompting the student, especially at the beginning of a presentation, to add important assumptions, motivation, or background. The student has started to take these things for granted, but without them any non-expert is quickly lost.
2. **Don't let the conversation drift too far into a very specialized discussion.** If you and the student are the only ones who have any idea of what is being discussed, it's probably time to say "let's discuss this further after the meeting".
3. **Use meetings for skills development**. This was already mentioned in [this related answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/2790/81). Instead of focusing exclusively on research, group meetings can also include discussions of things like:
* How to write papers
* How to read papers
* How to search the literature
* How to manage a bibliography
* How to give good presentations
* How to write a proposal
* How to keep a lab notebook
* How to keep up with newly published research
* How to stay organized and be productive
* How to referee a paper
* Software tools for all of the above, and for research
These topics are useful and interesting to anyone involved in research.
Answers to other parts of the question
--------------------------------------
* I hold group meetings once a week, and they last 1-2 hours
* Students are strongly encouraged to question and comment on each other's work
* We meet at lunch time, and there is food. That doesn't sound important, but I think it is.
* I try to save very detailed comments for my one-on-one meetings with students. Otherwise, the group meeting can devolve into a conversation between the advisor and just one student.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: 1. Frequency: depends on the size of the group. When someone has some new result that they are going to present (in a conference or any other venue) this may be useful to practice, etc. Therefore the frequency depends on how often people are producing results. This is also an opportunity for everybody starting something new to ask whether there is someone with some related expertise that could be useful (I prefer mailing lists for this specific thing).
2. Time:people have commitments. Chose some time that fits everybody. I'd suggest before lunch to have the chance to continue the meeting *while* (not instead of) having lunch.
3. How long should it be?: As long as needed, as short as possible.
4. General comments: useful for everybody. E.g. in the style of the presentation. What is specific for each person or group should be commented directly to them (thus without boring anyone else).
5. Student preparation/presentation: Whatever s/he has to present according to point 1.
6. Questions: Yes, everybody should participate. *All* questions and interruptions should be at the end of the presentation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Group meetings are very important, and I think it is worthwhile to organise them very well, to make sure they are focussed, to-the-point, time-effective, and that everybody participates. I remember my time as a graduate student as having very efficient group meetings, and most of my points below are based on my experiences back then.
>
> How frequent should a regular group meeting be? It depends on the field, and I hear something like daily to three months.
>
>
>
I think weekly is good. If people want to discuss significant results, one should not wait too long. However, too often takes away too much of peoples time.
>
> When should a regular group meeting be? I know some groups insist on Monday morning, some groups choose Friday evening which is terrible.
>
>
>
I've experienced groups with group meetings on either Monday afternoon or Tuesday afternoon, and I think both are good. However, I don't think it is the most important aspect. Personally, I don't like to have meetings during lunch. Although I understand the motivation, I believe it is important to have a break from work at some point.
>
> How long should a group meeting be?
>
>
>
When I was a graduate student, we had group meetings of *at most one hour*. We would typically have between 5 and 10 people attending the meeting (normally everybody in the group who was not away travelling). Each week, one person would be the moderator, and one person would be taking notes. Those roles would be alternating, providing everybody with useful experience in managing meetings or taking notes. We'd start with general announcements, and then everybody had the opportunity to present some plots. Some weeks, few if any people had anything to present any new results or bring up anything for discussion, and we might be done in 20 minutes. Other weeks, the role of the moderator was essential to keep the meeting to one hour.
>
> What level of detail should a supervisor comment to one's work? From every experimental concepts, to a vague conceptual suggestion?
>
>
>
What I think is great about group meetings, is that *it is not only the supervisor commenting*. Naturally, it can happen that discussions lead into details. Although beneficial for the people directly involved in the discussion, it may be a waste of time for others. When this happens, the moderator (see above) would intervene (also in the interest of time) and suggest for a discussion to be proceeded "offline".
This hits two birds with one stone: the meeting is limited in duration, and the meeting focusses on overall discussions of broader interest.
>
> As a student:
>
>
> What should a student prepare before a group meeting to have an effective meeting? To present every problem he/she faces, or just some significant results (if there is)?
>
>
>
I think it is not useful to present every problem he/she faces in front of the entire group. Some problems are best discussed one-to-one with the most expert colleague (scientist, engineer, technician). But if you have any significant results — like a first version of a plot that may end up in a paper, or anything warranting scientific discussion — that can be good to show.
>
> Should a student question other's member work? Sometimes it may be constructive, but it can also be an interruption.
>
>
>
Depends what you mean by *questioning*. I think a student should certainly comment on other members work if this is helpful. In the worst case, the comment is not relevant and the student learns something. Communication is essential to science, and communication with all members in the group has more benefits than communication exclusively between supervisor and student.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: 1. As a participant, and this applies to all kinds of meetings inside and outside of academia, it depends on whether it is a structured or unstructured meeting. It also depends on whether it is instructor led or student led. In both cases, having an agenda for the meeting will make it more effective; more on this below.
2. If the purpose of the group meetings is to brain storm in a collaborative environment, examine each others work, offer insights from unbiased but informed perspectives, and generate discussion, then an unstructured format is generally preferred. This gives participants the freedom for expressing ideas that may have a limited time value and impact. But this is also only valuable if there is a moderator to step in and control the discussion, allocate time to the points to be discussed, and everyone is a participant. If no one is, then there is little value to holding the meetings.
The most effective way to create the agenda for this, as well as determine the length of the meeting, is for the moderator to poll the participants on what points they wish to discuss. This can be during the last meeting, prior to the meeting through a communications medium, or at the beginning of the meeting. In all cases there should be common agreement that the agenda, once decided, is fixed and that all other discussion points will carry over to the next meeting if they are important enough.
Time wise, it should be reasonable; only an hour or two at most. More than that and you start to suffer attention span attrition. Frequency is based on need; if there is no need, then there should be less frequent meetings.
But I will not say that there should be no meetings; because that would signify that all of you have no interest in socializing with your peers, and do not consider peer and instructor review valuable. Which would not be beneficial from a professional standpoint.
3. If the purpose of the meeting is for everyone to present current findings and receive pointed guidance, then a structured meeting is preferred. The agenda is based on who has something to present; which all of you should, even if it is only current actions undertaken in your research. The danger of structured meetings where everyone is a participant, regardless of inclination or material, is that they can be extremely long if there are a lot of presenters; and also tedious if there really isn't anything to report and they are filling white-space.
The easiest way to create the agenda is to have a roster of the group and to have them brief their findings in the order that they are on that roster. They each have a set time to give out their information. The instructor then gives his guidance and possibly polls the group for opinions. Then the groups moves on to the next presenter.
Structured meetings with definite presentations require some legwork in the background. The most efficient way to get through multiple presenters is to have all of the presentations consolidated to one computer, either merged into one slide deck, or organized by briefer in the same folder. Who does that is something I'm sure the instructor will notify all of you about.
Time should be based on how many are in the group.
4. There are pros and cons to both approaches. The effectiveness of either depends on the participants and the instructor. If your meetings are not effective for any of the participants, then maybe you need to suggest to the group (off-line, during, or private session with the instructor I leave to your discretion) that the point of discussion for one of those meetings should be the effectiveness of those meetings. And then determine what each of you individually needs to take away from it, as well as what ways you are all collectively going to improve the quality of those meetings.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: At my group we use some [Agile methods](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development) from software development industry. Among others, we have short stand-up meetings and longer sprint sessions.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/07 | 322 | 1,380 | <issue_start>username_0: Could my institution get into legal hot water if we were to make copies of blank Scantron sheets? If so, are there good free alternatives for machine readable bubble sheets?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, there are some [open source alternatives](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_mark_recognition#Open_source). Scantron's software and hardware is proprietary.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The scantron forms and similar forms are not subect to copyright. US Copyright Office Title 37: Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights §202.1 Material not subject to copyright. (c) Blank forms, such as time cards, graph paper, account books, diaries, bank checks, scorecards, address books, report forms, order forms and the like, which are designed for recording information and do not in themselves convey information.
So to answer your question, no. As long as the school or university doesn't photocopy the actual scantron sheets from Scantron. inc. But it's not illegal for them to create their own version of the scantron sheets that can be readable by the official Scantron machine itself.
Plus, there are numerous companies, not even associated with Scantron. inc. in any sort, That sell scantron compatible sheets for cheaper prices than the 'official' scantron sheet. Amazon and eBay are full of them. So, yeah...
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/07 | 869 | 3,669 | <issue_start>username_0: I hold a BS in Mathematics with a minor in Statistics and I've been out of school for several years. I recently began applying to part time online master's programs in Statistics and Computer Science. I've been accepted to the online MSCS program through Johns Hopkins University and I'm hoping to be accepted to the online MAS (Master of Applied Statistics) through Pennsylvania State University as well. My goal is to earn both degrees, and with expertise in both disciplines become the ultimate statistical programmer!
The catch here is that I don't want to (and can't really afford to) leave my current job to pursue school full time, hence the part time online programs. I could do one degree after the other, but that would be another 8-10 years I'd be in school, all the while working.
It's useful to note that I'm already a statistical programmer. Degrees are helpful, especially if at some point I'd like to transition to being a full-fledged statistician or a more general-purpose programmer. In my mind at least, it offers a level of career flexibility not readily attainable with just a bachelor's or even a single master's.
But my question is this: **Is working 40 hours/week and taking two online master's level courses at a time in two different subjects from two different institutions completely insane?** My family sure thinks so. Does anyone have experience or input they could share?<issue_comment>username_1: Better to do one or the other. What you don't want to do is to fail out of either program. Pick the better/more prestigious one and do it. Also, I don't see how stacking up masters's degrees really helps you. I can see how one masters would help, but I don't see what value the second would add.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In my first semester as an undergraduate, I tried to take a double load of courses, and was dissuaded by the adviser assigned to me. I tried it anyway and failed one of the courses I had registered. (They let me do a big load in a later semester, with some success.) If I had stayed focused on my registered courses and let the courses I audited slip instead, I would not have that on my record. Also, I might have developed a different attitude toward that university.
Learning when not overachieve, or when not to make the attempt, is a hard lesson for many. Many years later, I am finding that I could have restructured my life, changed certain behaviours, and perhaps led a more efficient or satisfying or productive life. Fortunately, I still have some time to make changes.
In addition to the comment above about the proposed course likely being insane, and to seek help in real life (off the Internet) to pull it off anyway, I recommend a values inventory. The current program (one job, two degree programs) may seem feasible and cool and might nurture some internal aspect of pride; that doesn't mean it is good for you, or in line with how you will want to live your life.
Even if you don't know what you want to be when/if you grow up, checking in with yourself on what is important, and what you value, is a beneficial exercise you should repeat throughout your life. If you can (rationally and not maniacally) convince yourself that this use of time is in line with your current and possible future values, then go for it! It doesn't matter if you are crazy if you are enjoying yourself and not hurting yourself or others, but you may have to explain it to a judge or police officer; be prepared. If you aren't sure, ask for guidance, and avail yourself of the options that work and school might offer.
Either way, good luck to you.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/07 | 1,398 | 5,801 | <issue_start>username_0: I am doing my graduation project to become a Software Engineer. The project aims to study the behavior of freelance developers to subsequently design a process that allows more quality and efficiency.
To know the freelancer behavior I have made a survey, but I don't know what is the best way to publish the survey and get responses; after which I'll post an article.
I have published the survey in at least 7 forums, but in most of them my post has been closed for spamming.
Can any one tell me some advice for doing the survey? (on internet)<issue_comment>username_1: If you're using forums, don't just make a thread and then write:
>
> Class project, please fill out this survey. Link: www.xxxxxx984asdfac. Thx!!
>
>
>
Most of the time these annoying threads can trigger shutting down or be simply ignored as spam.
I'd recommend picking a few major forums and actually start a communication with the administrators. In no more than a few hundred words explain who you are, what questions you're trying to answer, and how your results may help both parties. If the outcome is positive, here are a bunch of wishes you can usually ask for:
1. Pin your thread at the top for a fixed amount of time to enhance visibility.
2. Tap into their membership e-mail or online messaging network for an announcement and about 2 waves of weekly reminders.
3. Provide you with important statistics including open rate, click rate, bounce rate, initiation rate, and completion rate. These are all necessary if you are to publish your results in an academic journal.
Try to enhance your credibility by, in the mail to the administrator and the message to the users:
1. Detailing the motive of your survey, what kind of questions respondents should anticipate, and how long would it take.
2. Getting an institutional review board approval, and report so in the announcement.
3. Explicitly mentioning the measures to ensure respondents' confidentiality and/or anonymity.
4. Explaining how the results will be used, and even be fed back to the communities that have helped you filling in the survey.
5. Being real and present by providing your official contact information (names and school e-mail are sufficient). Invite respondents to contact you if they have questions about the study. Check with your supervisor and department for policy of using the school's name.
6. Clearly stating the opening period of the survey.
You can also try contacting companies that hire freelancers, or talk to websites that organize freelance jobs.
I'd also suggest to make duplicates of your survey so that each forum will have their own referral link. You can pool the data later and compare the differences between forum. If you just make one survey you may not be able to figure that out at the end. Putting a "where do you learn about this survey?" question may also help, though probably not as objective.
Now, if you don't care about knowing all those rates, and just want a quick turn around of data, you may use your network to contact some high profile people in the field and see if they are willing to broadcast that for you. Most of the time, a tweet from them would be quite effective.
I also agree with the comments asking you to pay a visit to some social science faculty. At the very least, make sure your questions are examined by some professional for validity. Most researchers also do not mind share with you some templates of the survey introduction.
Some other technical strayed thoughts:
1. Do make a copy of online survey for each major source. Aka forum A will have its own link, and forum B will have its own link, etc. That way later you can stratify them in the analysis.
2. Invest in a good online survey service. Make sure not to enroll in those with limited responses. It'd be very annoying for the 501st respondent to get a "quota full" warning if your free service account only allows 500 responses.
3. Write good questions and include only relevant questions. Again, talking to some researchers will help a lot.
4. The [Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1550605/) provides a good list of components you should include in manuscript. Read them before you start data collection and make sure you have thought about all these factors.
Lastly, check if someone has already invented the wheel for you. Secondary data sets may have already covered information you wish to collect. For example [National Longitudinal Surveys](http://www.bls.gov/nls/) maintained by the US Department of Labor (I just went ahead and assume that you're interested in the US market) does ask question about freelancing. They even once released a [report](http://www.bls.gov/news.release/History/nlsyth_12202001.txt) about this.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To borrow from <NAME>:
>
> Why do I rob banks? Because that's where the money is.
>
>
>
You need to put your surveys where the people are. I've seen a few studies that used [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/simple.surveys), which lets you specify exactly which demographic should see your survey. [SurveyMonkey](http://help.surveymonkey.com/articles/en_US/kb/What-will-my-Audience-results-look-like) can also help put your survey in front of the people you'd like to see. I know that I had a lot of success putting up advertisements across campus offering to pay for participation, but that was for a study that involved more than just a single survey.
I would also suggest what was said in the comments... talk to the local economics, psychology, and sociology departments to see if they can give you any assistance with this. Researchers in all those areas will face this problem all the time.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/08 | 1,229 | 5,130 | <issue_start>username_0: I am working on a PhD in chemical engineering, and my advisor mentioned to me today that I'm on track to finish in about half a year. I only have one class left to fulfill the course requirements and I have a few papers published, with a couple more almost finished.
Personally, I'm in no hurry. I love grad school and working on research. However, from the perspective of a getting a good job, would a PhD at 23-24 years of age or additional research publications in high quality journals look better? Once I graduate I plan on either doing research in industry or working at a startup. I don't plan on going into academia.<issue_comment>username_1: In my field (computer science, broadly), my impression is as follows. It is of course an over-generalization.
* If you want to go into academia or industrial research, then what you
do during your Ph.D. matters much much more than how long you took,
though if you take more than 6 years to finish it starts to look bad.
* On the other hand, if you want to go into non-academic industry, you
might impress people with a fast Ph.D. because you'd show yourself to be the sort of person who can finish big things fast.
If you're only 2.5 years in, unless you have an offer from someplace and need to finish ASAP, and especially if you're enjoying your Ph.D., I wouldn't rush to graduate that quickly.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: My overall impression is that prodigies and *Wunderkinder* are not all that eagerly sought after in industry—particularly in fields associated with chemical engineering (my discipline). Twenty-three or twenty-four, however, is not *too* young, but it's probably right on the cusp.
However, if your work has reached the point of maturity, and you and your advisor feel that there isn't much for you to gain by remaining in graduate school longer, then it's time to move on and find a job. Of course, in the current economic climate, job searches can last many months, so even if you were ready to defend in six months, you might not have anywhere to go to afterward! (Unless, of course, you start your job search now, which may delay the time it takes you to finish, and so on.)
One final possibility that does cross my mind is the possibility that the funding being used to support your work is running out, and there isn't a follow-up source available—hence the notion of being able to finish soon being introduced.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Another (similar) opinion from the computer science field:
* If you want to continue with research, then it doesn't matter whether you have done your PhD in 2 or in 5 years. If you have still interesting things to do on your topic, why not doing them? However, think about your motivation. Now you have the goal to finish your PhD. After an year you will no longer have a goal and continue researching. Will it still be interesting for you?
* If you want to go in the industry (especially in startup), then you really don't need to do more research. In some cases it is even seen bad when you have done research, as this is quite different from the kind of (simple, imperfect, fast) work that is mostly needed in industry.
I would take my decision depending on my interests and not depending on what looks good. Both alternatives look fine, it is much more important whether continuing research on the topic is interesting enough for you or you want to have it behind you.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Ask yourself what your PhD will mean in your career. For some people, it's simply a "certificate of competence" - it shows they are a good researcher, they can think independently, create original thought, test hypotheses, write coherently...
For others, it is a sign that they have mastered a specific field.
If you fall in the first category, then by all means finish and move on. I work "in industry" and have hired a number of people like this. The first thing I tell them is "your PhD is a license to learn". Once that message sinks in, they realize that our particular field has so much more to learn, and they can become quite effective.
If you fall in the second category, then ask yourself if your current environment is the place to continue honing your specific skills. If it is, and you are enjoying yourself - stick around. Finish your PhD and stay on as a post-doc, maybe. It's not wrong to finish fast; it depends on who you are, and who you want to become.
Either way - you are in the enviable position of having choices. Make sure you realize how lucky you are.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: If you don't want to stay in academia and want to further your career as much as possible, get the PhD as fast as possible and start working. No one will care about how many years you spent in grad school and they also won't care very much about your number of publications. They will care about work experience which is what you would be building over the next few years.
If you really enjoy grad school, don't mind missing about on money and want to spend a lot more time learning, then you may want to stay.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/08 | 705 | 2,971 | <issue_start>username_0: As a beginner researcher, several years ago, I sent some (2-3) papers to a quality journal (with ISI IF). The papers were rejected.
Now I am preparing a manuscript, which is in my opinion much more mature.
In the meantime I had some papers published in other journals.
Now I am considering the same journal again, because of the topic.
Is it a good idea ? Or is there going to be some bias because of earlier rejections ?
Just to clarify: this is a completely new manuscript.<issue_comment>username_1: This is perfectly legit. You are not forbidden to submit ever again to a journal that has rejected one of your earlier manuscripts. Indeed, rejections happen for everyone. It is best not to take them too badly.
Now, it would be a different story if you resubmitted the same paper that was previously rejected, or a version with only minor updates. Sending an entirely new manuscript, or a much more mature version, is unproblematic.
>
> Or is there going to be some bias because of earlier rejections ?
>
>
>
Important journals get **many** submissions, the majority of which they have to reject. I think it is very unlikely that the responsible editor even remembers that you already had a paper rejected a few years back. And even if (s)he does, it is unlikely that (s)he holds it against you. As I said, rejection is something that happens to every researcher, at least now and then.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to username_1's answer, which hits on most of the main points, I would add one further suggestion, if the manuscript is a revised version of a previously rejected manuscript.
As part of the cover letter to the editor, you should indicate that this is a resubmission of the previous paper. You should also outline **clearly** what has changed from the previous manuscript to the current one: what have you added or removed, and how the present manuscript is an improvement over the previous version.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Not only is this a good idea, but its relatively common, and a decent publication strategy overall. Given a particular topic is likely to have more than one journal, a way to decide where to submit is to submit it to the "top" journal that you think you have a shot at getting into (you shouldn't submit work that has no chance - its a waste of your time and theirs), and then letting the paper "slide" down the rankings as it gets rejected.
Rejection doesn't even imply that you submitted to the wrong journal, or that the work wasn't worth trying to get in there - the vagaries of editorial discretion, publishing cycles, and reviewers mean something might have had a legitimate shot at getting in but just missed this time. The next paper? Start the process over again.
Unless your submission is egregious enough to be *memorably bad*, the odds of the editors holding rejections against you, or even remembering you specifically, are pretty low.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/08 | 3,220 | 12,604 | <issue_start>username_0: People in my program complain a lot and usually not in good humor. How can I handle this socially and professionally?
Some of these people are my friends and some are no more than peers. In general I want to be respectful but not allow them to harangue me with complaints. Generally, [much of this advice](http://whatshouldwecallgradschool.tumblr.com/post/39774996944/my-advice-to-first-years-worrying-about-exam) does not help.
For now, I try to avoid social gatherings with a high concentration of people from my program. When they get together, the complaints take over conversation. At the department, I can spot someone (or a group) having a stress crisis from a distance, and I keep my distance.
I certainly hope that this climate does not continue into faculty life.
[Migrated from other question [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20401/why-do-phd-students-complain-so-much-and-how-to-best-handle-it). There were some useful pieces of advice, so I hope that respondents will move their points]<issue_comment>username_1: *(as suggested by jabberwocky, I have moved the last part of my answer from [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20401/why-do-phd-students-complain-so-much/20412?noredirect=1#comment42706_20412) to this question)*
>
> People in my program complain a lot and usually not in good humor. How can I handle this socially and professionally?
