date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2014/06/11 | 551 | 2,380 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm currently writing a paper that is based on work that I won't be following up on, as I'm changing career directions. I believe that the work raises a number of questions and ideas for future work, and my program solves a number of the boring problems without getting into the interesting applications. However, I've previously been told that raising an idea in a "Future Work" section effectively 'reserves' that work for me, and it would be considered rude for readers to begin research on those areas.
How can I signal (without flat out saying that I don't care) that I hope others will pick up and run with the ideas I'm presenting?
If it's of any importance, it's a Computer Science paper.<issue_comment>username_1: I've never heard this about "Future Work". Items that you put in this section are simply things that you are currently considering, and someone else who does them should at least cite your original work. However, anyone who beats you to actually doing the work should be able to publish it.
If you want to make it absolutely clear that you do not intend to work on this material (and, you never know, you might end up going back to it later anyway!), simply call the section "Further discussion" or just "Discussion".
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Maybe it is just a matter of wording and rather than word it that *you* are going to do this "Future Work", maybe word it as *anyone* could do this future work. That way it shows you are thinking ahead (good thing) even though you may not want to do it.
To me, the Future Work would show that someone is thinking and would convince me that this work you have done is beneficial to the field and opens doors to other work.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: "While there is no further research planned by the author, there are several avenues that..."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I have been told that you should not put your best, novel idea for future research in 'Future Work', you don't give away your state-of-the-art research ideas for free right? Experience teaches me that researchers often put stuff like 'investigate in new industry/product/setting' 'investigate longitudinal' 'go out of the lab and test with secondary data' 'add obvious moderator' 'control for variable Z that we did not account for' in this section.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/11 | 943 | 4,299 | <issue_start>username_0: Why do admissions committees consider the Statement of Purpose to be important? Anyone with a command of English should be able to write a Statement of Purpose, in principle, so it seems a poor way to compare applicants' research potential. If I were to judge an applicant (obviously I've never been in this position), I would much sooner at grades than at their Statement of Purpose, simply because grades cannot (in general) be 'faked'.<issue_comment>username_1: One excellent reason for requiring a statement of purpose is to make sure that applicants have "done their homework." Have they taken into account who works in the department, and what can be done there? Can they formulate ideas for projects they'd be interested in working on? Furthermore, writing ability is a very critical factor for success as a researcher; someone who writes a very poor statement of purpose is likely to have a very difficult PhD candidacy.
Grades are somewhat objective, but they're also subject to a lot of external factors ("grade inflation," "scaling," sample size, and so on). But that doesn't mean they're not also considered. *All* parts of an application are usually considered, although the weights given to the various factors may differ greatly between departments.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: It may be simple for some to write good English but to actually write something valuable is a lot harder. There are of course no perfect single tools to evaluate applications so having a multi-pronged approach provides some improvements in the weeding process. Grades provide insights into some aspects, particularly someone's ability to perform on exams. Such ability is not necessarily equated with ability to, for example, think critically or creatively (we do of course not know of the assessment methods underpinning the grades). A Statement of Purpose provides insights into the person's own insights into a research problem or field. Hence combining these two aspects with CV, letters of recommendations or whatever else is required, forms a more complex picture of the applicant than what each and every part of the application does on its own. The Statement will perhaps be the part that most closely reflects on the persons ability.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Why do admissions committees consider the Statement of Purpose to be important?
>
>
>
This question assumes they do consider it important, but how it's actually viewed varies enormously between departments. In mine, it's not considered particularly important for most applicants. If your statement is pretty good, then that's good enough (nobody was ever admitted by writing a great personal statement). However, it can matter in special cases:
1. It gives you a chance to address anything non-standard or potentially worrisome about your application. It can be really valuable for you to make a case for why these things are not in fact a problem.