>
>
>
I have experienced that "dissatisfaction" can also be very infectious. Dissatisfied people often and strongly complain to their co-workers and co-students, which, over time, gives those people the same sense of dissatisfaction. For instance, in my old lab, we had one office room of people that were constantly dissatisfied about our work environment (all the other students in other rooms felt differently). Any new student that would be seated in this office would, within weeks, also start to complain a lot. As such, I think your goal
>
> In general I want to be respectful but not allow them to harangue me with complaints.
>
>
>
is very good. Try not to let other people convince you that life is terrible.
I am not sure whether entirely avoiding social outings is the right strategy, though. This will make you an outsider of your cohort, and you will have to spend **a lot** of time with these people in the next years. At parties, a usual strategy to avoid any topic that you do not want to talk about (politics, sports, or whether your life is terrible) is to avoid the groups that are currently talking about the annoying topics and focus your attention to people that are discussing something more interesting.
Sometimes, people will come directly to you to complain one-on-one about their problems. In such cases, one strategy is to acknowledge that they are feeling bad, but provide a more positive light on their case. When you do that regularly, two things may happen. In the best case, the complainer actually takes your words to heart and starts seeing things a bit brighter. If that does not happen, he will at least stop complaining to *you* specifically, because he is actually looking for somebody who echoes his feelings.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: *(as suggested by jabberwocky, I have moved the last part of my answer from [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/20429/13852) to this question)*
Kvetching is a perfectly normal part of mental and social hygiene, but to what extent depends on the person. It is also a self-affirming activity: If complaining leads to positive social experiences (people you talk to relate to your experiences and opinions and share them), you will do this more often. If unchecked, this vicious circle can easily cross your tolerance threshold for complaining (which is different for each person). So, first of all you should keep in mind that "too much complaining" is your subjective view, not an objective truth (absent a concrete case of someone spending the day complaining instead of working and then failing to meet a deadline). Of course, if you'd rather have less complaining around you, it's perfectly legitimate to try to break that circle.
The best strategy (outside of avoiding complaining peers, which you apparently now follow) is often to lead by example: Do not respond to complaining with your own complaints (especially not with ones about their complaining), but try to steer the conversation to happier grounds by
* getting them to relate positive experiences about their PhD;
* mentioning ones you might have had (without showing off -- this one can be tricky);
* taking an interest in their lives outside of academia.
In short, show them that they can have positive social interactions without complaining. If enough people around you feel the same way as you do, this usually works.
To your final remark: This is by no means limited to PhD students (or even academia) -- you get similar "hot spots" among early-career faculty simultaneously applying for permanent positions (in Europe) or trying to get tenure (in the US), or among tenured faculty of any seniority any time a major evaluation (of a grant or institute) or reaccreditation is imminent.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As a PhD student who like to complain (partly as a PhD student, partly as a Slav) and work/live in such environment: it's not much about etiquette (at worst, they will *complain* about your behavior), but about social contacts.
If your goal is to avoid complaints (especially non-productive ones):
* DO steer away from sensitive topics (especially if it is not a new topic, e.g. "We already had a discussion about the odds of getting tenure; if we have nothing more to add, let's talk about X..."); some people have their weak points you don't want to touch,
* DO try to focus on something positive (sometimes non academia-related topics can be the best/safest),
* DON'T try to persuade that they don't have a problem (it's like persuading someone that (s)he is not feeling pain),
* DON'T start complaining by yourself (it is a positive feedback mechanism),
* DON'T start conversations with "how is your thesis?", or in tougher cases, not even "how are you?",
* DON'T talk that other have worse (not many people are happy when hearing about others being unemployed or anything),
* DO focus on their opportunities (in academia, science, non-academic job market, seeing an cool city while on a conference, etc),
* DO try to focus on facts and actions rather than pointless complaints (see below).
Some people complain no matter what and no matter what is the topic - then you can't help.
With respect to complaints, PhD students are often smart and analytical. Saying that complaints never solve anything but one should focus on cold diagnosis and action often helps (or at least - halts some complaints). See (a bit different context, but somewhat related):
>
> [...] People who struggle against the system (in this case, national education, but you can insert here any academic or political institution you don't like), or try to reform the system from the inside, often end up bitter and frustrated. Large institutions evolve at glacial speed, so whatever aspects one might want to reform, instead of fighting the resistance of matter it seems more fruitful to find a niche and expand from there. [...] **We’d have got nowhere if we simply complained about the Polish education system and stopped at that.**
>
>
>
from my text [An independent camp for high school geeks](http://warsztatywww.wikidot.com/en%3aindie-camp-for-hs-geeks), emphasis mine
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: As I said in the other question, you can avoid some of this, but shared suffering is a bonding experience - you and your cohorts will have the experience of having been "in the trenches" together, and this can be a fairly powerful bond with people who will be your colleagues in the future. Especially for those who are "just" your peers, those kinds of links can be important.
I think there's also a reason people complain in social settings in academia - some amount of stress and suffering is universal, but success is largely personal. Everyone can commiserate about quals, or NIH pay lines, or how brutal a particular class was, but at any given moment far fewer people are riding the high of getting a paper accepted, going to a conference they're looking forward to, landing that prestigious postdoc, etc. Focusing on that also highlights those people who *aren't* experiencing that. When I was in graduate school, the complaining was about things that happened to you *because you were a graduate student* not because they were your fault - everyone was stressed, everyone was poor, etc.
Some thoughts of mine on dealing with it:
* Don't dismiss the complaints. A lot of people want to know they're not alone, and just writing off their problems - however trivial or annoying you might find them - isn't going to make the social situation better.
* Refocus the conversation on shared experiences that are funny or odd or some how enjoyable, rather than just complaints. The professor with the oddball anecdotes, the antics of the students you are supervising, etc.
* Know things about your cohort's lives outside of school. It's a lot easier to not complain about school if you have something else to talk about.
* As @PiotrMigdal said, put the brakes on a little harder when things turn to sensitive topics - that doesn't go good places.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> In general I want to be respectful but not allow them to harangue me with complaints
>
>
>
Good answers so far. I would add that I have found that different complainers have different goals for their complaining. Compare and contrast these two conversations:
* Professor Bedfellow is always on my case to get the grading done faster, it's driving me crazy how awful people are here.
* Have you tried talking to the professor about it?
* Yes, but prof just says "I'm busy!" and I should come back later. It's awful!
* Have you tried asking the admin to schedule a short meeting?
* Yes, but the admin hates me. People in this department are awful!
* Surely the admin will do their job even if they dislike you.
* Yes, but by the time I get a meeting it'll be too late! Everything is awful!
* AAARGH YOU ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO DEAL WITH.
vs
* Professor Bedfellow is always on my case to get the grading done faster, it's driving me crazy how awful people are here.
* That's terrible.
* The prof just says "I'm busy!" and I should come back later. It's awful!
* How irritating that must be for you.
* And the admin hates me. People in this department are awful!
* How vexing.
* By the time I get a meeting it'll be too late! Everything is awful!
* Boy, that must be frustrating.
In the first conversation the joy of complaining is secondary to the actual goal of the conversation, which is to infuriate the person trying in vain to solve their friend's problem. This is a Why-don't-you-Yes-but conversation and the first person to get frustrated loses.
The second conversation seems exactly the same, but the friend this time is commiserating rather than playing Why-don't-you-Yes-but.
My point is: if the complainer is looking for people to have a game of why-don't-you-yes-but, and you play that game, they'll keep on coming back to you if you play. If that's what they're looking for and you just nod and say "You're right, everything is awful" over and over again, they'll get bored and look for someone else to frustrate.
Now, if the person is genuinely just looking for someone to say "yes, that's awful", then you deal with that by *not saying that more than once*. Let them get in one complaint and then change the subject until they get the hint.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: May not apply, but: There are regional variations in how complaining is used socially. New Yorkers, for example, tend to see it as an opportunity for bonding (sharing complaints about something else implies you don't have complaints about the person you're sharing them with), whereas midwesterners tend to hear that kind of complaint as general annoyance which could be directed against them in the next breath.
Understanding the subtext may help with finding ways to either deal with the complainers or explain to them why they're making you uncomfortable.
(Recommended reading: <NAME>'s books analyzing variations in conversational styles, specifically [That's Not What I Meant!](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/That%27s_Not_What_I_Meant!))
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/08 | 514 | 1,972 | <issue_start>username_0: The [ABET accreditation criteria document for Computer Science](http://www.abet.org/cac-criteria-2014-2015/) lists some course requirements as
* One year of Science and Mathematics
* At least one half year of Mathematics
* One and one-third years of Computer Science
* At least one year of up-to-date coverage of fundamental and advanced topics
How many courses is one year equivalent to? It may mean 10, going by 5 courses per semester. "One year of X" may mean a year where there is at least one course on X every semester. In either case, "one and one-third years" of courses does not make sense.<issue_comment>username_1: A "year" of a subject almost certainly means one course per term for a year's worth of terms. That is, "one year of science" at a semester school would mean two courses in science. (At least, this is how I've seen similar terminology used in discussing mathematics requirements---when people say something requires "2 years of math" they mean taking in total at least four semester long courses, not necessarily consecutively.)
The "one and one-third" years is presumably for schools which use trimesters, where that means 4 courses. (I assume that at a semester school that means three courses---a year and a half---since these are minimal requirements, though I wonder if they really expect schools which use trimesters to include two courses on discrete math.)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: ABET formally defines a "year" as
>
> The lesser of 32 semester-hours (or equivalent) or one-fourth of the credits required for graduation [1].
>
>
>
The wiggle room in the definition is almost certainly because of the wide variety of credit systems used by various schools. "One and a third years" would then equate either to 42 semester hours, or four full trimesters or quarters of study for those on alternate study schedules.
[1] <http://www.abet.org/eac-criteria-2014-2015/>
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/08 | 570 | 2,521 | <issue_start>username_0: During my undergraduate, I have a publication, however I am listed as the second author. I know it is not as ideal as being listed as first author, but for graduate admission, will it still play a role?<issue_comment>username_1: No-one would expect an undergraduate to publish papers so the fact that you have been involved in publishable research is a merit. One of the goals of a Phd education is to learn to write good research papers so, again, no-one would expect that from your from the start. I would suggest that you try to describe your contribution to the paper so that your authorship can be valued from the perspective of that contribution. Being able to understand the skills and experience of a student, provided it is good, is of value in a selection process.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It will absolutely still play a role. What graduate schools are looking for in terms of publications, undergraduate research conferences, etc. is not that you already have an established body of first author publications (that's the point of grad school) but that you have some experience and aptitude for research.
A second-author publication establishes that.
This is especially true in some fields like medicine, public health, etc. where the results of a large study might have many authors, and no matter how much you contributed as an undergrad, the odds of you meriting first or last authorship is slim. However, regardless of your field, there are some things you should also consider doing:
* As @PeterJansson suggested, make sure you can describe what it is you contributed to the paper. You might not have room for this on your CV, but in application essays and in interviews, this will be important. If it's the only paper on your CV (which is likely), you're *going* to have to talk about it. It won't be held against you if you're the 2nd author, but it likely won't look good if you can't communicate what the paper was about or how you helped.
* Consider seeing if there are ancillary questions in the research (how sensitive our our results to X? What about Y?) that might make good projects you could take the lead on and get a conference presentation or short paper out of.
* Similarly, look out for opportunities to present undergraduate work at your institution, and apply to those. Even if you're not the first author on the publication, it's often possible to present on your part of the work in the context of the larger whole.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/08 | 840 | 3,556 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it possible to apply for a PhD through a government or a military research laboratory?
If so what would be the process? Is the qualifying exam required? How is that scheduled? How about course work?<issue_comment>username_1: I am in the UK so in other countries things may be different.
Some government research institutes fund PhDs, where you are based at the institute for your research. However the PhD itself must be awarded by an academic institution (i.e. a university). You will generally have a supervisor at this university and its name will be on the certificate.
The specifics are going to vary for place to place including: what, if any, taught courses you must do, how often you must visit your university etc. In my experience these factors are often a compromise between the two institutions, particularly the university often has various requirements for the PhD while the research institute just wants you to do research for them.
As for applying, you should expect the same/similar requirements to a standard PhD. when looking for positions the host university or the industrial lab are the best places to start. Although it is not always clear whether the position is just funded by the lab, but based at the university, or actually based at the lab.
A related option, not sure how location dependent it is, is doing an EngD. These tend to be more industry focused, often in a company.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, you cannot have your PhD degree *awarded by* a government or military laboratory, and similarly industrial labs generally cannot award degrees, either.
However, having worked at several government labs, I can confirm that it is possible to be a grad student and do your thesis research at a government lab. Usually this is done under a co-advising arrangement within an existing collaboration (Prof. X at university A works with Dr. Y at lab B), or under a cross-affiliation (Prof. X has a joint appointment at both university A and lab B).
More specific details differ too much depending on the university and department's regulations, as well as those of the lab in which you're interested in working, so you'd need to ask them specifically. However, it is also worth noting that many graduate departments still have a "residency requirement" on the books—which states that you must spend some number of semesters actually registered as a student at the university before receiving a PhD.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: There are very few exceptions to this, and those exceptions that exist are usually simply collaborations between an institution and a PhD-granting academic institution. For example, [the Danish Council for Independent Research](http://ufm.dk/en/research-and-innovation/councils-and-commissions/the-danish-council-for-independent-research/for-applicants/what-can-you-apply-for/overview-of-instruments/research-educations-outside-the-universities-phd) funds PhDs that are hosted at research institutions that do not normally grant PhDs. However, you have to maintain and actually earn the degree from a university, even if you spend the entire time working at the non-academic institution.
Similarly, some institutions that are not universities grant PhDs. For example, [the RAND Corporation](http://www.prgs.edu/) runs a graduate program in public policy analysis, even though it is not a university and grants no degrees other than that single PhD.
In general, however, you need to be at a research university to earn a PhD.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/08 | 1,729 | 7,349 | <issue_start>username_0: The graduate students at my university (a relatively large state school in the US) are considering joining a union. To help decide whether to sign a union card in support of joining the union, I'm interested in more information about how unions have helped graduate students at other universities. What are some improvements to graduate life gained by graduate students at other universities upon joining a union?
I'm also interested in information about how unions have hurt graduate students at other universities. What are some detriments to graduate life caused by graduate students joining a union?
I'm primarily interested in student-body-wide benefits/detriments, instead of student-specific or faculty/administrator-specific claims (e.g. "my advisor treated me better with the union behind me" or "my students have stopped working since they joined a union" is not what I'm looking for).<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have first-hand knowledge of specific details, but I am aware that at my university the graduate student union has successfully negotiated items like:
* Basic health care coverage for GAs, RAs and TAs, with full coverage provided to 0.5 FTE assistants.
* Tuition payment deferment so that earned stipends can pay tuition fees not covered by tuition waivers.
* Paycheck deductions in installments for parking permits for graduate assistants.
I have also been told that they negotiate assistantship salaries and minimum and maximum working loads for assistants, and that the union will represent assistants should a grievance arise.
I've never discussed the graduate student union with anyone in my department – professors and other students alike – and am aware of no negative impacts of my membership.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: I went to graduate school in mathematics at a university with a TA union. I think the main effect was to level off graduate student compensation across disciplines -- so, the union was apparently a great boon to those in the humanities, but I heard that compensation for math TA's would likely be higher if not for the union.
Another benefit to the union was that it instilled (for many) a sense of camaraderie and common cause. Union events were fun, and they served beer. It was a good way to get to know your fellow graduate students.
The main disadvantage was that dues had to be paid, around $200 a year (most of which went straight to the AFT). This is not a lot, but on our salary it did mean something. Dues were mandatory, even if you opted out of the union -- although state politicians have since seen to it that this is no longer true.
Another potential disadvantage is that union dues went (in part) to political contributions to union-friendly politicians. I didn't mind, but this tended to alienate graduate students who were more politically conservative than me.
There was occasional heated rhetoric when I was there, and even more after I left, but overall the union didn't seem to do much good or harm. Mostly, I remember the beer.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I was a postdoc at an institution with unionized graduate students. One specific consequence was that graduate students weren't allowed to ever lecture in place of a professor.
This is an annoyance to the professor, but more relevantly, it's a mixed deal for graduate students. When I was a graduate student, getting the chance to lecture was an opportunity---at some schools it's one of the few chances to get that experience while still in grad school. On the other hand I have heard stories (in other fields) of professors abusing this and passing a large part of their teaching load off to their grad students. (This, I assume, is why the rule was negotiated in the first place.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a huge over simplification, but it is worth noting that Universities, unlike companies, are closed systems that generally do not make a profit. Giving additional benefits from someone means taking them from someone else. For a company it is usually the share holder that loses out. For academic departments added benefits to graduate students hurts professors.
There is no question in my mind that while graduate student unions may provide a short term benefit to graduate students, those students who wish to continue on in academia are effectively shooting themselves in the foot. Those increased benefits come directly from departmental budgets. This means heavier teaching loads and less discretionary money for academic staff. To offset this you need either high grant overheads which will make getting a grant even more competitive or higher tuition. Basically if you support graduate student unions, you lose your right as a faculty member to complain about high teaching loads, not having a grant, and high tuition.
As a graduate student in response to "threats" about unionization my university increased the PhD student stipend. The stipend was above the NIH recommendation. This means that any student funded by an NIH grant needed to find an additional source of non governmental funding. This essentially boils down to PIs using their overhead accounts to supplement the stipend, but PIs did not get a bigger slice of the overhead pie to cover this new cost. At the same time the University got a site license for Matlab. To cover the cost the PI slice of the overhead pie was reduced. Universities take, but rarely give.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: You ask about student-body-wide benefits, I think you need to ask this question across schools.
Unions at some schools have more bargaining power than others, and at some schools the field is already more level than others. But when you look at things like tuition waivers and health benefits, I don't see how they would be as common as they are now without TA unions pushing the fight for the last 40 years.
Non-union schools are under pressure to match the compensation at union schools. Now other battles loom at many schools regarding international student issues and mandatory fees.
I was involved in my TA union as an elected leader for three years, and I heard lots of complaints about how the department wants to give us this, but the union won't let us, the school wants to pay us more, but the union won't let us, etc. I personally investigated every case and the most common explanation is that the school administrators -- starting these rumors -- did not understand labor law or the union contract. In no case did the union prevent a TA from being paid better, etc.
Also, I heard complaints about union dues going to liberal politicians, this is also not true, and is against the law. Unions do help some politicians, this is true -- but it isn't with dues money. The reason unions do help is because unions have painfully found out that what is gained at the bargaining table can be taken away at the state capitals very easily.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: A good thing in unions is that you get to interact with others, specially your seniors, who can guide you in your academic life because they are one step ahead of you.
A drawback is that you will have to be a part of parties, meetings, and gatherings etc. which could be disturbing for some people who are not into much socializing.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/05/08 | 1,326 | 5,512 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm not famous enough of a scientist to be frequently solicited by the media\* (plus my field has little political/social controversy around it), but I had a few encounters with local newspapers and one with a public national television. The results were not entirely bad, but the general sentiment given was significantly different than what I would have wanted it to be.
It seems like I'm not alone, I just got back from a conference in my field where more senior scientists discussed their relationship with the general media. It came out that more often than they would like, the relationship was bad.
Problems stated, among others†:
1. Misquotation, or words taken out of their context significantly changing their meaning (this is the most frequent).
2. A general difficulty for the media to understand, and convey, uncertainty ('we think, it might be so..' or 'we are rather confident that ...' becomes 'it is so')
3. Difficulty to apprehend results, applications, consequences that may or may not appear 10-20 years down the line.
4. Exaggeration of the conclusions
etc.
These are not without consequences, at the personal level, as it can give the impression that you don't know what you are talking about.
My first thought was to ignore the media attention and advocate that scientists should do the communication themselves to bypass the regular media (having a blog, entertaining a profile on social media, etc.), but it is extremely time consuming and would distract from the actual research work. I think there must be something to do, on our side, to help with that.
I understand that it is due to how media works, and I don't believe it will change by a lot. But the question is then: **are there any strategies that would help reducing this effect**, at least to protect oneself against the consequences?
\*newspapers, television, magazines, etc. i.e. not scientific journals.
†anyone who has items to add to this list is welcome to do so.<issue_comment>username_1: I've had one paper I wrote garner significant media attention, so while I'm not a practiced hand at it, some things I learned along the way:
* Be able to convey the idea behind your paper simply. A brief, non-technically "What happened", and why this matters. Don't oversell, but if you provide good information, you have some more control over how it gets conveyed, instead of forcing a non-expert journalist to translate your work into words.
* Keep it short. It's harder to misquote or provide out-of-context soundbites if you keep things short and to the point. Don't pontificate.
* Make the caveats of your work clear, but don't over-hedge.
* If it's clear they're trying to get you to say something in particular, decide if you're okay with saying it. If you are, just do it. If you aren't *don't go anywhere near it*. Don't dance around, or try to add qualifiers - just don't approach.
* Be prepared for rage-inducing discussion of your work online after it hits the air. Learn to have a thick skin, or purposefully ignore it.
* Remember that, in the grand scheme of things, even a fair amount of media attention is a flash in the pan, and the odd story that makes you wince is just that - a single story.
While I think you can *help* mitigate some of the problems around media coverage of your work with an active social media presence and a blog, it's only by engaging the audience. It's not going to let you "stand aside" from the media - no website or news paper is going to go "Oh, Dr. X has a blog. On second thought, lets not bother with the story..." If anything, an active social media presence will probably raise your profile among science communication types, and increase the odds of getting a bit of media attention.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *(At the request of the OP, I'm expanding my brief comment into an answer.)*
The advice I've heard most often is
1. **Prepare your own sound bites** (i.e., minimal media-style statements). If you don't boil it down, they will, and they are certain to get it wrong. If they already made cuts you don't agree with, don't hesitate to send them a counter-proposal: something similarly short but more correct. (Reputable journalists usually are more concerned with meeting word-count restrictions than with increasing sensationalism.)
2. **Be rigorous in demanding the last word on any change and in exercising that right.** If they don't grant you that, do not agree to speak to them (it's a sign they are not up to professional standards). This especially applies to the uncertainties or caveats you mention; make it clear that they get either a quote with qualifications or no quote at all. Getting wrong exposure is worse than getting no exposure.
3. Repeating username_1's excellent point: If you are worried they will distort something, **do not mention it at all** -- *especially* if they seem to insist on it.
4. For appearance on radio or television, **rehearse** (a lot). (Even for interviews in connection with a written piece, it pays off to spend some time beforehand to formulate and polish the key statements you want to make.)
5. If live appearances happen often enough, **get professional coaching** (universities usually offer such things, since it's in their own interest that you look good). They are probably also happy to look at any written communication you want to send to the media and to point out possible pitfalls or help boiling it down to make it media-ready.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/09 | 768 | 3,344 | <issue_start>username_0: It just came to my mind, currently if one wants to obtain an
academic degree one must to do a thesis. This is a widely accepted
method to prove the knowledge of certain academic level, sort to say.
But my questions are, where this method was originated? Which historical
or social circumstances originated it? Is there any philosophical background?<issue_comment>username_1: (note: I have no references for the below, nor am I qualified in the topic)
First of all, the premise of your question isn't quite accurate: certainly in the UK it's very common for undergraduate degrees to have no thesis requirement. But putting that aside:
I think there are parallels with other mediaeval professions, which required proof of skill in order to become a member of a guild (the professional organisation). To be a 'master' of the guild one had to produce a 'masterpiece' (the origin of that word); this has obvious parallels with the idea of a thesis proving that an individual should be admitted to a degree (remember that historically a degree is more like a rank than an award, honour or qualification).
The MA at Oxford and Cambridge is still awarded automatically to those with a BA seven years after the start of the degree, which I believe matches the time someone in a professional guild would take to become a master.
Note also that the modern doctorate is a much more recent invention than the MA.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A bit if history. The history of thesis is intertwined with the history of universities in the 12th and 13th century.. The early history of universities is not clear but with time systems develop on how information/knowledge is taught and discussed. The end (so far) result is what we have today. The written thesis is based on the fact that ideas need to be made more permanent than oral traditions. the advent of printing made wider distribution of copies possible. The first degrees were the baccaulerate and magister artium which corresponded to doctor in certain disciplines.
The thesis was originally what the word describes a thought or thinking that needed defending, which goes backs to Aristotle and Plato. As soon as writing was possible, the idea was to put the ideas down in writing and hence a written thesis was born. One has to remember that teaching early on did not necessarily occur as lectures, it could be mentioning and learned discussions. At the same time knowledge was not as structured and defined as now.
early on the teacher actually wrote the thesis and t was the students job to defend it. So the focus was less on developing knowledge but to defend a thesis with arguments and logic. During the renaissance the thesis in a form we can recognise was developed. These texts were called dissertatio (lat. development, presentation) where as the defence was named disputatio (lat. c. learned argument). From these relatively common beginnings different "cultures" developed which now are reflected in differences between countries in how a thesis is defined and defended.
Much more details can probably be added to this but the core is covered. There is no necessary connection between a degree and a thesis. Certainly not at a bachelor's leverl and it is also possible at a master's level. Differences also exist between disciplines.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/09 | 821 | 3,360 | <issue_start>username_0: I've worked for an university for one year after my master's degree. Now I'm searching another job. For the moment I've tried to ask to several professors via email if there is any internship opportunities but only a couple of them answered me. I'm wondering if I'm doing something wrong or this is not the praxis or the formal manner for this type of requests. This is a general template I use:
>
> Dear Professor `Surname`,
>
>
> I'm a young chemist for the conservation of Cultural Heritage. In my career I've studied mainly non-invasive techniques for art diagnostics and authentication, such as reflectography and Raman spectroscopy. I've also learned, on my own, to use GIS software for organizing data for Cultural Heritage management. I've seen that one of `name of a Project I'm interested` tasks is the maintenance of cultural heritage. Therefore, I would like to ask you if there are any internship opportunities in which my expertise could be useful to your current research? Thank you for your time.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
>
How can I propose myself for an internship? Which is the most accepted praxis?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think this practice is rude, but if these are not people with whom you have any connection, and who have not advertised a position, then I don't think you should be especially surprised that you aren't getting many responses. In all likelihood, the answer is "no" and they don't feel like anything will be achieved by telling you that.
A few things which might be hurting you:
* The email above really reads like a mass form email. You aren't making any argument about how your expertise is relevant to their specific work, and you're putting the burden on them to think about how your skills might fit with what they're doing rather than thinking about it yourself.
* Maybe this is different in other fields, but it's not clear to me what "internship" is supposed to mean here. A paid position? Unpaid? You may be being deliberately vague, but if you're not responding to an ad for a specific position, you have have some clarity about what you're looking for.
* I think that the slightly awkward English doesn't really help. "Chemist for the conservation of Cultural Heritage" sounds very strange to me. I think "Chemist specializing in/interested in/working on the conservation of Cultural Heritage" is much better.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: To add to Ben's answer, professors usually get these emails by the dozens and for various reasons, most of them are auto-tuned to ignore them. The maximum notice such emails may get is a mention in a lunchtime comment to colleagues. Like Ben said, if you are not getting a reply, the answer is probably "no". If there are open positions, they would already be advertised on the prof's or the department's page. Some departments do not take interns as a policy and say so on their webpage.
Your best bet is to contact professors whom you personally know, or have your own professor recommend you to colleagues. Go to places where you can meet more professors, e.g. conferences. Look for professors who have published in your area and start a discussion on some paper of theirs you find interesting. Those emails do get noticed! Bring up your need for an internship in said discussion.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/09 | 1,627 | 6,863 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to prepare some exercise sheets for a course. I am wondering whether or not it is OK to take some exercises directly from the textbook.<issue_comment>username_1: The big concern is copyright. How important it is depends on how complicated the problem statements are. For instance, if the question is something like:
>
> Using Rolle's Theorem and the Intermediate Value Theorem, prove the Mean Value Theorem.
>
>
>
then there's no worries about "reusing" a question like this, because the formulation of the question is not really "original."
However, if the problem involves a half-page of explanations and formulations, you can't simply copy it in your problem sheet verbatim without reference. You may or may not be able to make a photocopy of the relevant page and distribute it under fair use guidelines; you should probably consult your university librarians about this.
The simplest solution, though, would be to list the source of the problem, and identify the problem from the source:
>
> Deen, *Analysis of Transport Phenomena*, 1st ed., Problem 1.6.
>
>
>
and then allow the students to look it up. (Of course, you should make sure that a copy of the text is available to them in the library via "reserve" policies, if at all possible.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: From a practical point of view, taking a few exercises for internal classroom use will probably not cause copyright problems, depending on the local laws. Teaching is one of the fair use possibilities in the US, but I am no expert in law, and I don't know how far it goes.
Assuming US law applies, [here are](http://www.teachingcopyright.org/handout/fair-use-faq) a few rules for fair use, and I believe you fulfil them all: non profit, for educational purposes, on content more factual than artistic, extracting small parts, and no net effect on the market. [Some other sources](http://copyright.columbia.edu/copyright/files/2009/10/fairusechecklist.pdf) also add restricted access to the student as a point in favour. It is always safer and more ethical to add a reference to the original book.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Textbook publishers and instructors have an agreement (in my experience, an unwritten one): if the instructor tells students the textbook is "required," then the instructor is allowed to use all the images, test bank questions, and animations as desired in the course. If you or the main instructor has therefore indicated that the book is "required," then I would say you can use examples from the text (with proper attribution) all you want.
If you are using a text that *isn't* required, I would say you are venturing into fair use territory, nicely summarized by username_2 and commenters. An email to the publishers asking to use X number of questions with attribution over the length of the course would be the most legal way to use the resources.
Of course, saying a text is required does not mean students will purchase it. But that's a separate discussion, and publishers do not expect the instructor to enforce the requirement.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Beyond the issue of legality, you have to put in some effort in order to make it appropriate *for students* and TAs (if you have some) -- plain copying can be dangerous.
1. Cross-check definitions and results necessary to solve the exercise. Even small differences between the book and your lecture can render an exercise completely infeasible.
2. Skim the related chapter and prior exercises in the book. Sometimes problem 8 builds on the thought process or solution developed in problem 5, or uses a theorem you don't have in your lecture. If you skip 5 but copy 8, or don't give the theorem as hint, you are posing a harder (infeasible?) problem to your students.
3. Make *sure* the exercise works as you expect, i.e. solve it in detail (!) yourself. Not only are there many flawed exercise problems in books, but the level may also off.
Make your solution accessible to the TAs.
4. If you don't want your students to have an easy out, make sure to take the exercise from a textbook not on the syllabus and/or without solutions and reformulate a bit so they can't google solutions (easily).
These are lessons I've learned from painful experiences which were unanimously caused by me being short on motivation, time or both and just copy-pasting exercises onto sheets.
Regarding work ethics, provided what you do is legal (in your country) I'd say copying exercises is *completely* acceptable. Developing good exercise problems is hard *and* time-consuming. It helps nobody if you do half a job, or overextend yourself on this. It's somewhat similar to using an existing texbook vs writing your own.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Most of these answers seem to be focused on the legality of using textbook but I would like to argue from a student's viewpoint that it is not acceptable.(And don't have enough reputation to simply leave a comment.)
These questions are from a textbook they should already have. Normally the questions are extremely similar to examples in the text and are most useful in the context of understanding the concepts. It is my opinion those questions should be reserved for students to reference while going through the book, as well as references while working on your slightly different or harder exercises.
What is the point of taking a class when you could have just got the book instead?
Edit: It is your responsibility as the instructor to add value to the course, giving students new (possibly tailored to skill level) problems is a great way to do that in addition to your in class explanation of concepts. Taking exercises from the textbook adds no value since they already have those questions.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: >
> I want to prepare some exercise sheets for a course. I am wondering whether or not it is OK to take some exercises directly from the textbook.
>
>
>
Yes.
----
Regardless of the *legality* or *scholastic integrity* of copying exercises from required textbooks, recommended textbooks, non-required textbooks, other books in your personal or institutional library, course web pages, random pieces of paper found in classrooms, and the like, it is common and accepted practice to do so, typically *without* attribution of any kind.
Unless you're teaching a popular MOOC (which attract lawyers like certain substances attract flies) or writing a popular textbook (likewise), nobody is going to come after you for copyright violation. But if it'll keep you awake at night otherwise, rewrite the problem in your own words before you distribute it to your students.
Of course, you should *also* include your own original problems. (Just don't be surprised to see another instructor use them later.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/09 | 1,266 | 4,630 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a paper that I want to cite in my own work, in the form
"<NAME>" (for <NAME>) in the bibliography part of the paper and `Wayne` in the body of the paper.
The full name of the author appears on the paper as `Aaaa Bbbb Cccc`, and is typically a non-western name.
Say, consider something like `<NAME>`, but let's assume you never heard of them, and they obviously are from a different culture, and you don't know if their last-name is `Kennedy` or `<NAME>`.
Should I note it in my Bibtex file as `Kennedy, <NAME>` or
`<NAME>, John` ? This will change things when printed with last-name only, it will appear either as `Kennedy` or `<NAME>`.
So, more generally, is there an academic naming convention for this kind of situation ?
**Edit:** To be more precise, what I want to know is if there is a standardized way for an author with such a name to sign his paper, for example `Aaaa Bbbb-Cccc`, so no ambiguity is left for the reader. Or for the reader, if one has a guaranteed way to know this (seems not).
I must add that I have seen the considered author cited as `Bbbb` or as `Cccc`, one of these being obviously incorrect (even both could be).<issue_comment>username_1: You could google the person and see how they refer to themself in their publications on their group's page. This would probably be the easiest general way to solve this problem.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The convention, inasmuch as one exists, is:
>
> **Write the name the way the individual wants it to be written.**
>
>
>
For example, one of my co-authors has four names:
>
> (First Name) (Middle Name) (Adopted Married Name) (Given Last Name)
>
>
>
but chooses to use
>
> (First Initial). (Middle Name) (Adopted Initial). (Last Name)
>
>
>
as his "formal" academic name.
As a more concrete example of this phenomenon, this is a significant issue with a lot of British folks, who eschew the hyphen in a "double-barreled" last name. For instance, you'd cite:
>
> <NAME>, Ralph. *The Lark Ascending*. London: Oxford University Press (2005).
>
>
>
and not
>
> Williams, <NAME>. *The Lark Ascending*. London: Oxford University Press (2005).
>
>
>
In such cases, you just need to look up exactly how the author writes his or her name, and follow that trend. [Google Scholar](http://scholar.google.com) can be a good source of such information; [Web of Science](http://isiknowledge.com) and other citation-tracking sites are often better.
The most useful method of all would be to find "self-citations": works where the author cites his or her own work. How the name is written under those circumstances should be the most unambiguous statement.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: No.
---
(username_2 has already addressed nicely how to deal with this, but what follows is too long for a comment.)
As far as I know, there's no standard way (i.e., the same for every name no matter the culture) of indicating which components of a name are considered to be the last name. In fact, even the concept of last name is different from culture to culture and may even be absent -- see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Names\_by\_culture](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category%3aNames_by_culture). Even in Europe, you can get [quite complicated naming systems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_naming_customs). So you are really trying to identify the "main professional name", whatever that may map to in a given culture. To identify it from the list of names *as written within that culture*, you have be familiar with the specific naming conventions (maybe the Wikipedia page helps, or if you know someone from that culture, you can ask them).
It's worth keeping in mind that getting it right serves two purposes:
1. Making sure everybody knows the person you refer to, even if they don't know the full name.
2. Showing courtesy towards that person.
While the second point is the only one of importance when addressing the person directly ("Dear Professor/Dr. X"), in your case the first point is actually more important: If (say) a referee wants to check the bibliography whether you cited a relevant author's works, they would expect to find them in a certain form. If everybody uses the same (wrong) way of parsing the name, it would arguably be the right thing to do to follow that choice.
(Finally, you could also chicken out and just list *all* authors in full, native name order; in Bibtex, you can do this by wrapping the full name in curly braces.)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/09 | 1,212 | 5,325 | <issue_start>username_0: I am trying to look for a PhD position by contacting potential supervisors through email. I have made a list of professors who I found interesting through searching some papers and their department websites. Now I decide to write to them for asking opportunity and in order to show my sincerity, I would like to attach a research proposal.
I know it seems not necessary to do this if my credentials are good enough, but in order to stay out of the crowd, I don't know if this is actually a good idea to attach a research proposal. Anyway, I want to have some advice on writing a research proposal in this situation.
1. What should the appropriate length be? 2 pages, 20 pages? with cited reference?
2. How much deviation is allowed with the professor's research interest? Because if everything are the same with the current papers, it seems I am just copying its content into the proposal.
3. Should I include all necessary experimental steps? (I am from engineering)
4. Any other suggestion on writing research proposal in this situation.
I don't know if it is worth the time to do this, I would like to know if you have also some suggestions in impressing potential supervisors solely through email.<issue_comment>username_1: *In most branches of engineering*, sending a research proposal to a prospective PhD advisor is not particularly helpful, **unless you are providing your own funding.**
The reason for this is that most PhD students are funded through grants obtained by the professor, either from traditional research funding agencies (NSF/DOE/DOD/NIH and their counterparts in other countries), or through industrial contracts. In such cases, the projects that are to be worked on are well-defined, so the possibility of deviating from those projects and using the money to fund other projects—such as the one you propose—are remote.
On the other hand, if you can provide your own funding, things change significantly. Under such circumstances, you could propose a project of your own design, so long as it fits within the general scheme of the professor's existing research (or moves slightly outside of it). However, proposing a project that lies too far outside of the mainstream typically is unlikely to be well-received, since the professor won't be able to provide much useful support.
However, even under such circumstances, the initial proposal should be more like a "white paper"—a faculty member, if he or she reads such a document at all, is not going to spend more than a few minutes reading it. So the initial idea will need to be compellingly presented in a short amount of space—two or three paragraphs at most.
The best way to show your interest in a professor's group is to explain how you could contribute to ongoing research in the group—that is, do you homework before writing to the faculty member. Your email should make it clear that you are writing the *specific* faculty member, and addressing the concerns and interests of their group. Anything that has the whiff of being a form letter will likely be ignored, unless your CV looks like a perfect fit for the research group!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would strongly suggest not using email for your pitch until you know the professor. Use email to setup a short (make the 'short' clear in the email) meeting with the professor. Attach your CV to the email.
Think of this from the professor's viewpoint. If they give you funding and a place in their research group, they are committing to you for 3-7 years. That is a long time. Meeting in person will give them a chance to see that you can work together well.
Some professors are strict about the topic of their projects and some will go for anything. You need to ask around to see how this is for each professor. For professors with narrow topic spectrum, you'd need to show them how you could benefit what is already going on in that field and in his/her group. For professors with wide topic spectrum, come up with some topics that you'd like to work on and that are relative to that professor's area of expertise.
In the end, show the professor that you can do good research. That is really what they care about. Professors are generally good topic generators, they just need some expert researchers to do their dirty work.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The proposal should not be long (1/2-2 pages), or at least should have a summary that can be read in one glance.
It should show your interest, but not be so narrow that it creates the impression that you are fixed on what you want to do. Often supervisors may have ideas which are related to what you want to do, but are better informed. If they think you have locked in on an idea, however, they may not be interested in supervising you.
Finally, if the proposal implicitly demonstrates particular skills that you have, that also may interest a potential supervisor, even if their topic is per se different.
Generally, it is a good idea, if you have a very specific supervisor in mind, to talk to them in person, or try to ask for a conversation per Skype. Don't try to do that for a generic application, academics are very busy. But, if you have a very specific topic and supervisor in mind, they may agree to that, in their own interest.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/09 | 4,405 | 20,084 | <issue_start>username_0: *(This is a reworking of [Software for submitting and testing programming assignments](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/20226/13852).)*
First, a bit of background. Many courses in applied mathematics have a programming component, where students are asked to implement algorithms (say, in Matlab) and possibly test them using a given set of interesting data. Although they are a valuable part of the education, these usually receive little love from the students (who, moreover, have rarely received a rigorous training in programming). The result is -- with rare exceptions -- lazy hacks at best and "at least it looks like code" (often followed by my favorite, "it worked on my machine") at worst.
So I am thinking about having students submit their programming assignments via an automated assessment software. The idea is to give them instant feedback on their (repeated) submission with the goal of
1. saving the TAs from having to check every submission and (if they are generous) inserting all the missing semicola to make the code run, and
2. trying to increase the student's motivation to do more than the bare minimum by introducing some gamification elements (giving points for the fastest/most accurate code, for example, or a current ranking to encourage resubmitting improved solutions).
Hence my question (which is hopefully relevant to other disciplines as well): Has anybody tried such a thing? Did it actually lead to less work and/or more student involvement? Any hints on what to do, and what to avoid?
(I know there is the [VPL](http://vpl.dis.ulpgc.es/) module for Moodle, and we have an [in-house system](http://www.s3.uni-duisburg-essen.de/research/jack.html) that can provide the necessary functionality, so I'm not asking for software recommendations here. That said, if some software provides a specific feature you've used successfully, by all means mention it -- bonus points if it's open source.)<issue_comment>username_1: **TL;DR**
We did something along this lines for Java-based programming assignments. Students and TAs generally like it. It was **a lot** of work for us.
**(Very) Long Version**
I used to teach software engineering at a large public university in Austria. We implemented a similar approach for two courses back there, for a **400+ students bachelor-level** distributed systems course, and **for a 150 students master-level** course on middleware and enterprise application engineering. Both courses included large, time-consuming Java-based programming assignments, which students needed to solve individually three times per semester.
Traditionally, students would submit their solutions for both courses as [Maven](http://maven.apache.org) projects via our university-wide Moodle system. After the deadline, TAs would download and execute the submissions, and grade manually based on extensive check lists that we provided. There was usually a bit of huffing and puffing among students about this grading. Sometimes, TAs would not understand correct solutions (after looking at dozens of similar programs, your mind tends to get sloppy). Sometimes, different TAs would grade similar programs differently (the sheer size required some parallelization of grading and the tasks were complex, hence it was impossible to do check lists that covered all possible cases). Sometimes, the assignments were actually under-specified or unclear, and students lost points for simple misunderstandings. Sometimes, applications that actually worked on the student's machine failed on the TA's machine. Generally, it was hard for students to estimate in advance how many points their submissions would be worth. Given that those two courses are amongst the most difficult / most time-consuming courses in the entire SE curriculum, this was all but optimal.
Hence, we decided to move to a **more automated solution**. Basically, we codified our various check lists into a set of hundreds of [JUnit](http://junit.org) test cases, which we gave to our students in source code. Additionally, we kept back a smaller set of tests, which were similar but used different test data. The tests would also serve as reference implementation - if the assignment text did not specify how e.g., a given component should behave in a given borderline case, what the tests expected was the expected behavior. Our promise to the students was that, if all the tests for a given task pass, and the student did not *game* our test system (more on this below), not much can go wrong anymore with the grading (it was possible to get minor point losses anyway for things impossible to test automatically, but those things could not amount for more than a small percentage of all points).
**EDIT after comments**
Note that I was saying *more automated*, not *fully automated*. Human TAs still look at the code. There is no *grading Web service* or something like that (this usually does not work, as keshlam correctly notes). On a high level, what we did is that we provided the requirements for students not only in written text anymore, but also in form of formal executable unit tests. The new process is roughly like that:
1. TA downloads submission from Moodle and starts tests (takes about 10 minutes).
2. While tests are running, TA browses over the code, does some spot checking of code, and checks a few things not covered by the tests.