2. It gives you a chance to shoot yourself in the foot. For example, applicants occasionally sound like arrogant jerks, demonstrate that they like to talk about mathematics they don't understand at all (without admitting their lack of knowledge), or reveal that they have no idea how graduate school works. The first two are major problems, and the third is worrisome.
It can also be helpful to learn things like the intended specialization or advisor, but we ask for that elsewhere on the application as well.
If you apply to a department that takes this approach, then you shouldn't stress out too much about the statement of purpose. But of course other departments may do things differently, so you can't relax entirely.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: As a complement to other useful answers, I'd say that it is *not* possible to "fake" a good personal statement (unless one enlists already-successful mathematicians, and, even then, it's not clear...). The issue of grammatical correctness is non-trivial, but minor. The tone, the affect (all the more subtle in written language), speaks reams. The implied/assumed context? Etc, etc, ... And, indeed, all the better that most applicants do not effectively see how to "game" the personal statement. That's what I look at first, for graduate admissions. :)
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/11 | 919 | 4,018 | <issue_start>username_0: I published some research papers in an ISI Journal during the past years. But due to the lack of precise knowledge of the correct referencing, and particularly due to attending an “unintentional plagiarism class” in my university, perhaps in some places of my papers, referencing rules unintentionally do not meet correctly and exactly. It seems that I have to modify some parts of my papers if possible.
Also in some parts of my papers I commit an intentional plagiarism.
Now what should I do? Should I contact the editor of the journal? Do they reject or retract my papers? I am a PhD student and if my papers are rejected or retracted I could not defend my PhD thesis.
Please guide me. I'm afraid of expulsion from the university and loss of honor.<issue_comment>username_1: As it stands it is impossible to say what can happen. Plagiarism is a serious thing but there are places where copied text is less detrimental and there are places where it is definitely so. If your self-plagiarized parts are in, for example methods descriptions where you are describing similar or in fact the same procedure or method, the issue may not be critical, not good either. So you need to assess, or perhaps better, let someone else assess the case. Why don't you contact the person(s) running the class you mention and ask them for advise with your papers at hand?
As for retraction, I am not sure the journal will necessarily retract your papers. Retraction is usually reserve for very serious cases of fraud. I suggest you carefully look at some of the cases written up on the [Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)](http://publicationethics.org/). COPE is for editors and publishers but their cases may give you an idea of how your cases stands *vis-à-vis* their published cases.
So, try to get some more experienced people to look at your material and provide feedback. This will provide you with a better perspective than what can be achieved through this site since any answer here will be speculation or hypothetical since we have not seen the publications. Once you have a better perspective from your peers, and your case seem to lean towards there being a serious issue, you can consider contacting editors to hear their view. It is of course not impossible to contact them right away but right now it is not possible to evaluate if this is necessary.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The journals need to be contacted, but I would not do it directly. Hopefully your university has someone, ideally a committee, who deals with academic misconduct. I would approach this panel with a detailed list of the occurrences in the papers where you now believe you have plagiarised. Explain to the committee how you were unaware of the norms of good academic research practice until your recent class on the topic. Have in place a plan that will help you continue your training and demonstrate to them that it will not happen again. While they may expel you, I think most academic misconduct panels would look favourably on a student who comes forth on there own with a plan in place. The committee should then be obliged to bring he matter forward with the presses and will negotiate a settlement.
As for loss of honor, it sounds like you plagiarised because you did not understand the norms. While some people will hold this against you, more will look favourably on your ability to admit a mistake.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: username_2's answer is a good one though I would also suggest that when you approach anyone about it: have completed revisions of the papers with proper references on hand.
Going to them with "I just realized I made a mistake, these are the fixed versions I'd like to replace my old papers with" is probably better than just "I made a mistake".
Mistakes happen all the time in all fields but I'd be more concerned about the "intentional plagiarism" in their shoes, intentional dishonesty is much more serious than unintentional mistakes.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/11 | 1,361 | 6,154 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a question regarding a researcher’s practice in writing.