3. When the tests are done, the TA notes down the results of the tests and his own observations.
4. If something severe happens (e.g., compile error), the TA sighs, takes a deep breath, and falls back to manually grading (and, likely, complaining a bit in our mailing list).
**Advantages:**
* Students now have a good feeling about **how many points** they will get in the end. No nasty surprises anymore.
* The TA **effort for grading** is now much, much lower, maybe 1/3 of the previous time. Hence, they have more time to look at problematic solutions and help students actually produce assignments.
* The tests, good or bad (more on this later), are **the same for everybody**. Lenient and strict TAs are much less of a problem.
* Working solutions now **work** no matter if the grading TA understands the solution or not.
* Students get **rapid feedback** on the quality of their solution, but not *so* rapid that it makes sense to just program against the tests without thinking. One good side effect of the way we built our tests is that simply executing the tests for many tasks takes 10+ minutes (starting an application server, deploying code, ...). Students need to think before starting tests, just like they would if they would test against, e.g., a real staging server.
* Students do not need to waste time writing test applications / test data. Before, one problem that made the student effort in these courses skyrocket was that students did not only have to program the assignments themselves, but also needed to write various demo programs / test data sets to test and showcase their solutions. This has become entirely obsolete with the automated test framework, significantly reducing the amount of **boilerplate code** that students need to write. In the end, we can now focus more on the actual content of the labs, and not on writing stupid test code.
* All in all, our personal impression as well as student evaluations have shown that the majority of students **appreciates** the automated test system.
**Problems:**
* The **initial effort** for us was certainly non-trivial. Coming up with the first version of the tests required a concerted effort of 6 or more TAs and 2 junior faculty over multiple months during the summer (not full-time of course, but still). Note that this was even though we utilize a widely used, standard testing framework - the effort was just in codifying our grading rules, finding and defining all corner cases, and writing everything down in useful tests. Further, as the assignments are complex distributed systems, so were the tests - we had to start application servers in-memory, hot-deploy and undeploy code, and make sure that all of this works out of the box on all major OS versions. All in all, writing the tests was an actual project, that required a lot of leadership and time commitment.
* While, overall, our total time spent arguing about grading has decreased, it is not zero. Most importantly, as students can now see the grading guidelines clearly written down in source code, they seem to feel more compelled to question requirements and grading decisions than before. Hence, we now get a lot of *But why should I do it like that? Doing it in X-Y-Other-Way would be much better!* questions and complaints (incidentally, in practically all cases, the "much better" way is also much less work / much easier for the student).
* While we were able to cover most of our original assignments, some things are **impossible to cover** in tests. In these cases, TAs still need to grade manually. In addition, in order to make our test framework technically work, students are now a bit more restricted in how they can solve the assignments than before.
* Some students feel compelled to try to **game** our grading system. They spend significant efforts into finding solutions that do not actually solve the assignments but still get full points. In general, these efforts fail (as we actually have pretty sophisticated backend tests that do not only check whether the behavior is correct on interface level, but also look "under the hood"). Occasionally, they succeed, leading us to improve our tests.
* Initially, we received some flack from a few students for a small number of **bugs in our tests**. The bugs were easy to fix and mostly not particularly severe, and most students understand that if you roll out a couple thousand lines of Java code for the first time, bugs will happen. However, some will take the opportunity to complain. A lot.
* We had the impression that the number of copied solutions **(plagiarism) was up** the first time we rolled out the automated tests. Note that we had automated plagiarism checks long before, and nothing had changed in this regard, but apparently students assumed that cheating would go unnoticed with the automated testing.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: We used CourseMarker in combination with BlueJ for teaching first year students Java. There are three main criteria for marking: typographic correctness (layout, indentation, comments, etc.), semantic correctness (does the program run and do what it is supposed to do), and programming language features (whether specified programming constructs are present in the code). It is possible to supply a supporting code (a skeleton of the program, where students fill the gaps) or let the students start from scratch.
The CourseMarker administrator (in our case the module leader) can set up a marking scheme as a combination of the three main criteria and their sub-criteria. It is possible to configure CourseMarker to accept multiple submissions. Students can submit initial version of their program, receive immediate feedback, make necessary corrections and submit again. The feedback for the students can pinpoint the exact problem and its location, and provide suggestions for improvement. The feedback for the lecturers is statistical data about students’ performance.
We set optional training tasks for the student to self-study (no limit over the number of submissions) and a coursework, which was assessed (3 to 5 submissions for each part depending on its complexity).
There are also embedded methods for plagiarism detection, which compare student’s work for similarity. The comparison is not just semantic, it accounts for changes in the code that actually do not change the logic of the program. The suspect students’ work is reported to the lecturers.
The exam (also on CourseMarker) combined multiple choice questions, fill-in-the-blanks questions, and constructing flow charts and programming code. All the students answer the same set of questions but they are ordered in random manner for each student. The order of the answers for multiple choice questions and the layout of elements for constructing flow charts or programming code are randomised, too.
Benefits - instant feedback to the students, especially useful for unsupervised work (remember the students are beginners in programming). Actually most of the students installed the client package on their computers at home and correspond with the university server via Internet. From lecturers’ point of view, it saves vast amount of time - we didn’t have to check and mark students’ work.
The main drawback of CourseMarker is its rigidity. Normally a programmer can write a piece of code in various ways. CourseMarker can be set to understand and assess only a pre-determined pattern, which should be specified in the task description. Any deviations from the pattern would trigger reducing the marks. So I made a point to explain that there are certain limitations working in this particular programming environment but in other circumstances, there are other options to be considered.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: **TLDR**
We used fully automated testing for programming assignments in a second-year course. We directly showed students their grade and allowed them to re-submit as often as they liked. Students loved it, and it freed up time for the TAs to hold far more office hours.
**Long version**
We developed our own in-house solution for a second-year Data Structures course. The exercises came with compiling skeleton code and interfaces for the test software to hook into. Students would submit to a web server running a Perl script, which would then compile the code alongside the testing framework, run a number of tests and display the grade. We did not provide the students with the tests, but did display the outcome of each test, usually in a way that made clear where the problem was, without revealing the exact test data. In addition, students were allowed to submit as many times as they liked. We explicitly encouraged them to submit early and often.
Advantages:
* It allowed us to **harshly punish code that doesn't work**, or gives compile errors (we gave 0 marks for both).
* **Complete uniformity in grading**. Fully automating the grading meant that solutions that implemented the same functionality would always get the same mark.
* By being very clear about the requirements, and at the same time being fair by allowing them to re-submit, we significantly **reduced complaints about grading**.
* We had one TA (myself) who was mainly responsible for developing tests, and one who maintained the submission server. This freed up the other TAs to **hold many more office hours**. We had TAs available 4 hours per day, every day of the week.
* **Students can correct (and learn from!) their mistakes** before the grade is final. The good students in particular did not rest before they had a perfect grade.
Disadvantages:
* **Can promote plagiarism**. We did not bother with any plagiarism checks, but this could become a significant problem, especially if assignments are reused from previous years.
* **Non-functional requirements are hard to test**. While it is possible to test certain coding style requirements automatically, this is much harder than having a TA look it over. It is also much easier to game these automatic tests.
* **Can promote 'coding against the tests'**. Some students did not bother to implement even the most basic correctness tests themself, instead relying purely on the server. For the next iteration of the course, we are considering basing part of the mark on whether student-written tests can succesfully detect our incorrect solutions. This will hopefully force them to think about testing their code as well.
* **Can shift focus from high-level understanding of the material to implementation details**. Automated testing relies on the students being able to produce valid code. If the students are struggling with syntax, it can get in the way of higher-level objectives like the algorithms and data structures involved.
Conclusions:
Overall, both the students and the professor and TAs really appreciated this form of grading. The students received instant, unambiguous feedback about their work and the chance to learn from their mistakes while it still counted. At the same time, it allowed the majority of TAs to focus on helping the students understand the material, instead of tedious evaluation.
The Java testing framework is available on [Bitbucket](https://bitbucket.org/username_3/checker). Unfortunately, it lacks documentation.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: This is not exactly an answer to the question as posed but a few remarks I think you should consider before choosing an automatic mode of submission/grading.
I often give my students some assignments where programming is needed too (in the linear algebra course I taught I asked them to break Hill's cypher with the clue that certain words were somewhere in the medium length text and to create a drive (flight for extra points) simulation view in the classical perspective) though I assign such things for extra credit more often than as a part of regular homework.
My approach is that I restrict neither the choice of programming language, nor the operating system (I can program in 3 languages myself, but if you ask me to do it in some other one with substantially different syntax (like, say, Haskell), I will probably manage finally but I will just hate it). Also my solution to the "worked on my computer" problem is "bring your laptop and show me". If it, indeed, works, I have no objection.
I never ask anyone to do programming quickly (we all know that no program works as intended on the first run and that even if you know perfectly what you are doing, the debugging time exceeds the typing time) so I have no "do it in class" programming assignments. The way I make sure that the students get a quick feedback is just by assigning the tasks where, once you run your program, you see yourself whether it works or not. In some cases, like code breaking, it is apparent that if you get a meaningful text, then your approach and code make sense (I never ask for more than that because otherwise we should leave the students alone and start with shutting down all major software companies for their "sloppy code"). If it is crunching data, I supply a test sample, an answer to the test sample, and a real sample, so you, again can see everything once your code runs.
The thing I do when the assignment is submitted (full protocol, with most students whose abilities I know, I cut it down quite a lot) is to ask the student to run the code, to check the results, and to ask a few questions about the code itself afterwards. I always do an "oral examination" in this case because it is quicker and way more efficient in the sense that it allows me to correct minor stupid errors on the fly if the student knows what he's doing and just kill the students who do not with a couple of appropriately posed questions. The idea to try to read somebody else's code submitted in writing or to run and debug it myself has never even crossed my mind.
All submissions should be done during my office hours, not during the class time. I dislike the American way of assigning 20 problems of the same type each day and usually do 2-10 (depending on the course) each of which can be solved only if you combine several ideas in one program (of course, I explain which ones and how before the assignment). Such assignments are easy to check (either the code works, or it doesn't + either the student knows why that loop is there, or he doesn't) but not so easy to carry out. As to copying, as someone noted long time ago, "one's code is more individual than his fingerprints", and if you can copy a code changing its structure substantially, I just take it on faith that you can do it yourself as well if needed and don't really care.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/09 | 991 | 4,247 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it ethical to use WolframAlpha on a take-home exam for a math class? A couple qualifiers: this is a make-up exam where the original exam allowed for a scientific calculator but not a graphing/symbol-solving calculator.
The professor has made no other stipulations about the exam yet (no word on if it's the same rules as for regular exams or otherwise). He has simply just announced one will be given out.<issue_comment>username_1: Generally speaking, if a particular set of tools was permitted - in your case a scientific calculator but not a graphing calculator, I would assume those would be the *only* tools permitted.
This is especially true for tools, like Wolfram Alpha, that duplicate functionality of things that have been disallowed, like graphing calculators and calculators that can deal with symbolic notation.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: No, it is not ethical to do so.
In addition to the "spirit of the law" argument made by username_1, you should consider that the computer running the WolframAlpha software *is* a "graphing/symbol-solving" calculator, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary's [definition of calculator](http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/calculator) as "a usually electronic device for performing mathematical calculations," so not even the exam rules as written (the "letter of the law") would permit you to use it.
(I'm assuming that the make-up exam has the same rules regarding calculators as the regular exam did, which seems like a reasonable assumption until we see the make-up exam.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I would say it depends on what kind of exam you're going to get. It's quite possible that the take-home exam will actually account for the possibility of students using online tools.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Is it ethical for the professor to give a take-home exam with a set of instructions that probably can't be enforced by anyone? Is the professor going to police every student's taking of the exam by patrolling each and every domicile? The point is that **in real life** you have to consider and worry about what the **other** students are going to do. Trust me...it's generally not the "ethical" thing.
In all likelihood, the professor is going to create a very difficult take-home exam and then allow the students to have at it, no holds barred. This will eliminate the effects of the unavoidable tendency among students to be unethical.
Here's the crux of it. If you are going to break one of the professor's rules, don't get caught and never **ever** admit to it if you get accused. That goes for the rest of life as well because there will always be someone "holier than thou" who will try to hang you.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: This is unlikely to be ethical on the student's part, as it would mean them bypassing the learning expected to form part of this assessment and so they may be gaining a qualification under false pretences.
If this qualification is then used to gain a job, for example, in many locales the end result could be considered a fraudulent activity.
It is likely that the university will also have wider guidance about plagiarism. Copying from an Internet source, without acknowledgement, which the use of WolframAlpha would represent, would be considered plagiarism.
Now, it may be that the take home assessment allows the use of the Internet. In that case, using, acknowledging and citing WolframAlpha may be acceptable. At that point, whether this was a good idea would depend on how the marking scheme was constructed. If the scheme only requires the answers (and possibly working) the student may be able to get full marks. If the exam (and marking scheme) is constructed to require the student to go beyond the information available online, then the raw WolframAlpha answers would not be enough.
In practice, if the assessment was set up to be so easily solvable in this way, it is unlikely to represent best practice. A wide body of literature exists for professors on how to set assessments that also positively promote academic integrity. It may be worth the professor actively engaging with these as part of their continual staff development.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/09 | 649 | 2,730 | <issue_start>username_0: I am often in charge of researching new sub-topics in my discipline for short papers. I find my default technique is:
1. Search Google Scholar for best-guess keywords
2. Open relevant-looking resulting paper, skim
3. Find new references in that paper, open new tabs for those papers while reading first paper
4. Look at new papers, find new references and key words. Open new tab for new Scholar searches
5. Decide those key words aren't useful after all
6. Make valiant attempt to figure out which of the 20 open tabs are still worth keeping open, which papers are worth adding to Zotero, which papers are worth downloading.
Clearly, I am not of a methodical mindset. I'm beginning to wonder if I took 5 sec to add each paper author-year-keyword to a small notepad app on the side of the screen before I opened the article, that might help me keep track of the mess. Or something. Does anyone have a simple workflow for this "brainstorming" phase that would work well for the non-methodically minded? I'm a Chrome/Google type rather than an Apple type, if that matters.<issue_comment>username_1: My workflow/suggestion would be to keep this all in Zotero. I'm a big believer in keeping the number of tools one uses relatively small and becoming very proficient at using ones favorite tools.
I use a collection ("Inbox") dedicated to items I may or may not keep and don't have time to read right away. I will then go through those items periodically and either throw them out (remember you need to "Move to trash" or `shift+delete` - just pressing delete will just delete them from the collection.) or file them in the right collection and delete them from "Inbox".
To quickly remind you of why you saved the items, you could either attach Zotero notes or you could use tags, including [colored tags](http://zotero-manual.github.io/zotero-manual/tags#colored_tags) if you can make do with only a couple of short keywords.
Finally, since you will always save items into Zotero right away, you can sort the collection by "date added," which should give you a good idea of the context in which you saved an item.
Since you're using Zotero Standalone, you'll want to use `alt+tab` to quickly move back and forth between Zotero and your browser.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I use [Papers](http://www.papersapp.com) for this, because not only does it let you organize your citations, but it lets you search and import documents directly from the program, rather than having to bring them into a manager.
Basically, I create a new folder for this particular brainstorming session, everything I find that's worth skimming gets imported, and then the ones that don't pan out get deleted.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/09 | 633 | 2,708 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm writing an application for a dissertation fellowship, which according to the application is "to a truly outstanding doctoral degree candidate in the last semester of residence".
I need to write a 'personal statement' which is only described as follows:
>
> a statement of how the fellowship will facilitate the completion of
> the doctoral degree by May 2015
>
>
>
That's it. No other guidelines are given to describe how to write this personal statement.
My research is theoretical, and does not require the purchase of any special equipment other than pencil and eraser. Thus, my naïve, simplistic answer this question is:
"I need the money so I can pay for tuition long enough and buy enough food to keep my brain cells alive long enough to graduate".
Obviously, I know this is the worst possible way to answer this question. In all honesty, the way this fellowship describes how to write the personal statement is rather limited. Other than writing a more eloquent phrasing of "give me money so I can eat", I can't think of anything else to write in it.
What do personal statements generally contain for fellowships like this? Are they usually as limited as this? What other points can I bring out in this statement other than "I need to buy food and pay for school"?<issue_comment>username_1: What about those students who don't receive that fellowship? Do they drop out or do they work as Teaching Assistants in the department? If it's the latter, then just point out how you would like to spend your time doing research instead of preparing courses.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Your answer is over-simplistic. In reality, having money allows you to devote time to research as opposed to getting a job to earn the money so that you can eat and do (less) research. If you already have such support, then I do not see the point of applying. If it turns out that finishing this dissertation quickly and with fewer distractions advances science as well as your personal and professional goals, then applying seems reasonable.
I would write something along the lines of how the time to prepare and establish the results is precious, and that having such a fellowship will grant you that time. Also, while your expenses may be minimal, you may find that using some of the money to attend a conference or to facilitate discussions with colleagues will allow you to add more to your dissertation than you could otherwise.
This is just off the top of my head, and I've been outside the ivory tower for more than a decade. Certainly some of your colleagues off the Internet can also suggest some themes to use for this aspect of your application.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/10 | 1,393 | 5,577 | <issue_start>username_0: My school has a recommendation, but not a requirement, not to let students eat during class. I am wondering if I should make this a rule or not for the classes I teach. I am concerned about my undergraduate students.
On one hand, the noise from rustling bags and crunching chips and bottles falling on the floor can be distracting. On the other hand, hungry students are distracted by hunger. This is a particular problem for my classes which start before 8 AM as students often skip breakfast and want to eat it during class (because they do not want to wake up early enough to eat before coming to school).
Since my main concern is on the learning, I would like to know how the issue of allowing eating during class actually impacts student learning.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have any data on this, just an idea.
You could mention the rule (and justification), ask students to please come fed, and say that if you're really hungry you would still prefer that they attend class and be discreet: sit near the back, don't make undue noise, etc.. That would hopefully minimize the disruption to student learning without making you seem unreasonable.
(If I were the university administration, I would probably do away with 8 am classes; younger people (especially teenagers) have circadian rhythms that run a bit later than older or younger folk. I do not think it speaks that ill of students that they don't want to wake up early enough; it's probably quite difficult for quite a lot of them. High schools are beginning to adjust.)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: **EDITED:** As you mention, there are two competing issues here: Running low on carbohydrates and especially hydration leads to decreased cognitive ability; but eating is a distraction from attending the lectures. I have found mostly opinions and little hard data on this, for example
* <http://www.ludlowcub.com/opinion/2012/05/01/allowing-students-to-eat-in-class-helps-with-learning-ability/>
* <http://www.breakfastintheclassroom.org/pdf/BIC-Fact%20Sheet_FINAL_1-07-11.pdf>
* <http://policy.federation.edu.au/learning_and_teaching/ub_tec/classrooms/ch01.php>
The consensus seems to be that water (in sealable bottles) should definitely be allowed, and that students should not go longer than three hours without a chance to snack. This would suggest treating the classroom like a study place in a library: Water (or anything that doesn't leave a mess when spilled) yes, snacks only during breaks.
One thing to keep in mind that diabetic students will have more strict requirements on when (and what) to snack, which should be accommodated, see
<http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/6/2/180.full.pdf>.
Not allowing other students the same opportunity to refuel might be seen as unfair.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not sure if there is any hard data on this but reflecting back on the undergrad years I think we can all provide some perspective on the effects of food consumption in class.
If there is a clear cut school policy (not your case, as you indicated) then there is little you can, and should, do. Otherwise as the teacher you should make the rules of the game clear for the students from the first day. If you intend to allow eating, then ask first for any allergies that might be relevant. At our university, we had some students who had severe allergies to peanuts. Thus there was a campus-wide ban on peanuts.
If the classes are longer than 45 mins it might be tricky with the morning lectures. As the OP mentions, many students skip breakfast on occasion, willingly or otherwise. I believe you can get away with banning eating, would probably be better off actually... Food that speaks to one or more of the senses besides visual (smell, sounds etc..) might be distracting to others.
But be vary of drinking; both coffee (in the morning) and water (all day) might be vital for students to be able to keep focus, and extend their attention span.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Most of the answers here suggest limiting or prohibiting eating in the classroom, but I have to disagree.
First, students generally do not control their own schedules. Personally, I often had five or six hours of class back-to-back as an undergrad, and I was not unusual in that regard. Yes, there are breaks between classes, but students need that time to get to the next classroom. In addition, many professors let their class go overtime, reducing the length of the break. If you prohibit eating, hungry students will simply choose to arrive late after getting a snack, which defeats the idea of minimizing disruptions by prohibiting eating.
Second, you don't know what medical issues a particular student has: they may be diabetic or need to eat at regular intervals for other reasons. While a student can tell you about this at the start of the term, I don't like the idea of forcing students to discuss their medical issues with every professor, every term. After all, students who get special classroon accommodations due to a disability are not obliged to tell their professors what the specific disability is.
For these reasons, if the university does not have a specific policy, I would tend to be lenient at first. Most students are reasonable people who won't show up to class with a five course dinner. If a specific concern arises during the term, such as very noisy food or garbage being left behind, you can address it either with the individual student or the class as a whole, as appropriate.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/10 | 1,154 | 5,078 | <issue_start>username_0: I have gotten a job in a sort of university of Applied Sciences; this work place wants to start a small research group, but one issue that I started to notice is the orientation they want to give it. I mean, they want that all research to give a profit. For that reason, I was wondering how to convince the persons in charge of the Faculty, that not all research will give immediate profitable results.
The faculty is information technology oriented, which has a big influence on Computer Science topics. For what I saw in other institutions, not all research is profit-oriented, but oriented to expand the knowledge about some fields.
Any advice?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I have gotten a job in a sort of university of Applied Sciences; this work place wants to start a small research group, but one issue that I started to notice is the orientation they want to give it. I mean, they want that all research to give a profit.