Let me give you some background about this issue. Here’s what this researcher does when writing introductions and literature reviews. He makes certain speculations first and then proceeds to making claims based on those initial speculations. It is worth noting that the claims he makes are sometimes too specific. Following that, he starts looking for evidence to support his claims.
I have tried many times to convince him and have told him that this is not the right way to write a research paper. It’s more like writing a composition rather than an academic piece of writing which aims at making contributions to the world of education.
Here’s part of what he recently wrote in an email in response to me:
“I disagree that making claims and looking for evidence supporting them is "not academic". Maybe I am wrong but this approach is less exploratory than the method you have in mind. For example, [Michael] Kane's framework is based on this method: Claim --> evidence. Kane specifically stresses the importance of opinions/judgments etc. I personally do not prefer to tie my mind merely to the literature --I do not find it much academic in the sense it does not engage me in critical thinking. My method is: "The theory I wish to develop does not exist out there; I develop and support it"”
I would like to have your opinion regarding this issue. Is what the researcher claims really right? If not, can you introduce some published sources which have attacked this practice?<issue_comment>username_1: Claim -> evidence is a perfectly valid approach. It is just that evidence is not the same as only looking for supporting information, it means critically scrutinizing all aspects that speaks for or against the claim and then drawing an educated conclusion on whether the claim is good or not. In the end the "evidence" is the net outcome of positive and negative support to the claim. So to me the claim that one should come up for an idea an then look for support is either poorly phrased, leading to misunderstanding, or plainly bad.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: You'll find some evidence for pretty much anything
--------------------------------------------------
It is okay to make assumptions and verify them afterwards. However, there is a problem with "looking for evidence to ***support*** his claims" - verifying claims requires looking both for evidence that supports the claim, and also for evidence that would disprove the claim.
Doing only one half of that will be a failure since if the claim is contested, then you'll find only what you're looking for even if the 'other side' has overwhelming support. There are many proven false things that have also some published supporting evidence.
You don't know if the claim is contradictory
--------------------------------------------
There are many cases when seemingly obvious things aren't actually true. If a seemingly obvious issue is a core of your argument, you should make sure that it's true - and that includes looking also for contradictory evidence; and you know that it's not contradictory only after checking it. If it turns out false, you'd want to say "There wasn't any published data about the falseness", not "Well, it was on the first page of google but I didn't bother to look for it".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Honestly, I suspect that a lot of research is done this way. Read a *couple* of papers, get an idea, collect data and then write the paper. During the paper writing one has to do a reasonable literature review (at least in my field) to give context to your work and why it is better. This isn't the best way of doing it.
I believe this really separates researchers from great researchers. The great researchers have a strong knowledge of all the background papers and understand how they relate to their topic.
As someone who has done research for 20+ years, I would really encourage any newer researcher to get a good grasp of the background papers and create an understanding of how they fit together and how your work fits into theirs.
We all build on the shoulders of the past, it is rare to create a new research topic that is not based on past research.
The person you mention, I think, is not creating objective work, it seems a little more subjective (though it is hard to distance yourself from your own ideas :-) ). My feeling is that *you* need to do the right thing and realize that what they are doing is not a great model (which I think you have realized already).
I think there is a difference between assumptions and hypothesis. Assumptions, to me, seem to be unsubstantiated ideas. Hypotheses, to me, are substantiated ideas. A hypothesis typically comes from a strong knowledge of the background literature and a few good ideas you have come up with.
Just my 2 cents.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Another way to frame this matter is in the context of the "confirmation bias." This is the tendency to favor evidence to support one's stance, while ignoring contrary evidence. The social psychology literature has produced an abundance of research to show this is a very common (and unintentional) bias. I think it is perfectly acceptable to make a claim (or hypothesis) that is informed by good theory, and then seek out the relevant evidence that can help refine the claim (or hypothesis).
The problem is not in the process of making the claim and then reviewing evidence -- rather, the problem occurs during the actual review of the evidence. If your colleague isn't aware of the possibility of a confirmation bias, it is likely that she or he will look only at the evidence that aligns with the claim. One way of minimizing the confirmation bias is to begin the search process with more of an open question that allows one to capture the full range of evidence, as opposed to just one of many possible sides.
I highly recommend the book "Thinking, Fast and Slow" by <NAME>, which does an excellent job of describing many decision making processes and where people can go wrong.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/11 | 2,093 | 8,807 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a year into my PhD (electrical engineering). I loved my topic from the beginning, and the direction in which my research is going. My advisor is also a really understanding and experienced Prof.. However, I am an international student here (Netherlands) and I don't like living here. I cannot necessarily point out one particular aspect of it, but life in general doesn't "feel happy" and is now getting to me. The place where I live is also kinda dull. I doubt I could go on like this for 3 more years. Normally, in times of stress elsewhere, the social aspects or something outside work always brought up my motivation, without really trying. That here is seriously lacking, at least from my perspective.
I find the university's attitude towards international students a bit indifferent. And, I dislike the graduate school. Its very disorganized. I would like to point out that I have lived in many places before (in and outside my home country) and this isn't the first time I got out of my house. I even have 3 years of work experience. I enjoyed studying in the US and made good friends easily. May be it was just accidental, I don't really know.
To make things worse, my phd is associated with a project, which is a highly disorganized, almost a bloody joke and would mostly get worse over time. I knew this earlier, but thought it would get better. It isn't. People in the project aren't thinking like engineers, sometimes ignoring physics, in short. This causes a lot of stress sometimes and could affect my research output itself. Having said that, my output for the past few months is not great either, due to stress, but I see that as a temporary thing.
I am contemplating quitting the PhD but continue to work on the research, from my home country, without a job/salary, to do justice to the topic. I haven't communicated this to my prof. yet, but he knows I have second thoughts. I came here only for the love of science, to improve my skills and not to escape my country (may be the general mentality in my country towards research, however, its not good here either). Having said that, I'm open to new cultures, people, etc. There are limits though. Reports of rising xenophobia in Europe also bother me at times, worrying about how it would escalate in the future.
In short, I feel the cons are outweighing the pros (funded phd, awesome topic, good prof.) and the cons might invoke lot more stress in the long run. I have no issues with the stress of learning and discovery itself. I understand that this is the essential stress. What I find difficult (and made me quit jobs) is the stress caused by bad policies/ attitude, peers, society, etc. And I find putting up with these things a waste of time and mental energy.
I would appreciate your opinion or recommendation on quitting in such a situation. Thanks for reading<issue_comment>username_1: I am not international, but understand what you're going through. In fact, when I was in undergraduate, I had an Italian friend in your exact position who left after a year to go to graduate school in Europe...so it certainly does happen. A couple pieces of advice:
1) have a plan for where you are going before you leave. I'm not sure about the Netherlands, but the economy in the US is not completely back to normal and it can take time to find (good work)...even for well educated folks. As you said, having a funded PhDs is a pro, so don't waste it! At the very least, use this time to study all of your interests, not just your dissertation topic. For example, if you want to become a computer programmer, master some languages, contribute to some projects and document your work on (e.g.) GitHub. This can help out A LOT if you decide to leave.
2) having a good advisor and topic are the most important pros. I live in a great place (nyc area) with great friends...but my advisor and I have communication issues (I chose poorly) and my topic is not so interesting. For me, these cons (sort of) cancel out the pros as they make life miserable more often than not. On the other hand, if you live in the middle of nowhere...I can understand why you'd want to leave...but you may not find such a great advisor and topic elsewhere!
At the end of the day, of course, you have to choose for yourself. But I would say that if you are currently doing what you want to do and/or this is the kind of work you would like to do after leaving/graduating, then you should stay. At least until something comes along you know would be better for you. Plus, things could get better for you at school within the next year or so (graduate school is long) and the you would be leaving for no good reason!