>
>
>
Well, that's a direction that *many* research centres around the world go. Fundamentally, IBM does not maintain IBM Research to contribute to human knowledge, but so that IBM Proper can get an innovation advantage (and patents - lots and lots of patents).
A University of Applied Sciences is usually not a research university in the traditional sense. They are not funded to do research, and, by and large, it is not their job. It seems perfectly reasonable that they expect their upcoming research group to fund itself or even be a cash cow. There is no obligation that a research centre needs to also do unprofitable things.
To make this perfectly clear: building up a for-profit research centre is a perfectly valid strategy. Clearly, it is not the kind of research you want to be doing (which is perfectly fine, even very understandable for me), but you cannot expect them to change their global strategy to fit your idea of research, especially if you just joined them.
>
> should all research be profit oriented?
>
>
>
No, of course not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The statement "If I knew what I was doing, it wouldn't be Science" provides some insights. New knowledge builds on earlier knowledge but the groundbreaking new insights come from unplanned events, even mistakes. It is of course possible to research new products in a planned way, where a focus is to arrive at a sellable product. Where the difference between research and engineering goes in this case is not clear. But, it is not so likely a goal oriented approach will lead to revolutionary developments, particularly if experiments are deemed from a commercial point of view. This is because risk is involved and if commercial products is a goal it will be the organization's willingness to "waste" money on risky but potentially lucrative ideas, or, just stay within the safer zone of incremental development.
So trying to figure out what strategies they see driving the research will also allow you to assess the picture. It may also allow you to influence the direction of the institute depending on how the process is working in forming the organisation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: There is a difference between
1. Doing things that will immediately generate a profit (product development; low risk, mostly applying known technologies, possibly combining them for the first time)
2. Doing things that you *expect* may lead to profit (sometimes called "line of sight" - you have some unknowns, but if the risks pan out you expect to move into category 1 and will be able to make a profit).
3. Doing things that are *interesting* but you're not quite sure how they will be used (there was a time when nanotechnology fell into that category. "I bet something interesting will happen - I just don't know what"; and now it is everywhere)
4. Doing things that you can confidently predict will not affect "profitability" for your employer over your career (think - searching for exoplanets in solar systems that are 30 light years away).
In principle there is nothing wrong with any of these approaches - and a healthy research department will have a blend of the first three, with maybe a smattering of 4 thrown in for the odd chance at a Nobel prize etc. The mix (proportion of each type) that an institution can afford depends on their source of funding - not only for the current year, but going forward. A department that keeps says "just fund me one more year - NEXT year will be the breakthrough" eventually loses credibility. By spinning off a few short term hits you earn the right to work on longer scope / higher risk higher reward stuff.
There are other things than money that can and should motivate research - but unfortunately, unless you make sure that there is bread on the table, your high ideals will only carry you so far.
**Final thought** Having a diverse, motivated, and highly skilled workforce should be at the top of the list for any research organization. This is an excellent argument for keeping a mix of projects with different time scales going in parallel.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/10 | 849 | 3,462 | <issue_start>username_0: What are some common methods for assessing how well a exam works, once you have the results back? This is something of a generalization of [How to measure entropy of exam results](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15335/how-to-measure-entropy-of-exam-results).
I've seen professors regress scores against some potentially interesting covariates (majors vs. non-majors, gender, etc.) and look at which questions were predictive of your overall grade, but I'd be interested to see if there's a particular battery of tests one should look at to see if an exam is "well written".<issue_comment>username_1: For multiple-choice exams, [split-halves reliability](http://web.sau.edu/WaterStreetMaryA/NEW%20intro%20to%20tests%20&%20measures%20website_files/reliability.htm) is (for better or worse) a common measure of internal consistency. The basic idea is to divide the questions into halves (e.g., odd vs. even) and look correlate students' scores on the two halves.
Another common measure is the [discrimination index](https://www.msu.edu/dept/soweb/indexdis.html). These indices giveyou information about how well an exam item "discriminates" between high performing and low performing students. This I find most useful when I've mis-coded the key. Students who otherwise do well, do particularly poorly on a question.
Both of these methods are most easily applied to exams with lots of questions (e.g., multiple choice), but they could probably be adapted for essay or short answer exams as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The most common analyses I've seen are generated automatically by scantron grading software, and are thus only used for multiple choice questions. But a motivated person could perform the analyses themselves.
I've read a few articles on test analysis over the years, and this [summary of a particular scantron software](http://www.washington.edu/oea/services/scanning_scoring/scoring/item_analysis.html)'s results seems like a good overview of test analysis in general. A quick summary to improve searchability:
Item statistics:
**Item difficulty** - percentage of students answering correctly. Desirable = above chance.
**Item discrimination** - how much item correlates with test as a whole (students who did well on the exam get this right more than low-level students). Uses stat like Pearson Product Moment correlation. A "good" question has a score over 0.2.
Test statistics:
**Reliability coefficient** - A general measure of test length, breadth and its intercorrelations. Scores above 0.8 are considered excellent for a classroom test.
Some other interesting measurements are used more in standardized testing, rather than classroom testing. These definitions are taken from [this overview](http://www.uni.edu/chfasoa/reliabilityandvalidity.htm).
**Construct validity** - does the exam actually measure the subject, or some other variable like reading skill. Generally uses a panel of "experts" or feedback by students.
**Split-half reliability** - measures whether different test items that purport to test the same concept produce similar results within a single exam.
**Criterion-related validity** - measures how well the new test correlates with a known exam, like an ETS field test or GRE subject test.
If you don't get a basic output from scantron software, is there a department on your campus that will analyze your exam for you?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/10 | 519 | 2,308 | <issue_start>username_0: Do departments look at MOOC's certificates favorably during the graduate admissions process? Will it give me any advantage over students who don't have them if I am trying to enter a PhD program?<issue_comment>username_1: You're free to mention the certificate in your application. How much weight to give to it is presumably up to individual committee members. I think unless the certificate pertains to a specific skill that's in demand for the program, you shouldn't expect to get much of a boost from having one. At the moment, people don't have much experience with such certificates, and will be more inclined to look at indicators they know better, like grades and GREs. It's possible this will change a bit in the future, but it will likely move pretty slowly.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the MOOC certificate is in a closely related field, it will help. If it is in something like "Underwater Basket Weaving", it may not give you an advantage over anyone else, unless of course you are entering a program in Underwater Basket Weaving. Or something similar, such as Underwater Knitting.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: What sort of advantage do you have in mind? MOOCs could help a little in addressing weaknesses in your application: if there's a standard course you were unable to take, then it could be helpful to be able to say you learned the material by other means, and a MOOC certificate might carry a little more weight than completely independent reading. However, on a scale from saying you read a book to getting a strong letter of recommendation, a MOOC certificate is much closer to saying you read a book.
Beyond that, it can't hurt to list MOOC certificates on your CV, but I doubt they'll make any difference. If you're going to graduate school, you should have spent time on many different sorts of learning: lots of formal classes, extensive discussions with peers, independent reading, and ideally working with a faculty member on something (a senior thesis, undergraduate research, etc.). Adding a few online classes is just not a big deal, especially if people are unsure of what the standards are. Compared with things like letters of recommendation or research experience, MOOCs disappear in the noise.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/11 | 834 | 3,624 | <issue_start>username_0: I was working on a problem in the field engineering. I have used one approach and it turned out that it does not work well. After that I got into conflict with my supervisor, and realized that it will be hard to publish the original paper with him. So, I have redone everything with another approach, wrote a paper, submitted it and at as soon as my paper have been almost accepted, my supervisor wrote to the editor claiming that he also should be an author of the paper. He haven't even seen the new paper nor haven't analysed or interpreted the new results. What should I do in this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Maybe you should review the supervisor agreement that you signed at the beginning of your studies. In some institutions it is stated that you MUST put your supervisor as a coauthor of any research paper; which is the result of your working at that research group. In this cases it does not matter even if your supervisor has only told you to adjust the font size (being sarcastic by the way).
Bottomline, all depends on the supervisor-supervised agreement signed.
Good luck! and try to settle differences with your supervisor.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: This entire situation is an ethical quagmire that **both you and your advisor are responsible for.**
The reason why I say that you share in the creation of this situation is the following. Let's replace your advisor with an external collaborator. The sequence of events, as you have outlined here, runs as follows:
* The two of you collaborated on an initial version of the paper.
* You had a conflict on some issue (seemingly related to this paper)
* You then proceeded to go behind the collaborator's back, redo the analysis, rewrite the paper, and submit it without informing her.
Under such circumstances, it is clear that you would bear a large percentage of the blame for the situation. The fact that it's your advisor instead of an external collaborator doesn't change the ethical considerations here.
Your advisor probably feels that because you were previously working on the problem together, you have cut him out of the loop without his consent. You should have showed him the preliminary results of your new analysis and let him decide if he wanted to collaborate further. If he was to be an author on the original paper, he was entitled to at least that much.
Of course, at this stage, it's hard to say what to do—your advisor has also complicated the situation by asserting his author rights on a paper he allegedly has never seen, which is also wrong. I would follow JeffE's advice here and take the path of least resistance. Getting out of this mess of a relationship is the critical step right now.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. The advisor is being reckless in asking to put his name on a paper he hasn't read. The paper could be wrong, of poor quality, or even have academic misconduct issues (I'm talking in general ... I'm sure this is not the case for your work, but [serious problems](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thereza_Imanishi-Kari) have occured in the past).
2. Do *not* publish with your advisor if he has not contributed *anything* to the work. Of course, the fact that you've collaborated on this problem before makes it very hard to think that this is the case.
3. This is a real mess ... I can think of two reasonable solutions:
*a.* Tell the editor the current situation and rely on his/her opinion to sort out the issue. *b.* Add an acknowledgment to your advisor saying that this work is a rework of a previous unpublished work written with him.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/11 | 1,344 | 5,888 | <issue_start>username_0: I've majored in computer science (BSc: close to MIS, MSc: advanced software engineering), I've worked on dissertations on totally different topics in every stage at college, now I'm planning to do a PhD and I've been looking at different topics from various sub-fields but I frankly can't pin one to use as a starting point. I would say that I like X topic or Y and when I look closer at the papers being published in the field they seem too obscure to me and I can barely comprehend their abstracts. For example, I was searching for starting point in solving concurrency problems in software or even advance such technique since I felt it's what I want to do and what I know that would keep me motivated but I frankly couldn't find anything, I've looked at publications that reference famous papers/book (things I've researched very briefly) like [**communicating sequential processes**](http://www.cs.ucf.edu/courses/cop4020/sum2009/CSP-hoare.pdf) and **[cooperating sequential processes](http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/ewd01xx/EWD123.PDF)** but there was nothing that could give me a good start.
My questions here, am I looking in the wrong sub-field? I know I'm highly motivated by the previously mentioned area but do I understand enough to enter such area? I've seen people jump from psychology to computer science at PhD level and I wonder how someone could do such thing. Also am I even a PhD material if I can't pass this stage?
**Note:** the topics of my past dissertations were on AI and online social communities<issue_comment>username_1: Any time you have difficulty understanding something written, you must consider that it is you or that it is the writer who cannot communicate clearly.
I skimmed the second paper you listed and it is certainly understandable (and I teach business but have a background in software development). However, I'm a native English speaker so my vocabulary is quite large.
The writer seems to be Dutch and from my experience, the Dutch have an excellent command of English. The English this author is using is a bit advanced so if your English is not as strong, you might not understand simply due to less vocabulary. Those who write with simpler English will be much easier for you to understand.
The first article you listed is written in simpler English.
I would say if you feel you cannot clearly understand the first article then you might want to consider another field of study or you should spend more time to develop your English reading skills (from your question, your English writing skills seem fine).
If you are considering a PhD, you might want to see if you could meet with an adviser for a few minutes and discuss this issue with them. They could more easily evaluate what would be reasonable for you.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Your supervisor or potential supervisors should be able to help - and I don't necessarily mean by talking to them. First of all identify potential supervisors whose (recent) work you like and (mostly) understand. In the first instance look at their recent papers, and particularly concentrate on any points they raise in discussion or future work. In particular do a SWOT analysis and note what are the best and worst features of the approaches, and whether you can see opportunities for different, even interdisciplinary, work to be brought to bear.
To the extent you don't understand anything, don't keep reading and rereading and struggling with it, go back to the earlier work and the citations. Try go be back to the originators of the concepts you are lacking or find difficult, and the commentators who clarify the insights behind the formalisms. Look for conference and workshop papers for these early developmental versions of work, rather than the erudite and impenetrable journal versions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: 1. You have to ask yourself, what do you want? This is the question you should answer by yourself and which is crucial in all the following steps. So you want to do a Ph.D. Where do you want to do your Ph.D? What country? You want applied research or theoretical? After a few questions I assume the filed of research would become narrower and narrower.
2. If you have a vague imagination about what you want, just do a simple search about the areas. If you don't know what is this sub-field about, don't start reading scientific articles but rather start from the scratch, basic information. Don't get depressed if you don't understand the article stuff. It is a very narrow research and you have to work diligently in that narrow filed to start understanding it. Read the recent scientific news. For instance, I always read MIT news. Quite interesting researches.
3. If you already know the country and the subject (not exact), you start searching the university groups which are engages in a similar research. You check the articles and pay attention to the impact factors and number of articles. You check that your future supervisor has good recent articles. It means that he is working actively now.
4. You may contact the group supervisors to arrange a meeting or just to have a correspondence. It is always better to go and meet the team members and then they will provide some rudimentary information about all the studies they carry out.
5. When you narrowed down the number of choices to let's say to 5 groups, then start reading their articles. Always try to stay in touch with the groups. Ask questions, show your interest, because although you have funding, you still have to be accepted.
6. Of course, if you have some background in the field, it is always a bonus, but, if you don't, it is not detrimental. Everything depends on your diligence and intentions. If you are motivated, if you don't give up, after a few months of your Ph.D you would feel much progress.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/11 | 1,011 | 4,348 | <issue_start>username_0: I found a useful advice if I cannot reproduce computational published results in ([What should you do if you cannot reproduce published results?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7900/what-should-you-do-if-you-cannot-reproduce-published-results)). However I would like to ask the same situation with experimental results.
I am from chemistry, and it often involves synthesis of compounds. I know every lab in the world cannot be identical even if all equipment are the same, because many external factors such as climate, humidity, lab temperature, etc. may possibly interfere with the experiment.
If I have followed all the steps described in the literature, from the source and purity of chemicals to every single step described, but still I cannot reproduce the results (evidence from some characterization techniques), what can I do? Should I contact the author to give me all 'hidden' steps like the size of beaker, etc.? Or the journal reviewers think that the authors have already disclosed enough information for others to reproduce it, so the remaining job to investigate how to reproduce the results is on me? However sometimes the description is really vague, like 'drying in a vacuum oven at 50oC for 10 minutes', but what is the degree of vacuum?
(Sometimes the size of beaker may play a role, as evaporation way affects its crystal size, also the position of drying compounds in oven, etc.)<issue_comment>username_1: @posdef's comment is already very good.
I would definitely suggest contacting the authors and trying to get *exact* agreement also on the details that they didn't describe in the original paper. The original authors should be quite interested in an independent replication, so they should have an incentive to collaborate. Depending on how much they contribute, they could also hope for co-authorship on your paper.
Conversely, if they are *not* cooperative, that is another piece of information that should be included tactfully (!) in the paper you are putting together.
If you are lucky in your analyses, you may be able to identify the exact circumstance or unreported detail that makes the difference between reproducibility and non-reproducibility, and there you have the nucleus of an original paper all by itself.
On the other hand, if you cannot reproduce the results even with help from the original authors, this should be worth at least a correspondence. [Reproductions are *important*](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/), and [there are far too few of them](http://blog.scienceexchange.com/2012/04/the-need-for-reproducibility-in-academic-research/)!
I part ways with @posdef's comment in that I would definitely not send a letter to the editor voicing concerns about reports and reproductions not matching. This already points towards a suspicion of scientific wrongdoing on the part of the original authors. And unless you have a lot more to go by, a simple inability to reproduce a finding should not be taken as the result of foul play. There are so many potential reasons for non-reproducibility, from the ones you mention to simple random error (aka, uncontrolled conditions), that there is really no need to even imply dishonesty. Such an implication can mess up either the original authors' or your own reputation in the field for decades, so it should not be made lightly.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There is nothing wrong or rude about contacting the author and asking for some help in this matter.
You should identify not only who you are, but what your institutional affiliation is (and as I guess you are a student or postdoc who you are working with/for).
You should explain what you are up to (simple replication, or are you trying to use this work as a step in a larger process), an outline of what you have tried, what choices you made on any steps that were not completely specified, and how your outcome has been unsatisfactory (it is possible that the author needed multiple tries to get this to work and has seen the same failure mode before).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Easiest solution is to invite them over and let them do the experiment. You will find what they are doing different and then you can decide together how to proceed with publishing the results.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/05/11 | 2,404 | 9,734 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in my final year of undergraduate. Another student, call him John, sent me a message on Facebook saying basically:
>
> Can you send me the solutions to the assignment from unit X, that you
> took last year. In exchange, I will tell you what the future minitest
> questions are for unit Y that we are both doing this year.
>
>
>
Attempted Collusion is not explicitly mentioned in the Universities Academic misconduct guide. But, the mini-tests say at the top of each page:
>
> IT IS NOT PERMITTED TO TAKE THIS PAPER AWAY FROM THE TUTORIAL SESSION OR TO DIVULGE ITS CONTENT
>
>
>
since students in the later tutorials could learn the questions from the students in the earlier tutorials (exactly as John proposed).
A complicating factor is that I really dislike John. He doesn't seem to have realised this.
I find him personally annoying, and consider him a poor student.
I don't understand how he has managed to pass enough units to have not been suspended for poor performance.
It may be he is very good at exams, or it may be that he has been cheating all along.
I have a number of options, and could do one or more of them:
* Ignore it, and block him on Facebook. I'm worried this could reflect poorly on me if the message ever became public.
* Tell him no, and refer him to the universities plagiarism/cheating policy
* Speak to the Professor of Unit Y about it (that we are both studying).
* Speak to the Professor of Unit X about it.
* Speak to the Head of School (sub-department), who is above both units
* Speak to the University Dean. Who is in charge of enforcing the Academic Misconduct policy. (Will probably mean going though channels)
If I speak to a professor about this, he may be suspended.
I worry that I am a bit too willing for that possibility as I don't like him.
On the other hand it isn't my job to decide the consequences of his actions. Which is the best option?
---
**Update:** I spoke to the coordinators of units X and Y. Both said they would look into it and get back to me. I also responded to John, saying no, and referring him to the Academic Misconduct policy.<issue_comment>username_1: Putting such a request in a written, verifiable manner as this student has done is incredibly *dumb*, and frankly merits whatever punishment is associated with this.
Although in principle you could simply ignore the request, I think this is one of those cases where you're better off reporting it. Otherwise, there's still the possibility that "John" could bring you down with him (he wrote you a note, after all!). So I would write to him declining the offer, and then report it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I generally agree with username_1 - the profound stupidity of putting a request like this in a way that provides evidence is *staggering*.
Whether or not you *should* report them for cheating may not be a decision you have to make - I would strongly suggest you check your institution's student handbook or honor code. I've been in more than one university where if you suspect or have evidence of someone cheating, you're obligated to report it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Here is my evaluation of the options that you mentioned.
>
> Ignore it, and block him on facebook.
>
>
>
This option is fine, but in my opinion is a bit lazy.
>
> Tell him no, and refer him to the universities plagiarism/cheating policy
>
>
>
This couldn't hurt, but probably he will just ignore it.
>
> Speak to the Professor of Unit Y about it (that we are both studying).
>
>
>
A good option. Another related option that I don't think anyone has mentioned yet is telling the professor about the request but not mentioning John's name. Most professors would (or should) appreciate hearing in general terms about ways that students are cheating in their classes.
>
> Speak to the Professor of Unit X about it.
>
>
>
It is probably better to speak to the professor in charge of you and John at the moment.
>
> Speak to the Head of School (sub-department), who is above both units
>
>
> Speak to the University Dean who is in charge of enforcing the Academic Misconduct policy. (Will probably mean going though channels)
>
>
>
I don't think it is a good idea to go over the professor's head unless you think that he or she is not taking the matter seriously.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Sorry, I'm old school. You don't lie, cheat or steal. Additionally you don't tolerate anyone who lies, cheats or steals, particularly in an academic environment. I believe all students have a duty, an obligation, to report someone breaking those rules, period. That's part of being a responsible adult. Accepting that poor behavior among your peers erodes the quality of your education. Yes, when the peer group doesn't always support it, it does take a lot of character, strength and personal courage to do the right thing. Oh.. and just imagine for a moment.. what if this person was your best friend? That decision takes lots of courage and is very difficult. Good luck with your dilemma.
Oh, and whom to speak to first? I would start with either of the two teachers involved. I'd hope you'd get the same response from either of them. They have been trained for this situation, and will direct you as to possible next steps. Note: is there a university policy on this with a specific process to follow? If so follow it. If not talk to either teacher.. probably the one who knows your integrity and credibility better.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I finished a good university which helped me find a wonderful job. Cheating in the university is not the best thing to be done, but sometimes people have to do it in order to win - if you don't understand me I doubt you understand life - watch <NAME>ger six rules of success. And I would like to tell you that reporting your colleague is very stupid in my opinion - why you need to do such a bad thing to him? Did he do something bad to you - no... Maybe it's best that you ignore it, but for sure you don't need to report him - you will make him unhappy, and if you ignore it nobody'll be unhappy, right? If you obey all the rules (I'm talking about the rules, not the law) you won't go far in your life... If you don't believe me check the most successful guys in the planet - what do you think, they obeyed all the rules and never cheated on anything??? Think out of the box. I know intelligent guys with great academic experience and at the same time guys who only graduated school and are 100 more successful than the first. Be cool, don't take things so seriously - it's not a robbery or a rape, as I said - take action when somebody's been made unhappy, this is not the case. And now you're about to make someone unhappy, why?