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll start with telling you in short about my analogous situation and how I cope with it, then I will suggest my ideas for you.
Situation:
In my country we have a much loathed system where everyone participates in mass exams and the top x people who chose a particular school in a particular university make it in. This has placed me 200km from my home, which in a country about 1000km across is considered a little far from home. I hate the place I stay in but will not move out because it's practically outside the university, in one year of studies I only found one great professor in my field, the other decent professors are into areas indifferent to me (I am into software, they teach hardware), or teach math and physics. As for classes with other professors, they are generally ridiculous and to pass them you have to rely on open courseware and books. Also the school is disorganized and this has cost me, semester exams are incoherent, while it's hard to find out about any papers you might need for a class, changes in the schedule and so on. In short, I can't wait to get out of here.
My approach:
What I do to compensate is work on my own on stuff, I am aiming to get Microsoft and Oracle certifications in summer, have participated in an international contest held by Microsoft (nothing achieved but they know my name at least, and gave some good comments), and am up-first in the list of new Microsoft student partners for October (the whole Microsoft thing is because it's the only company that opens doors to students in the area). I am more specifically headed for game programming and thus have started learning the systems of Unreal and Crytek, and am trying to write lots of tutorials on my webpage, which I see many others saying that is what earned them their job.
The result:
Essentially, I see this as defying the awful circumstances and trying to surpass the diploma of CS I will get in 4 years (I also have more personal reasons), because professors are indifferent, incompetent, or anything else, and I get to forget about where I am. It is also said that when one gets through something hard, the best chance he's got is getting devoted to work. Looking back at these 8-9 months, I realize that 85% or so of the progress was done in the last 4 months, and the rate with which I advance grows exponentially (though exams have brought it to a halt currently). It has been lots of fun, I now know a few people who are graduating next year and sooner or later will be in the industry, and I have stuff to write about in my CV.
Bringing it to your needs:
Talk to the professor and see if the system there will allow you to switch to another project or work on one you pick and start yourself, this way you have a clean project and make sure the team is reliable and serious about it. You can also see if you can reboot the Phd altogether. I will insist on starting your own side projects, and try to see what the world thinks of them, it is very rewarding. It will also prove your point to the professor that you are serious about your work and held back by the others. Even if you do quit, when interviewed for another PhD you can show your work and show them the exact same thing, that you are good in what you do but will require them to give you at least a neutral environment.
In any case, see if you can change the project or the team, or if you can reboot the PhD, if you decide it is insufferable and see no way out of it, make sure you have already started your own projects and work, and look for another PhD you are interested in, since you have started for a PhD, make sure you get one, whether it be there or elsewhere, otherwise you are taking a step backwards. Whatever you do though, I insist that you start a project of your own, that fascinates you, straight away, and as soon as you have something you can show, make sure one can verify that you are indeed doing it.
I hope I helped in any way, I am in a similar situation psychologically so i thought I should share my experience.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/11 | 2,581 | 11,115 | <issue_start>username_0: I am wondering how long it usually takes to read a research article. I can see that the answer depends on:
* The knowledge and intelligence of the reader
* The field of research
* The journal
* The individual paper
So I am particularly interested in how long a PhD student or a young post-doc would take to get through a molecular or systems biology paper published in journals like *Nature*, *Science*, *Cell*, *PLoS* and *PNAS*. We can focus on papers of typical complexity for the journal, and ignore those that are exceptionally easy to read or exceptionally complex.
On multiple occasions I have been able to skim an 8 page, 5 figure paper in as little as 10-15 minutes. From this I could glean enough information to follow and even participate in a class or journal club discussion (though there would be a lot of asking question like "how exactly did they do this/explain this in the paper? I didn't read very carefully").