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: As a student, I would like to answer this, apparently everyone has a different perspective here, but mainly 2 sides. Students vs Professors :)
He asked you for last year's answers. What is wrong with this? I sometimes ask my friends for previous years' answers as well. This does not mean I am going to copy them. I can go through their work, understand the concepts better and do my homework. The reason is, not every question type is covered in classes or books and guidance might be required to solve them. First you learn how to solve something, then you apply your knowledge to questions. And questions with solutions are the perfect way to master the knowledge. When I use my friends' past homeworks, it really helps me learn the material and all the time I spot their mistakes and prepare my own homework with no mistakes.
Of course, his intentions might be directly copying your homework. In such a case, a proper department should keep old homework solutions and it is the TA's responsiblity to detect them.
So, if someone who you think has intentions to learn from your homework is asking for it, it is very normal to give. But if you think his intention is to directly copy, then you can simply decline his request. You can say you don't have them anymore or you do not wish to share them. No person is guilty unless they commit the wrong and again, you shouldn't worry about them. The university pays graduate students for these matters, it is their job.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Let me defend the middle ground here.
First of all, we're hearing only one side of the story here. Although, the case may seem straightforward, I do find the proposition of John strange. If he had simply asked for the solutions from last year's course without offering anything in return, this wouldn't have been an issue at all. It's like asking a girl out but also offering her money to improve your chances.
Also, everyone seems to be taking for granted that his suggestion of cheating necessarily means that he has cheated before or even that he will cheat again. In fact, this person, who is a student, and whose case is relayed to us by someone who admits to disliking him, has already been labeled a serial cheater and is even considered to be very likely to use cheating as his primary means in obtaining a job!
Anyone who has given a little thought to the problem would realize that there is a limit to cheating. Cheaters do not pass all exams with 100%. You can't cheat your way through answering interview questions unless you actually understand what you're being asked.
One of the suggestions given here, which I think is the most appropriate, was to ask the instructors in general terms about the exact form of cheating and its consequences. Then you will be better positioned to decide whether or not to report someone directly.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/11 | 2,157 | 8,891 | <issue_start>username_0: Some people try to complete their PhD asap, others try to make major breakthroughs. I think these aims are mutually incompatible, one is going against the other.
What are pros/cons of each for somebody whose intended career is research in academia?
The answers should be general, but I myself am interested in pure mathematics.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> somebody whose intended career is research in academia?
>
>
>
I believe any PhD student who can
* Identify interesting research problems
* develop solutions to them
* publish in good conferences/journals
*should* graduate and enjoy the freedom of research. PhD is not a lifetime career. It is just the beginning. Longer or shorter PhD does not matter; what does matter is that you are an independent researcher when you defend.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There are several considerations regarding whether to graduate now.
I'll go through them from most to least important (in my opinion).
1. **Thesis readiness:**
You can't graduate unless
your advisor and your committee feel your thesis is good-enough.
For some departments, you need to have 2 or 3 separate projects
which are in advanced enough state or even published.
2. **Research readiness:** As @username_1 noted,
if you feel that you are able to do research independently,
and your advisor agrees, then you are ready to graduate.
3. **Future job situation:**
* If you can get a tenure-track job or post-doc in September 2015,
then go ahead and graduate in June 2015.
* If you can't get any academic jobs in September 2015,
then maybe you should stay one more year.
4. **Job prospects this year vs next year:**
For some fields, getting a good job requires a student
to have papers in advanced stages of the publishing pipeline,
i.e. submitted is good, under second or third round of review is better,
and accepted is best.
If you have a great paper but it is not yet ready,
waiting until the next year before you apply for jobs
may allow you to have that great paper
in a more advanced stage of the publishing pipeline
which can't hurt your job prospects.
5. **Funding from advisor:**
Is your advisor willing/able to support you for an additional year?
Some advisors limit their support to 4 or 5 years,
and students who wish or need to stay longer may have to carry heavy teaching loads.
6. **Research environment:** Are you learning from your advisor,
and doing good work with the other students/professors in your current institution?
If so, leaving for another position becomes more risky
because the situation may be worse than your current situation.
7. **Financial situation:**
Usually, a PhD salary is less than a post-doc salary,
which is less than a tenure-track job salary.
For some students who may be supporting a family,
earning more money as soon as possible is an important consideration.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> others try to make major breakthroughs
>
>
>
This can be a trap because not everybody is able to make major breakthroughs. Besides not being smart enough, a major factor is the group of people you are surrounded by. It could easily take years for your cohort to catch up with the leaders in the field. If your project involves a major leap, consider the alternatives.
Evaluating what is do-able and the time involved is understanding your field, and an important part of a PhD. In fact, big companies have 'domain specialist' positions where your job is to review the value and effort involved in a project.
There is a category of people with a fast PhD who are successful because they understand what is relevant to pursue.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If you are aiming for a career in mathematics at a research university, then trying to complete your Ph.D. as quickly as possible is a bad idea. In the U.S., you should plan on spending four or five years in graduate school. You should not graduate in three or fewer years unless you write an absolutely extraordinary thesis (or personal concerns force you to leave graduate school). Graduating in four years is reasonable, but most people are better off taking five. Even if you've reached a natural break point in your work, it can be valuable to stick around and work on something else for a year.
This may seem counterintuitive, but it's based on three principles that describe how junior candidates are evaluated in mathematics:
1. The job market is brutally competitive, and you need the strongest application you can put together.
2. No extra credit is given for graduating quickly. People who graduate in three or four years compete on the same footing as those who spend five. [However, there can be a penalty for taking six or more.]
3. Once you graduate, the clock starts ticking. If you take longer than average to find a tenure-track job, it will be held against you.
The net result is irrational: the job market judges it better to spend five years in grad school and then do a three-year postdoc than to spend three years in grad school and then five years as a postdoc. The former looks normal, while the latter looks like you graduated too quickly and then were unable to find a tenure-track job after your first postdoc (so what might be considered a compensating plus/minus pair turns into two negatives).
Five years in graduate school is something of a cut-off, for two reasons. Most grad schools discourage staying longer, because of limitations on space and funding, and spending six or more years starts to look like you were unable to complete your dissertation. However, up to five years, longer is usually better.
One way of thinking about this is to consider the question title:
>
> Longer PhD with a deeper result vs a shorter PhD with a sufficient result
>
>
>
What constitutes a "sufficient result"? Sufficient to graduate is a weak condition, since getting a good postdoc is much more difficult than merely completing a dissertation. However, a good postdoc won't get your career off to nearly as strong a start as a great postdoc would. If another year in graduate school could make the difference between a good and a great postdoc, it may well be worth it. But what if your work is so wonderful that you're obviously going to get a great postdoc? At that point you should raise your ambitions and aim to get a Clay research fellowship.
There's an enormously high ceiling, and you never reach the point of being able to say "OK, I've done enough." Graduate school is not a matter of doing enough and seeing how long it takes you. Instead, it's a matter of taking the standard amount of time and seeing how much you can do.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: My supervisor used to tell me regularly that there is no such thing as a "PhD with bar" (that is some extra merit/credit/marker to say it was really good - it is just yes/no).
On the other hand several of my students have one university or professional association prizes for their theses, and there are opportunities for publishing a good thesis. A good thesis is something you will want to cite for the rest of your life. You don't want something that you will be ashamed of in a decade - whether or not you "pass".
I get students to decide on three innovations that if they succeed with any one of them would be sufficient for the PhD. Some may be dead ends, but most students do manage to hit two or three bulls eyes. But one is enough.
The questions really are: will your thesis get up? are you employable? could you get a research job? The way to be confident of this is to have multiple publications (my students tend to have 5 from their PhD, mostly conference, with a couple of journals - those who did a Masters will have some from them as well).
The other thing is that if you have a scholarship or a TA contract or other support, make the most of it, use all of it - don't submit early. It is far easier to publish during your PhD than once you are in a full time academic position preparing teaching notes for half a dozen different courses. So aim for publications first, building up your thesis as you go (either a resource from which you pull out publications, or a compilation made by putting together your papers). The papers related to a chapter should be identified in the opening and/or closing pages (e.g. with footnotes), and in some universities you can do a thesis by publication or include verbatim papers with a bit of glue text. But examiners don't really like this (they tend to read the same intro material over and over again), and I encourage a coherent readable monograph approach (which is then publishable which a collection of already published papers isn't). But one way or another if referees from a stack of reputable conference and journals think your work is publishable, how can they turn down the thesis that spawned them.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/12 | 1,249 | 5,706 | <issue_start>username_0: In the following situation: I made research about some topic X in the field of Computer Engineering, submitted a paper and it got accepted. Actually it was an independent research that I have done while working as an information technology lecturer. Now the institution in which I am working does not want to give any financial support for the publishing of this research, what it would be the most ethical thing to do?
* Put into my academic affiliation the place that I am working as a lecturer? that will count as a publication for their Faculty, but I believe that is not fair that they do not even try to pay for any expenses.
* Put in my academic affiliation that I am an independent researcher, would that be advisable? maybe some academics would believe that I am not serious enough.
I believe that once I read some cases of people submitting papers as independent researchers, there were not so many, but those cases were real. For me I believe there is not so much difference, because what it matters is what is inside the article.
Any advice?
Thanks<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure that I see an *ethical* issue here. Ethically, I think you are free to omit your affiliation if you so choose.
But I don't see any benefit to you by doing so. It may be a symbolic jab at your institution for not funding you, but it's not going to directly hurt them in any way: nobody is going to notice except you and them. On the other hand, it certainly can directly hurt *you* and your relationship with your institution. As just one example, they might decline to consider that publication as part of your research record when they evaluate you (e.g. for tenure). Or, more seriously, they might decide that if you don't want to be associated with them, they don't want to be associated with you; and therefore stop employing you (if your contract permits it).
Clearly you have some issues with your employer, and I hope you are able to improve matters somehow. But what you suggest seems at best ineffective and at worst self-destructive.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Ethically you should put ALL the affiliations that contributed to the work. This included contributing to ANY of your expenses, living costs, research costs, travel costs, laboratory infrastructure, computer equipment, etc. used for the research.
If you are not paid by ANYONE to do (teaching and) research in the area of your paper, did not make use of ANY facilities or equipment not owned by you, did not do ANY work or thinking on an employer's time (think intellectual property) then you can say it is independent research, otherwise the affiliation of the supporter must be acknowledged. The primary source of support should be the primary affiliation. Depending on the publication venue you can provide additional affiliations or acknowledge other support in footnotes or acknowledgements. Funding for publication (from you or an organisation) can be mentioned in the acknowledgements like any other funding, and all funding really should be acknowledge unless the funder wishes otherwise. If you are affiliated with the funder (e.g. for self-funding through your consultancy) then this can go as an additional affiliation. This sharing of affiliation also makes clear that your university did not pay for everything needed.
I have never put "independent researcher" but have always put a relevant business/company name in some cases where support was officially declined for the project and/or I was between jobs or consulting. Putting "independent researcher" conveys the impression that this work is so unimportant that nobody would pay for it. As a consultant or employee, anything not actually covered by your contract and payment can be regarded as your intellectual property and independent research.
If you are an "independent researcher" then you have obtain your funding yourself, you support yourself, and are not receiving a salary to undertake research in the area of the paper, and you should thus regard yourself as a business and set things up as a business. You can register a business name or a partnership (e.g. with your wife) or incorporate a company, and use this name. Depending on where you are (legal residence/place of business) partnerships relating to your actual names may not need to be formally registered.
I am frequently in a position where I am a visiting professor somewhere and put both my substantive position and my visiting affiliation in an order that relates to where the bulk of the research and/or writing was done. But you really need to be able to justify this.
To make a closely related point based on the same ethical principals (often enshrined in a code of ethics by university, funding bodies, professional associations and/or journals): If you did any work on the paper or the underlying research at a university, you need to list the affiliation. If anyone else contributed in any way to the intellectual content or written form, this needs to be acknowledged, and if they contributed to both then they need to be an author, unless they specifically request otherwise.
Incidentally just providing funding (cash) or services (reviewing, technical assistance) doesn't require an affiliation or authorship byline, but should be included in the acknowledgements. On the other hand, provision of technical services or reviewing assistance that went beyond the call of duty and actually changed the direction of the project or lead to new conclusions (i.e. provided intellectual input and created intellectual property) does require the authorship and affiliation byline rather than just acknowledgement.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/12 | 793 | 3,211 | <issue_start>username_0: I am an undergraduate student starting my second year. Last semester, I took part in a research project and earned co-authorship of their paper, which got recently published.
However, when adding names from our anonymous submission to the camera-ready version, the primary author misspelled my first name(Garret instead of Garrett). Because this was a fairly minor edit, I didn't notice it until a few weeks after it had been fully published.
I've already asked the advising professor about it and he said that it wasn't anything to worry about, and that I should create an account on Google scholar and manually add the paper to my account. I've done this, but is there anything else I should do? How bad is this, or is it actually fairly minor?<issue_comment>username_1: I guess you can contact the journal publication and ask them change your name in the online version. Printed book is probably already published. But the online is very easy to change. I never tried this, but I guess this would not be a problem. Just give it a try.
I see one problem here. In case you want to use that publication in future, lets say in your thesis, your misspelled name may induce some problems, because you present the verified list of articles you published.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: It's pretty hard to change a name after publication. Many journals with print editions treat that as a permanent record of sorts. I'm not sure if that information can be changed in the DOI record though. It would be best to do as was suggested, and link that pub to your name in citation managers.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: This is probably not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. The journal can fix your name on the "linking page" for the article—which is the one most search engines will point to.
Secondly, in terms of the search engines themselves, the misspelling is not as catastrophic as if it were the last name that were affected. This is because most search engines only use initials for first and middle names, instead of the complete name. For instance, "<NAME>" would be searched for in [Web of Science](http://isiknowledge.com) as
>
> Public JQ
>
>
>
not
>
> "Public, <NAME>"
>
>
>
which makes finding your papers not so difficult, in spite of the spelling error. (Of course, if there's a problem with the citation databases, you can alert them to the error.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The name error is a factual error and it should be possible to request a corrigendum to the journal. See for instance here:
<http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v16/n12/full/nn1213-1906a.html>
All of the other answers hinting to the fact that you cannot change your name on a published article assume that the name was correct at the time of publication. This is not true in your case. Journals base their reputation on their being factually correct and I can't see any reputable journal refusing to change an incorrect name.
This said, I agree with others that it probably will not make much of a difference, but it would also be annoying to have to point this out every time it comes up (oh, yes, that is really me).
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/12 | 899 | 3,365 | <issue_start>username_0: I noticed that my university has a glass blowing service in the same building as the chemistry precinct, supposedly to make the glassware for the chemistry labs. At first I thought this was kind of quirky and I chortled to myself, "man, the chemistry students must break a lot of beakers."
Later I toured a campus overseas and noticed that they too had a glass blower. A quick [Google search](https://www.google.com.au/search?q=university+glass+blowing) showed that *many* institutions have similar facilities. Most of them sell their services too. It seems to be more academically-focused than I first thought; it would be incorrect to equate it with the janitorial service or the on-campus bakery, presumably.
Why glass blowing and not another craft? I'm curious as to what separates glass blowing from other crafts and manual arts that warrants it a dedicated department in an academic facility.<issue_comment>username_1: If you make enough use of them, it's cheaper and more efficient to use in-house services. That's why most universities will also have a mechanical workshop, to make one-off items mostly for the physics and engineering departments.
* Everything is streamlined: the glassblower is an employee, not a business owner. He can spend more of his time on his products, thus his services are cheaper. The University will also make some profit from selling their services.
* It makes things easier for the academic staff, and there's less bother with accounts or purchase orders. For routine jobs (if these things aren't outsourced), just visit the workshop and ask for another 1L boiling flask.
* The academic staff know that he will always do a good job: a low turn-over rate means the glassblower(s) develop a strong rapport with their frequent customers, and have a good understanding of their needs. If more jobs are outsourced, this personal touch can be easily lost.
Of course, it [seems these days](http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/01/local/la-me-glassblower-20131202) that ordinary items are usually outsourced -- a big factory is more cost effective. It's for the one-off custom items that it still makes a lot of sense to keep things in-house.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: As a chemist, I'll expand on username_1's answer, and confirm that he's in the right. Buying beakers is definitely cheaper through a commercial supplier, but for research in synthetic chemistry, every now and then you'll need glassware that doesn't fit standard specifications. For these one-off pieces, if the university is large enough it's better to have an in-house scientific glassblower. In particular, what my colleagues appreciate most with having access to in-house glassblowing services, is that it makes communication very easy and helps improve the products (*“you sure you want the top part to be so thin? I looks to me as it won't help condensation and might be a failure point later”*).
PS: the design and production of the most complex glass instruments is an art as much as a craft. In France, there even is a yearly competition of scientific glassblowers: [1](https://www.polytechnique.edu/home/current-events/jean-michel-wierniezky-2011-best-craftsman-of-france-89810.kjsp?RH=1250265754206), [2](http://www.souffleur-de-verre-de-la-recherche-scientifique.org/les-m-o-f.html).
Upvotes: 5 |
2014/05/12 | 3,533 | 14,398 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been receiving mails from (most probably amateurs), who claims to have proved famous mathematical problems, like the ABC Conjecture or Goldbach Conjecture. But invariably, they all contained mistakes. I decided not to waste my time on such unsolicited documents. But recently something interesting happened.
About 14 days earlier, I have received a mail from an Indian undergraduate student who claimed to have proved the [Sylvester-Gallai Theorem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvester%E2%80%93Gallai_theorem) in an elementary way. What is more amusing is that he claimed to have proved it using Mathematical Induction and a basic Euclidean Axiom. I decided to ignore it as usual. But yesterday I got his mail, telling me that-
>
> I suppose you haven't considered my document worthy of your time and so you haven't gone through it at all, or it may be that you are so busy that you haven't found time to check your email account. If that's the case then just ignore this mail. But if it's the first case then I would like to tell you something.
>
>
> Perhaps you have heard about the Indian Mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan. He also sent his mathematical works to renowned mathematicians like Baker and Hobson but they didn't reply. Later he sent his manuscript to Hardy and his genius was recognized. But just suppose that Hardy also considered his work to be the work of a crank, without even going through it. Consider this be the case even if he would sent it to other mathematicians. How long could he continue sending his unsolicited formulas and theorems (which were without proof!) to other mathematicians and be rejected? Of course, finitely many times. After that, he perhaps wouldn't write to any mathematician even if he had, suppose for example proved the Riemann Hypothesis. Why would he? He was likely to be rejected.
>
>
> So I suggest you at least to go through my document thoroughly and tell me precisely about it.
>
>
> Please don't behave like Baker or Hobson.
>
>
>
What should I do now? Should I remain silent or go through the document? Any suggestion will be welcomed.<issue_comment>username_1: Continue to treat it as spam, and ignore it.
For every Ramanujan, there are many many thousands of time-wasters.
The reward:cost ratio, weighted by the ratio of misunderstood geniuses to time-wasters, is very very low.
If someone has any ability, they should be able to demonstrate it quickly. And if they've got any sense, they'll realise they need to demonstrate it up front to get taken seriously.
So if someone hasn't put a pre-print up somewhere (much easier to do now than in Ramanujan's day), and has no pre-published material, ignoring them is now an even safer bet than it ever was before.
In this particular case, your [correspondant](https://mathoverflow.net/users/48849/william-hilbert) may have already tried posting on Math Overflow, although it may be someone else with the same name. Either way, if you're feeling generous with your time, you could prepare a canned response which went to all such neglected geniuses / timewasters that pointed them to Math Overflow, as a good place to engage with the Maths Research community and demonstrate that they are actually able.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The fact that he compares himself to Ramanujan just gives you all the more reason to ignore his mails.
If his work had any merit, his follow-up email would have been focused on that merit and how it might have been hard to see at first glance.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The reasoning developed in the second e-mail ("please do not ignore the hidden genius") was true when you first started receiving this type of e-mail, which is why you read these first theorems.
However, after a few try, you figured that the genius/spam ratio (as @EnergyNumbers pointed out) was not worth considering all these e-mail (maybe unconsciously...). In short, I think nothing changed with this e-mail.
If you really want to consider all these emails without spending toot much time, as @bingung said, and if you are giving lectures, you can assign them to students. It would be indeed a great exercice to try to demonstrate the theorems are not valid.
A third option, to give you a good conscience, and since the genius/spam ratio is probably really low, you can review 1/10th of the theorems you receive. It will not dramatically decrease the change to discover a math genius...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In a reply, suggest a journal to send it to. Then if it gets accepted for review, the reviewer may have an easy task in front of them. (Either that or genius will be recognised.) Everyone will be happy either way.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Unfortunately, I think there's little or nothing you can realistically do for most amateurs sending unsolicited manuscripts. What they don't seem to realize is how common this is and what a bad state most of the manuscripts are in:
1. I average several amateur e-mails per week (and I shudder to think of how many <NAME> or <NAME> must get). If I carefully read each paper and sent comments, that alone would occupy a substantial fraction of my professional activities, so I have to prioritize.
2. I at least flip through the papers, and most of them are obviously crackpot work. Occasionally I see one that doesn't look ridiculous, and I try to be encouraging when appropriate, but I have yet to receive a publishable paper from an amateur. The best I can do is generally to offer encouraging advice, and even that's uncommon.
3. Some people seem beyond hope (for example, the ones who send word salad), but some could presumably become solid researchers given the right education and mentoring. However, this is not something I have a lot of time to provide. I've got plenty of in-person students, some of whom would probably like more interaction, and I wouldn't feel comfortable telling them "Sorry, I'm busy trying to explain to some guy on the internet why his fuzzy understanding of quantum mechanics doesn't actually yield a short proof of Fermat's Last Theorem." Even if the amateur seems promising, they aren't likely to be dramatically more promising than my students, and mentoring over the internet is less effective, so it's still an awkward trade-off.
4. Some amateurs react very poorly to feedback. If you suggest their results are known (while complimenting them on their rediscovery), they angrily suggest that you must not have understood what they meant or are trying to deny them credit for their work. If you don't believe their results, they accuse you of incompetence or laziness. If you encourage them to apply to graduate school, they scoff at what academia would have to teach them. This is of course only a minority of amateurs, but it's just common enough to discourage giving honest feedback: there's too much of a risk of feeling like you wasted time offering feedback to someone who only wanted validation and responded with insults.
5. Part of the problem is grandiose visions. When people spend too much time daydreaming about being the next Ramanujan or finding the proof that didn't fit in Fermat's margin, it's really unsatisfying to learn that their story isn't actually as remarkable as they hoped. It's much easier psychologically to move to the parallel story of the genius oppressed by academia, rather than starting an academic career from scratch. (And even people who show no sign of grandiosity in their original e-mail sometimes have it hiding below the surface: I imagine that anyone who sends unsolicited accounts of their discoveries to experts is hoping for some degree of acclaim.)
So what to do about this? In an ideal world, I'd give lots of time and attention to everyone who wrote, but these are scarce resources. In practice, I handle it this way:
1. If the paper genuinely engages with my work and shows no signs of craziness (e.g., drawing religious conclusions from mathematics), I give at least a brief reply. Same thing if I have some other good reason to believe it was sent specifically to me, and not just as one of many recipients.
2. If the paper looks relatively promising but has nothing specific to do with me, I'll reply if I have time and feel that the reply would be well received.
3. If the paper is on a topic I particularly know and care about but doesn't involve my work and doesn't seem especially promising, I might reply.
4. Otherwise, I probably won't reply, and almost certainly not if the paper deals with famous unsolved problems.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_6: Many years ago, my university used to send letters that explained they received so many proof they didn't have the time to check them all, so each sender received a copy of the previous proof the university had received and asked them to check that one to help the university with their workload. That worked very well.
I think it was my professor in analysis, who received one letter where someone had worked out an excellent approximation of pi as a fraction of rational numbers (I think it was the next approximation better than 355/113). And he found that the result this man found was actually absolutely correct, not quite as mind-blowing as the sender probably hoped, but nevertheless correct, and he replied with a long letter acknowledging the correct results and a list of sources that would help an interested amateur.
That man was a single and outstanding exception. And the OP starter complaining about mistakes: Most of the time things are so bad, there are not even things that could be called "mistakes".
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: Have you considered offering your professional services for a nominal fee? I would think $250-500 that a starting price for detailed analysis, and potential support of a mathematical proof would be a fair price. Of course for one that will require considerably more effort, that fee could be increased.
If you are loathe to take the money you could always either donate the fees, or return them to the author. The primary purpose of the fee is to filter out the random amatuer submissions that have not been well thought or checked out. I assume that you would not mind doing a few serious reviews a year, if you could avoid the spam.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: This question has been asked more in the mathematical sciences than anywhere else. An interesting text on the topic (with advice) is **A Budget of Trisections** by Underwood Dudley. It is probably available somewhere cheaper than on amazon [dudley](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0387965688) *(I found some related work on scribd.com.)* If you are dealing with an intelligent and younger person, it might be useful to point out that your time is limited and that they might benefit from reading that text. The lesson I learned there is that practically no older amateur will take your advice when it is pointed out that they tried to prove something extremely hard or know-to-be-unprovable. Today this all happens online, and you should also look at <NAME>'s crackpot index at <http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html> , I assume there must be a mathematical version. (translate Einstein to Ramanujan, etc.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_9: After getting rid of spam in your email box by the spam filter, pass every unrequested mail through the crackpot index:
It will give points for, for example:
* mentioning Einstein, Feynman or Hawkins. (I suppose mentioning Ramanujan would be the same but in the mathematical field instead of physical field).
* complaining about the establishment
* vacuous statements
Read everything about it in: <http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html>
I don't believe you'll need more then 2-3 minutes for that.
However, also don't forget to take a look at <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amateur_mathematicians>, since there is mathematics outside academical mathematics too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: Ramanujan is actually a difficult case because he was in fact an amateur crackpot, and his contribution to real math is not clear to me. But yes, he was a genius. He did not reveal the methods by which he derived his magic formula, even though I am convinced he could explain it if he wanted to. He did not want to reveal his secret craft, he only wanted the fame. I say dunk it in the wastebasket in this case, and if you ever come across work which sounds scientific tell the author to submit it to [arxiv.](http://arxiv.org/)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_11: I think a good policy would be to redirect those people to [Math Overflow](https://mathoverflow.net/). Let them open a new topic to ask what's wrong with their proof.
If it's trivial to find errors then someone one Math Overflow will point out those errors. If their proof actually works I would expect someone at Math Overflow to recognise working proof.
You only need to write a email to redirect people to MathOverflow once and afterwards you can send everyone who sends you unsolicited proofs the same canned email.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: I guess I don't see the big moral quandary. You're a talented person who has worked a long time to develop his skills, and you are under absolutely no obligation to give those skills and your time away for free to every Tom, Dick, and Harriet. If you *want to* that's fine, but the fact that you feel pressured to do this is not good.
This person's case is really not that compelling to me: he has proved a result which has already been proved and by elementary methods also (according to a previous poster). Maybe it could be published but for this person to suggest his ability is comparable to Ramanujan's in some way based on *this* result seems absolutely ludicrous. To me, his appeal to Ramanujan, which is based solely on their circumstances and nationality, seems manipulative, and his comparison of himself to Ramanujan, shows a sort of hubris I find appalling. If Ramanujan had sent a proof of a result which had already been proved by elementary means to Hardy, do you *really* think Hardy would have given it a second thought? I seriously doubt it. Based on the information given, maybe he has some talent, but I don't see evidence of a world-class genius being lost here.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/12 | 509 | 2,133 | <issue_start>username_0: Are there journals that may consider articles of the type "new proof of old results" but the paper is exceedingly short(1-3 pages)?<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on the field and the nature of your derivation. If it gives new insights and uses completely new techniques that might in themselves be of interest, then you might pursue a regular journal. If the derivation is a clever application of an established concept, then you might consider something like the [American Journal of Physics](http://scitation.aip.org/content/aapt/journal/ajp), or others with a similar, pedagogic, agenda.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer is certainly "yes", but to identify the best fit for your paper you'll have to decide how different your proof is from previous proofs. It often happens that two proofs look completely different when viewed line-by-line, but still the main intermediate steps in the proofs are essentially the same -- in other words, proofs can use the same strategy but different tactics. If your main contribution is in finding an efficient or elegant way to present some of the same ideas that were used in previous proofs, then you might consider [*Expositiones Mathematicae*](http://www.journals.elsevier.com/expositiones-mathematicae/) or the [*American Mathematical Monthly*](http://www.maa.org/publications/periodicals/american-mathematical-monthly). On the other hand, if your proofs use entirely new ideas, then you have done original research and you should submit your paper to a standard journal. In between these two extremes is [*L'Enseignement Mathématique*](http://www.unige.ch/math/EnsMath/), which often publishes papers which combine new research with improved exposition of known results.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Most of the time, I would go to any journal that fits the subject (i.e., with an editor that should be interested, and know who to sent the paper to). For example I have had recent success with a 2 to 4 pages (depending on formatting) paper in Israel Journal of Math, which is not especially inclined toward short papers.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/12 | 467 | 2,089 | <issue_start>username_0: In a Program Committee (PC), can PC members non assigned to a paper still have a look at it and make comments influencing the decision, assuming that the reviewing system allow them to access the papers and the reviews?
If they only make a comment, should this comment be sent to the authors (EasyChair, for instance, does not forward the comments to authors)? For instance, consider the case where a PC member thinks that an important reference is missing, regardless of the overall quality of the paper, what should she/he do? Add a comment? Ask to be assigned as a reviewer?<issue_comment>username_1: Reviewer A asks colleague B who's not a reviewer to give his opinion on a paragraph because B has more knowledge about the specifics of that paragraph, then incorporates that feedback in his review.
Just one example of how it could happen.
Or Reviewer A knowing full well that his boss, manager B, won't like a review being critical of the work of prominent person C, so he decides to recommend strongly such criticism be deleted in order to keep his boss happy and his job secure.
Could happen too.
Are both going to show up on a review of the review process? Highly unlikely. Are both plausible scenarios based on human nature, even if not part of the review process? Highly likely.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: In theoretical computer science conferences (which often use EasyChair), I have seen the following practices:
* Once all reviews are in, PC chairs often *encourage* all PC members to comment on all papers on which they have something useful to say.
* Sometimes the comments are just discussion that may influence the final decision in borderline cases.
* Sometimes the assigned reviewers modify their reviews based on the comments (e.g., they realised that they overlooked some important point).
* Sometimes the PC chairs ask some of the assigned reviewers to incorporate the comments in their reviews.
* Sometimes the PC chairs ask non-reviewers to convert their comments to (short) reviews.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/05/12 | 2,022 | 8,709 | <issue_start>username_0: As part of my PhD, I have already published a paper and am working to expand it further. Recently, a PhD student (who I didn't know) from another university contacted me regarding my paper. He showed interest in the paper and the direction that I'm working on, wanted me to explain it further and, if possible, share the framework that I developed and used for experiment so that he could use it for his own research.
Although I like to help him as it will be nice if we can come up with some collaboration, I'm afraid that it might turn into an competition instead if he decides to pursue the same direction as mine alone. Since I'm still working on it without any concrete result, it is possible for him to solve it first and publish papers. I'm not saying that he might steal my ideas/tools since he can put my name in an acknowledgement.
So, my question is to what extent I should share or disclose my current research which is in progress.<issue_comment>username_1: You certainly have no *obligation* to share your work before you've published it. So you can feel completely free to say "Sorry, this work is still in 'stealth' mode, I'll let you know when I can share more."
It's helpful to collaborate with someone you know and trust, if you know the collaborative direction will not conflict with your independent work. (For example, I sometimes collaborate with members of my same research group, and share with them ongoing findings on related work that I wouldn't share with outsiders.)
But otherwise, you can keep your findings to yourself until you are ready to publish, or until you feel confident that you have enough of a head start that you won't risk getting scooped.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Great question! I found myself in similar situations as a student and likewise as a mentor for other students when talking with people working on similar topics.
A favourite quote of mine is from <NAME>:
>
> “If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas.”
>
>
>
I believe this is an ideal philosophy for research in a sense that ideally, everyone should gain from the free exchange of ideas.
However, as you gain experience, you realize that it can be just an ideal.
---
My first experience concerning the cost of openly sharing results was when I was a PhD student. Early on, I had the basics of what seemed like an important result for the community and had some initial results. My supervisor urged me to try and publish but the paper was borderline rejected from the conference with comments like "nice idea but still too early". I thus published it as a poster in the informal proceedings. In the meanwhile, my supervisor and I had been in conversation about how to progress further, get more results and mature the work. He presented the poster, spoke with various people and told me that he had had lots of interesting conversations: lengthy conversations with two senior researchers in particular.
I continued working on the problem. My supervisor and I had some difference of opinion on the direction the work should go in (theoretical vs. applied CS basically). We got bogged down in some theoretical questions where I felt the impact could be on simplifying the problem and working on the applied side. I missed the next deadline for the conference in our area but lo and behold, two papers were published that pretty much had developed the applied side of the idea. I read the two papers and realized that both had, in parallel, at the same venue, developed the ideas I had been working on ... with one or two interesting side observations. Both works were from groups of the two senior researchers my supervisor had talked to. One cited my informal/preliminary results as an inspiration, the other didn't cite it at all.
Four years later, the first paper now has 175 citations in Google Scholar, the second paper has 100, my paper has 41. I published a later paper on the topic that's doing a little better, but for sure, the early birds had taken the worm.
In part I'm happy that the idea was developed and they did add new ideas, and I've worked on various things since, but I honestly still regret not having formally marked the idea further before my supervisor exposed it. I also regret not being more urgent in getting the full work published.
---
This is not to suggest that you should stay tight-lipped at conferences or turn down all collaborations, but if you're worried about someone entering into competition with you, you might want to listen to that concern. I don't think it's at all unreasonable to not share every idea you have when you attend a conference. There are plenty of anecdotes of tight-lipped researchers: [for example, nobody knew what <NAME> was working on for several years while he was working towards a proof of Fermat's Last Theorem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiles%27_proof_of_Fermat%27s_Last_Theorem).
If you think the person is someone you can trust and someone who could help in a collaboration, listen to your gut. Test the water and see how knowledgeable they are or how they could contribute. Be careful if you have co-authors, not to talk about their ideas. If you want to collaborate, perhaps publish a technical report or a pre-print to mark your ideas first.
If in doubt, you don't have to tell them about your ideas straight away. Maybe stay quiet for the conference and email them later if you think you want to work together or to tell them about your ideas.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Let me offer another perspective.
>
> ... to what extent I should share or disclose my current research which is in progress.
>
>
>
To the extent you would like our society to improve, or the body of human knowledge to grow.
Having other people interested in our ideas means that our ideas are confirmed by others to be promising. Among these people, there could be those who are more capable, more intellectually gifted, more persistent, more enthusiastic than we are.
I would expect that the more people are involved in attacking a particular problem or working on a solution, the higher the chance or the faster it would take to solve that problem.
So if we think of the big picture, I believe we should share as much as possible our ideas. True, other people would probably get greater recognition than we do, but that is all right. Others' gain might be our loss, but in the end, the society benefits. And that is exactly why academic community exists---to serve our society.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Did he offer you something interesting about his research? Just wait until you have finished and published. Then you can send him a copy.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: As others have noted, the free sharing of ideas is the epitome of what the academic community is all about. However, as was also noted, we soon learn that this is only an ideal; reality often isn't quite like that, for many reasons.
Without getting into the many reasons--mostly involving fear of getting scooped-- for not sharing much (if at all) about your ongoing research, there are several ways to manage this situation.
First, if you truly don't want to share your ideas and/or pursue possible collaboration, figure out how to (preferably nicely!) turn someone down. Try something along these lines:
"Sorry, that's still classified information. Would you like me to let you know when I can tell you more?"
However, in those cases in which you do want to exchange ideas, perhaps with the goal of assessing the potential for future collaboration, you obviously need a slightly different approach. One approach is to share one interesting 'nugget' of what you have found/are working on, and then turn the conversation to their work.
"How do you think that might fit in with what you are doing? Do you see any other ways in which x might apply to y?"
Ask for their input on a small piece of the current puzzle;
"What could you tell me about z, in the light of what I've told you about x?"
Your milage may vary, of course, but this approach can get you many fruitful ideas (Be sure to attribute them to the proper source!), interesting responses, and even valuable collaborations. You can often get a gut feeling for whether or not you are or should be comfortable with responding frankly or whether you want to be more circumspect. In general, the value of sharing with others outweighs the potential risk, though again, YMMV!
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/05/12 | 508 | 2,007 | <issue_start>username_0: I know that after submitting a paper through Elsevier Editorial System, the corresponding author can check the status of the submitted paper online. But how about co-authors? Can the corresponding author give a permission to the co-authors to enable them to check the status of the paper as well? If yes, how that can be done?<issue_comment>username_1: The answer is No, he/she cannot cannot give any permission to the co-authors after submission to EES and before acceptance, as mentioned [here](http://help.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/279/p/7923/related/1):
>
> I am a co-author on the paper, I would like to be able to see the
> status of the manuscript. I have the manuscript number and I am
> registered on the journal website.
>
>
> *After submission, you can only see the status of a submitted paper via
> the corresponding author's EES homepage. You will not be able to
> search for this submission via your own author's EES homepage.*
>
>
>
So just the corresponding author can check the status before acceptance. But after acceptance, co-author can track the status as well:
>
> *After acceptance, the article is recorded in our tracking system, you
> can use the production reference number along with the Corresponding
> Author's name to track your paper status and add your paper to your
> personal homepage on <http://www.elsevier.com/trackarticle>.*
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You have received an email just after submission which gives you a link to check the current status of your manuscript. the text of the email is something like this:
"The link below takes you to a webpage where you can sign in to our submission system using your existing Elsevier profile credentials or register to create a new profile. You will then have the opportunity to tailor these updates and view reviewer and editor comments once they become available.
<http://www.evise.com/profile/api/navigate/>....."
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/05/13 | 473 | 1,738 | <issue_start>username_0: I had a situation where for a particular algorithm, it first shows up in a paper [1].
This makes [1] a primary source.
I found [1] a bit hard reading when it came to describing the implementation and fine details of the algorithm. But it was good at describing why the algorithm was needed.
I found another work, which was a masters thesis [2].
It included a step by step mathematical working from what was in [1] (and [2] cited [1] appropriately).
It helped me a lot. I could have done the mathematical working myself, but didn't.
So I am writing a brief summery of the Algorithm:
>
> The *{{Foo}}* algorithm allows the *{{Bar}}* problem to be solved [1]. It
> is based on the fact that *{{Equation}}* holds under *{{Conditions}}* [2].
> *{{My own explanation of {{Foo}} here}}*
>
>
>
Is this correct?<issue_comment>username_1: This is correct only if the source of the first sentence is exclusively [1] and the source of your second sentence is exclusively [2].
That is, if you learn "The {{Foo}} algorithm allows the {{Bar}} problem to be solved" from [1] without having read [2], and "It is based on the fact that {{Equation}} holds under {{Conditions}}" is an original contribution of [2] that is not in [1], then your citation is correct.
Otherwise, you may have to cite [1,2] for the first and/or second sentence as appropriate.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Something like this should be OK:
>
> The *Bar* problem can be solved using the *Foo* algorithm [1], which is based on
> the fact that *Equation* holds under *Conditions*. A useful and detailed exposition of the *Foo* algorithm and how to implement it in practice can be found in [2].
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 |
2014/05/13 | 6,610 | 27,110 | <issue_start>username_0: I am at the moment dealing with an academic dishonesty incident in a class I'm teaching (a few groups of students submitting identical code, when the class policy forbids getting help from another person on a graded assignment).
When I noticed indications of plagiarism, I emailed each affected student something along the lines of:
>
> The code you submitted is nearly identical to another student's work. Can you comment on this?
>
>
>
Their reactions mainly fall into three categories:
1. *"I made a mistake and I take full responsibility for it, I hope you will let me make it up but I understand if you can't."*
2. *"I talked about the assignment with another student, but I didn't copy anyone's code."* But then when I inform them they're getting a zero grade for the assignment, they don't argue.
3. *"I didn't do it! You can't give me a zero grade for the assignment when I didn't cheat, I refuse to accept a zero grade."*
Assuming I have evidence that all of these students cheated, is there a good reason to adjust the penalty based on whether students own up to their misconduct, or continue to lie about it?
On the one hand, I appreciate honesty, and doubling down on a lie seems like something that should be punished. On the other hand, I've never heard of anyone adjusting penalties like this, so I'm wondering if there's some reason I shouldn't.
It's also not clear to me what the relative difference in penalties should be, if there is one. I thought about it and it's hard for me to come up with one penalty that's appropriate for Group 1, another penalty that's appropriate for Group 2, and a third penalty that's appropriate for Group 3.
I would very much appreciate answers based on research and/or experience with policies like this, rather than just opinion.
(My school has no official policy on the matter.)<issue_comment>username_1: This seems tricky to answer but I'll try put some thoughts out there ...
>
> Assuming I have evidence that all of these students cheated, is there a good reason to adjust the penalty based on whether students own up to their misconduct, or continue to lie about it?
>
>
>
The objective part of the equation boils down to you incentivising honesty and deincentivising dishonesty. You will set a precedent that "owning up" lightens the punishment so folks are more likely to "own up". If students owning up increases the effectiveness of your teaching/course administration, then that's a win.
>
> It's also not clear to me what the relative different in penalties should be, if there is one. I thought about it and it's hard for me to come up with one penalty that's appropriate for Group 1, another penalty that's appropriate for Group 2, and a third penalty that's appropriate for Group 3.
>
>
>
On the other hand, you have to balance leniency with punishment: if a student just needs to "own up" after a crime to mitigate any punishment, then you are not deincentivising the original cheating enough any more. The punishment should fit the crime: thus you need to decide the severity of the original crime versus the claims of the different groups.
>
> I would very much appreciate answers based on research and/or experience with policies like this, rather than just opinion.
>
>
>
The principle is identical to why people plead "Guilty" in court. They get some leniency in return for simplifying the courtroom process. So maybe there's something in the legal literature that could give you an idea ([random search result](http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1340292?uid=3737784&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104011697567)).
---
Anyways that was the abstract answer. To give a more concrete suggestion ...
>
> Assuming I have evidence that all of these students cheated
>
>
>
... you could tell the students that you have proof that they cheated and tell them that they will get 0 marks for every assignment until they own up. This seems like a nice way of matching the crime for the punishment: the longer they continue to lie and cheat, the more they are punished.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: That's a really good question, that I generally often wonder about myself when dealing with plagiarism. As such, I don't have a fully fledged answer, just some thoughts.
>
> Assuming I have evidence that all of these students cheated, is there a good reason to adjust the penalty based on whether students own up to their misconduct, or continue to lie about it?
>
>
>
AFAIK, most courts are supposed to lower the punishment if you plead guilty of a crime, so there is certainly precedence for this. That being said, looking at court practice also gives a feeling of the downside of this. In general, people accused of a crime tend to plead Not Guilty as long as they see a reasonable chance of getting away, and plead Guilty if it is clear that they will be sentenced anyway. Pretty much the same thing also tends to happen for plagiarising students - they will deny until presented with sufficient evidence, at which point they own up.
>
> On the one hand, I appreciate honesty, and doubling down on a lie seems like something that should be punished.
>
>
>
I don't know. The honesty thing basically flew out the window when they were trying to cheat the first time, right? I don't see a huge difference in *honesty levels* between either of the three cases. As discussed above, I don't consider somebody smart enough to recognise a lost case as significantly *more honest* than somebody who has a strategy of denial.
>
> It's also not clear to me what the relative different in penalties should be, if there is one. I thought about it and it's hard for me to come up with one penalty that's appropriate for Group 1, another penalty that's appropriate for Group 2, and a third penalty that's appropriate for Group 3.
>
>
>
I see the same groups of students in my cases of plagiarism, and for now I generally treat them the same. I am open to good counter-arguments, though.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **TL; DR:** We adjust the penalty.
I sit on my department's Academic Misconduct Committee so unfortunately I see a lot of these cases. The University policy has created two similarly sounding, but different terms: academic misconduct and poor academic practice, with academic misconduct being much more severe than poor academic practice. Every student suspected of having engaged in poor academic practice is called into a meeting with the Academic Misconduct Committee. This committee looks at the evidence supporting academic misconduct/poor practice and hears the student's case which generally includes what training they have had about good academic practice, how the incident happened, and any evidence of extenuating circumstances (e.g., death in the family).
Based on this process we can come to one of 3 decisions:
1. not poor academic practice,
2. poor academic practice,
3. academic misconduct.
If we decide that they did not engage in poor academic practice, the incident is essentially purged from the system. If the student is called in again in the future, we do not nominally know that they had been called in before. If we decide that it was poor academic practice, the students are warned and it is documented. We are not allowed to apply formal penalties in the case of poor academic practice. If they are called in again we know from the documentation and are unlikely to give them the benefit of the doubt a second time.
If we decide that academic misconduct has occurred we can apply one of a number of different penalties to the work: no reduction of the mark, remark the work with the offending material removed or reduce the mark commensurate with the misconduct (anywhere from a 5% penalty to a 0 for the piece of work). A second incident of academic misconduct results in the penalty being decided on by a university panel and starts with a zero for the class and can go as high as a zero for the year. In this way there is a big difference between poor academic practice and academic misconduct with no reduction in the mark since poor academic practice does not count as a first offense.
Within this framework the committee is faced with how to handle the students who admit the issue and the ones who deny the issue. Those who argue they didn't cheat and have no explanation as to how their assignment matches another's work are almost always found guilty of academic misconduct since they are not willing to help us create a case for poor academic practice. More often than not they receive a 0 since we have no evidence that mitigates the penalty. For students who admit what they did, we often consider poor academic practice as an outcome since they describe what they did and realize it was wrong. Sometimes the offense is too blatant to let off without a reduction, but generally saying what you did wrong and how you will not let it happen again reduces the penalty.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Is it naive to propose a solution along these lines?
If everyone denies cheating i.e. situations 2/3 you outlined (which may all be lies, or one guy/gal having their work copied by the others, with/without their permission) 0% for everyone. They get the opportunity to submit a new assignment but with a cap on the maximum mark say 70%, or a mark rescaling e.g. they get 60% but their mark is rescaled from out of 100 to out of 70, so their grade reads 42%.
If an involved party owns up i.e, situation 1 you outlined, the involved parties get 0% but the opportunity to submit another similar assignment with no mark cap/rescaling.
I am not sure of the relative workload for you the assessor of having a few 'extra' possible assignments available for this kind of circumstance, but as I see it, a solution along these lines accomplishes several things:
1) Cheating/collusion when inappropriate is punished heavily, either resulting in 0% or a lot of extra work to try and make the marks back. This will act as a strong dissuasive influence for cheating both on individual and group levels.
2) The genuinely penitent (perhaps those who had something else on their plate and are otherwise diligent, one-time offender types) will have an opportunity to 'right their wrongs' and achieve a maximum mark (in theory, in practice they won't have as much time to do the assignment as it will overlap with other work, so their mark will likely be lower, again acting to dissuade a repeat offence as they struggle with the time cost).
An alternative, harsher implementation of such a solution would be to allow no resubmission if no one owns up, and submission for a lower cap/down scaled grade for honesty. This results in lower workload for you as the assessor, while still clearly rewarding honesty, strongly punishing cheating and being more balanced than just awarding 0%.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Depending on the response, you could punish subsequent lies. If someone cheats, gets a punishment. When confronted about that, if they recognize it, you don't take further action. But, if they give you a blatantly false explanation, they may get punished for it.
A (sadly) real case example: one student submitted exactly the same report than a previous one. When confronted about it, he claimed that he had done it, but when generating the PDF, it was somehow transformed in the other student's report, with only the name changed. This is being caught in a lie and try to avoid it treating the instructor as stupid.
Adding some research: Wikipedia links [a paper](http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol103/iss1/1/) where some subjects were falsely accused of academic cheating and offer a lenient punishment if they recognised the fact. 56% of them plead guilty to avoid the risk of bigger punishment.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: I am not a law major, but from an ethical standpoint I say *same crime same penalty*, anything else would be unethical. The motivations for the offense, likewise the reactions after being caught is irrelevant in the eye of the fact that the student in question *did* cheat and s/he *did* know that it was unethical.
What you *can*, and IMHO *should*, adjust is how to handle these students afterwards. The students who were sorry for having cheated or had some understandable reason for *having to cheat* might be given a chance to prove themselves. You can, for instance, have an extra session where the material at hand is reviewed lightly, focusing on the questions which baffled the students the most. In that way, they still get a chance to learn the material (that is the main motivation in giving assignment in the first place, right?).
In the end we are dealing with adults who should have a sense of reasoning, and consequences of their actions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: At my uni, almost every assignment has to be orally defended in front of the T.A. after it was submitted. This defense proves that the student understood the assignment and has acquired the necessary knowledge from it.
When students cheat, this can be found out before the defense (by reviewing the assignment) or at the defense, due to insufficient knowledge demonstrated. In one case or the other, the T.A. decides on the actions taken. In most cases, the offer is standard "If we continue/begin with the examination, and I arrive to the conclusion that there was "cheating" involved, I'll take it up with the Academic Committee. However, if you admit and explain now, I'll fail you the assignment this term and you can redo it yourself for the next." Of course, the exact circumstance wary based upon the conduct, manners and attitude of the student.
Keeping this in mind, my friends roommate, took the homework from some student which took it from some other, ... etc the result being that for that term ca. 5 identical versions of the same assignment were handed. When the defense came, he had additionally the bad luck that the professor himself was examining. The course of the initial conversation went something like this:
"Did you do this by yourself?"
"Yes, of course."
"Did you borrow your code or granted insight to other students."
"No."
*the professor takes 3 identical copies under different names from under his desk and lays them on the table*
"Would you care to explain this?"
"I have no explanation, my assignment is my own and has nothing to do with these"
"So it's just a coincidence then?"
"I guess so"
Then the professor proceeded to examine him, which lasted for more than 40 minutes (instead of the usual 5-10), but did not fail the guy in the end, because he took effort to learn what was going on in the assignment and what was required.
In the end, the professor seemingly valued more his knowledge and confidence than the fact that he took someone's assignment and blatantly and shamelessly lied his way through the examination.
This story also points to the obvious pitfall in the above approach, i.e. to prove from which of the students the assignment originated, as he requires special treatment in any case and can't be punished ad hoc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_8: Here is a criminal justice perspective (I have not had to deal with such egregious situations in the classroom.)
The motivation for *punishment* generally falls under the philosophies of retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation & restoration. The US's penal law system is based on retribution; that is you've committed a wrong against society, and it is societies duty to exact a punishment somehow equivalent to that wrong. My experience is people tend to frame the motivation for punishment *de facto* in retributive terms, even if it is not really appropriate for the situation.
All institutions I have been associated with have official committees that evaluate student misconduct - and cheating is their main calling. Assuming such a committee exists in your school, you should report the students behavior *and* it should be clear in your syllabus that is the consequence of cheating.
It is likely the said committee will cover any retributive actions necessary to fulfill any harms to society, so the question then becomes *what do you do to the students* in response to the behavior? This depends on your goals of the punishment to begin with. I strongly feel your role should not be to exact further retribution beyond what the schools official academic policy calls for - so that leaves deterrence, rehabilitation & restoration. (If you even have discretion at this point beyond your schools official policy for cheating.)
Studies in criminal justice tend to find that the severity of punishment is only weakly linked to deterrence - the probability of being caught is a much stronger influence on whether the student will commit the behavior. Pretty much *any* sort of note to the individual student that you caught them cheating will likely *prevent* future cheating. Even absent of punishment, this is a strong signal that their probability of being caught is high. My limited experience just letting students know "Your homework looks an awfully lot like the student who sits next to you." - effectively ended that behavior (although your situation is clearly beyond that point.) So you need not be worried about "letting them off the hook" (especially if they have been referred to the student misconduct panel).
Assuming letting the student know they have been caught is common-place, that then just leaves rehabilitation and/or restoration. Punishments oriented towards these perspectives often go hand in hand. One immediate example that comes to mind is to have the offending students lead a classroom discussion on the material they cheated on (this would be better for only one or two students though). Others may be extra-curricular activities, especially those that give back to the rest of the class (e.g. make them host a study session). Public shaming is an incredibly strong deterrent, e.g. just making them stand up in front of the class and admit their wrong-doing, but I am not sure if this violates other privacy mandates about grades and such things. (Restorative justice on its face may seem awkward since it is a victimless crime, but that doesn't make the potential punishments I suggest here any less reasonable.)
Anyway it is preferable that in the future to be *very specific* in your syllabus about what will happen. Otherwise it appears ad-hoc and can be construed as prejudiced toward any particular student.
---
In terms of relation to "admitting a wrong" - this philosophically should not have any bearing on the punishment that the offender receives. It is unfortunate a few conflations are being presented here in terms of *plea bargaining* - which is really a negative externality of the criminal justice system and the need to triage. When you plea bargain you concede to receiving a punishment for a lesser crime - you don't even have to admit you did anything wrong (e.g. you can plead "no contest").
The significance of admitting a wrong though is often placed on the other end of the system. It is often a requirement of parole that the offender admit their wrongdoing in front of the board before they are granted parole. In terms of restorative justice a key event is often just placing the offender in front of the victim and having the offender admit their wrong-doing. (Cooperation tends to be higher for offenders than you might expect - typically victims have a lower rate of cooperation.)
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_9: You need to be absolutely sure who the parties are and exactly what their involvement is. Having two (or more) identical papers is often not enough to know who cheated. Further, sometimes the shame involved is not enough for someone to confess in order to try again. Finally, as we've learned from other areas, sometimes people will confess to things they never did just to try and get past the problem.
My approach in the situation where I suspect cheating is to do the following:
1. Call each student in for a review. This should be back to back, but behind closed doors. Preferably where each student didn't know the others were also there; although that may be difficult. I'd recommend having two people present during the review in order to try and be unbiased in the analysis. Take notes and discuss after you have heard everyone.
2. Have them discuss the work with a focus on how they arrived at their paper.
For anyone that was successful in defending the work, I'd give them normal marks. For anyone that was unsuccessful I'd give them a zero and a warning.
I wouldn't ask any of them if they cheated. However, if during the course of the review someone confessed then I'd ask for the full details.
If they attempted to blame others, it would still be a zero. If they took full responsibility for their actions then I'd give them 24 hours to complete the assignment themselves with an 80% being the max possible grade. If it ever occurred again then I'd escalate it per university guidelines.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I don't like this practice for two reasons. These concerns are based on my experience serving on an academic honesty committee; for reasons of confidentiality, I will not go into further detail about this experience.
* You are creating an incentive for an innocent student to falsely confess, if they believe that they will be found guilty in any event. [False confessions](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession) are much more common than most people believe, and a student in an academic investigation is under pressures similar to a suspect being interrogated by police.
* You raise the question of whether you are taking the confession into account in a fair way. If students contest your actions, the issue of whether all cheaters were treated equally will arise; each factor you consider in making your decision will make this more complicated.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_11: That is horribly unnecessary.
There is no need to play some kind of morality police that to commit an offence and admit to it is better than committing an offense and no. Like some kind of parent. Stressing them out with an interrogation.
A wonderful response is a professor at my uni did. He said "You have the same program as this guy, you just changed XYZ to bluff me. I will give you each half so you share the mark between you!".
That's enough of a disincentive to copy if you only get half the marks.
What had happened really was the whole class had copied off each other.. There were only about 2 proper ones going round. But two copying students posted theres in a little bit late together, one copied off the other, not making many changes, and after he had already collected the bulk of them and not picked out any plagiarism, it was easy to spot the copying in those two. He was very good natured about it and didn't stress the two students out.
Also in those days, the grades in the first year didn't count. (eventually one guy intentionally failed all the exams in the first year, because he said there's no point. And they changed the rules the next year and made the first year count!)
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: An answer for the specific case of multiple students / student groups submitting the same plagiarized solution:
I would do the following (assuming 2 submissions by 1 student each):
>
> 1. Withhold the assignment grade.
> 2. Summon each of the people involved to my office.
> 3. If one of them comes in, I tell them "Look, you and student X submitted the same assignment. I've checked it, and graded it, once -
> and those are the points the two of you get for it. you can decide how
> you want to distribute them between the two of you, and let me know.
> Also, remember that if you don't do the homework yourself you won't
> get a good grip of the material, and you'll probably fail the exam and
> have trouble with subsequent courses, so it's purely your loss
> anyway."
>
> If both of them have come in - use the same spiel; it only makes
> things faster.
> 4. If they reach an agreement - I file the grades accordingly.
>
> If they don't reach an agreement - well, actually, this never
> happened to me, so I haven't decided what to do in this case.
>
>
>
The most important benefit, in my experience, of this method is that it allows people to "confess without confessing". If one person says "give him the credit", s/he's essentially confessed, without saying the words. And indeed, this is almost always the result I get. If the student who actually wrote the code is the first to walk in (very rare, they usually come together with the plagiarizer), they'll go consult before giving me the answer, and when it's the other way around, the plagiarizer has never turned out to be that much of an asshole to try to stick it to his/her benefactor.
This scheme has a few additional benefits:
1. Delinquent students get an increased sense of fairness by participating in the decision of what to do.
2. Instils a sense of "cheating is useless, it can't change anything" - that is, you can try whatever you want, the results, points-wise, will be the same as in the non-cheating case.
3. Completely non-retributional, reducing resentment of the delinquents.
4. Supports fractional punishment - reflecting partial work and partial delinquency among multiple students
5. If students insist, you can always pass them on up to the default university-wide disciplinary mechanism
**Note:** Following a discussion in comments, it seems that in at least one university in the world you may be forced to handle each potentially-offending student separately. I think that's kind of nuts, but I have to add the caveat that you need to check the binding rules on handling student violations of ethics, before deciding what to do.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_13: To ethically impose an additional penalty for denying cheating you need to be 100% certain that the students' work environment is such that copying could only have be done with the help of the person whose work was copied.
Without that, you risk imposing the greatest penalty on a completely honest victim of copying who refuses to lie. A less principled copying victim still gets the penalty for cheating, but not the added penalty for refusing to admit cheating.
There is also a temptation on the "prosecutor" to depend on coerced admissions to avoid the burden of proving that each individual broke the rules by either copying or permitting copying.
The original question does not explain how the OP can be completely sure copying was only possible with the aid of the person whose work was copied. If that proof is lacking, the OP can know that at least N-1 of a particular set of N students cheated, but not that any specific individual cheated and should be penalized. That would be a very frustrating situation, but I do not think coercing possibly false admissions through higher penalties is an ethical solution.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/05/13 | 1,231 | 5,402 | <issue_start>username_0: I am 29 years old and am about to finish my PhD thesis in the field of remote sensing (i.e. somewhere between computer sciences and geosciences in a broad sense or applied signal and image processing in a more narrow sense) at a university in central Europe.
Due to the fact that there are only few tenure positions available in science and I would rather stay in my (economically strong) home region, I want to find a position in industry in the long term. However, I have received an interesting offer for a post-doc / scientist position in a new-to-be-founded research group with great funding and cutting edge research in the applied signal processing field.
My question now is: Will some additional years in academia harm my chances concerning a job in industry?
Some additional points to consider:
* in the post-doc position, I would be the deputy of the group leader (who is soon to receive a full professor/tenure position)
* I'd be responsible for staff management and some budget issues (about 20% of time)
* I'd have the chance to travel to international conferences
* the application the signal processing research is carried out for is not directly industry-relevant
* I have received an invitation to an interview for an R&D job at an automotive company, but it is scheduled only in 3 weeks, while I have to decide for the post-doc offer sooner rather than later<issue_comment>username_1: I can not talk directly about remote sensing, but in computer science, a postdoc does not *harm* your chances to go into industry directly ...
... but unfortunately it will also likely not *help* you much when applying for an industry job. That is, I would expect that your CV for an industrial job is about as strong after the postdoc than before. Given that there are opportunity costs for working in a postdoc for (presumably) multiple years (lower salary, lost opportunity to build up experience that is more directly helpful in industry jobs, etc.), you *will* certainly pay for doing this postdoc if you look at the grander picture (lifetime earnings, etc.).
>
> I would be the deputy of the group leader (who is soon to receive a full professor / tenure position) - I'd be responsible for staff management and some budget issues (about 20% of time)
>
>
>
This sounds like you will have actual management experience after your postdoc. If you find the right company, these are certainly points that will help your case afterwards. However, some of my colleagues have made the experience that there are a surprisingly large number of companies in central europe that summarily dismiss everything you do at a university as "not really management" (mostly due to a lack of understanding that university labs also have to deal with budgets, hiring, people issues, etc.). Not sure how representative these word-of-mouth tales are, but it is something to keep in mind.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: At least in the life sciences areas related to medicinal chemistry and drug discovery, it's possible to gain a benefit from doing a postdoc with a PI who him/herself has great industry contacts. Off the top of my head, I think some factors to consider are:
1. If you are looking to get into a subspeciality within your field where the PI has a strong reputation in the industry, and you are looking to strengthen your credentials within that subspecialty with your publication record and networking, I think a postdoc is a good idea.
2. You want to focus on a more basic research area in your future career, then a strong postdoc where you guide much of your own research is a good idea. If you're not interested in self-directed basic research, maybe not.
3. If your postdoc efforts will be diluted substantially by administrative tasks as you imply, I'd be a little concerned and try to get this clarified. You would be taking this job to improve your academic and research credentials, and few people will give you much credit for doing even a superior job in the administrative role of your job. If this will restrict your ability to effectively do your "real" work, I'd be inclined to reject this offer.
4. You say that this is a new group, implying that it's with a new young PI. This could go either way, but you should definitely be selfish and trying to honestly estimate the productivity that you would achieve in a new group with a new PI in this field. If you don't see yourself with a good likelihood of excelling in the field, I would consider declining. An "average" postdoc will not distinguish you in any way in your future job search, but an excellent postdoc might.
Some postdoc positions are created basically as a way to pay less while also not really offering the upside of outstanding research and publication opportunities that you'd really seek out in a good postdoc fit. Your administrative requirements sound like a red flag to me that this position really isn't suited for a postdoc, but that of course is for you to decide. If you're considering a postdoc, you should consider how you could distinguish yourself to future employers who might be interested in your outstanding research ideas and implementation, and they'll see that through high profile publications and conference presentations that you make. If you're unlikely able to do this, then I'd argue that you're not likely to benefit from a postdoc.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/05/13 | 921 | 3,760 | <issue_start>username_0: According to [this article](http://www.justice.gov/usao/ma/news/2011/July/SwartzAaronPR.html), a student was arrested for downloading ~4 million articles from an on-line database.
I want to review all existing articles in my interest area before writing my paper, so I need to download and skim through several thousand articles. I read the terms of service of my school's database, but it just says I should avoid trying to make a "collection".
At what point does the downloading become enough that the databases start to complain? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? Do they send out warnings?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> According to this article, a student was arrested for downloading ~4
> million articles from an on-line database.
>
>
>
That was an extreme case. He had history of downloading and releasing large amount of information. In this JSTOR case, I don't think he had actually released the articles, although the indication was strong. He was charged with "unlawfully breaking in a protected computer," which I guess he probably downloaded the paper with unusual means, perhaps using codes or hacks. Overall, the whole case was very politically charged and I will not use that as a benchmark in your case.
>
> I want to review all existing articles in my interest area before
> writing my paper, so I need to download and skim through several
> thousand articles. I read the terms of service of my school's
> database, but it just says I should avoid trying to make a
> "collection".
>
>
>
When there are several thousands of articles that are pertinent to your research interest in ONE paper, I would suggest you to refine your research interest. And no, you don't need to review *all existing articles*, just pick the important seminal works, and then trace the major works along a very well define research interest. You can also use a few prominent modern works as seeds and use their reference list to snow ball your library.
>
> At what point does the downloading become enough that the databases
> start to complain? 1,000? 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000? Do they send out
> warnings?
>
>
>
You should be able to download as much as you want as long as you follow the instructions and rules. For large download volume, I'd check with the librarian to clarify:
1. What the institutional limit is. There may be a download limit and if you'd get a warning letter it's likely from your school because your thousands of download could have cost them a lot more than usual. Some school libraries may ban accounts associated with a large download volume as well; it's better to give the librarian a heads up.
2. Your student account payment scheme. Some schools may have limit and beyond which the students may have to pay. I know that this is certainly possible for inter-library loan (which you may have to do if a few thousands paper is your goal.) A peer of mine got billed for more than US$500 because she ordered about a hundred papers through inter-library loan.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would suggest to contact the database team, tell them about the project, explain that are you doing, so they would have chance to say is it ok for them or not. You are much less likely to face restrictions if the project is known and approved by your scientific supervisor.
The database website should contain the terms of use page where these acceptable limits should be listed. If nothing is listed, usually a good rule is to wait three times the duration it took a server to serve the previous query but no less than one second, and stop immediately if the server returned the unexpected error message.
It may be much more important not to violate other terms of use.
Upvotes: 1 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.