However, when a paper is very important (for example I want to use a variation of their methods for my own project) I feel the need to read it much more carefully. It seems worthwhile to closely look at even very trivial things, such as description of standard procedures like cell culture in the methods, exactly how much of each chemical was used for simple, routine reactions, close examination of control experiments from the supplement, what papers the paper has referenced to justify their work, and even what commercial systems were used and from which company, and whether the paper actually followed the protocol in the manual and so on. After putting this much effort, I also feel like I should take notes. This produces a heavily highlighted and annotated paper plus about 4 pages of notes.
All of this takes a lot of time. Occasionally it could take me a few days to work my way through a very important paper (for instance, if their method is unfamiliar to me and I will be adapting it for my own research, or if I want to draw conclusions by reanalyzing their data).
My question is, is this typical? How long do you usually take to read a paper? Should I start putting effort into teaching myself to read faster, or should I just accept it and make time by scheduling other activities to accomodate paper reading?
---
I can imagine an "incremental" strategy for reading at arbitrary depth. For instance, you could read the paper several times, each time reading more carefully, like so:
1. Read only the title, parts of the abstract, and look at the pictures.
2. Read abstract more carefully, look at title headingfs of results section.
3. Quickly skim the results section to look for main point of the paper.
4. Scan introduction and discussion, read results carefully to understand obvious limitations of their conclusions.
5. Carefully read all sections, including methodology, to make a comprehensive list of all assumptions made and all potential issues with the research.
6. Carefully go through all supplements, look at raw data if any and consult the other papers cited as justification to contextualize the research.
Logically, I see the merit of something like this, but I haven't tried it for the "dense" readings I've talked about above. The reason is that I'm not sure how I can take notes effectively when I do something like the above. It may also be harder to motivate myself to re-read a paper I've already skimmed, because I've given away the punchline to myself and the novelty factor is gone.
I've also written an [answer on Mathematics@SE](https://math.stackexchange.com/a/617995), which I think might be relevant to this question.
Note that I am not asking how to read a paper. This has been addressed in several previous questions already. I am only asking *how long it should take* a typical junior scientist to read one, so I can benchmark myself and see if I am slower or faster than is usual.<issue_comment>username_1: Though not an expert in reading journals, I would like to provide my point of view. Actually the answer for the question can be made from different perspectives.
We read journal articles for multiple reasons:
* Present in a journal club
* Attend a journal club
* Search for a protocol
* Search for a reference
* curiosity about some novelty in the article
In each of these situations the way you read the article would be different along with the time taken to read the article. If I am looking for a particular protocol, lets say, genotyping a polymorphism, I will scan the abstract for the polymorphism name and then I will head straight to the methods to see the genotyping procedure. So this could be as quick as a 30 second search, provided you know for what and where to look.
Lets say, I am looking for data about the prevalence of a particular disease in a specific population. So again, I will scan the abstract for the disease name and the methodology, will head straight to the tables to seen the number of participants diseased out of the total cohort, which also could be a 30 second search provided I know where to look.
Lets say I am attending a journal club and I have the article with me. I will read the abstract, then the conclusion, then glance the tables and figures, then will see the techniques they used just to make sure I know about the techniques before I attend the journal club. It will not be always feasible for the presenter to explain in detail about the techniques in the presentation. This should take around 10 minutes plus the time you spend on search unknown techniques.
Lastly, If am going to present an article in journal club, surely I will be reading the article again and again till I have a thorough understanding for my presentation. Every time I read, I will find a new information in the article. Here the time required will be based on your familiarity with the field and the complexity of the article. It could be hours or days. So according to me its the knowledge about the structure of the journal in your field of expertise matters, than the time taken to read the article.
*The time factor depends on what is your objective is from reading the article.*
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As you have alluded to, there are many ways to "read" a paper and the first question to straighten out is for what type of information are you reading a specific paper. A beginner's mistake is to believe you need to read from the first to the last letter of everything you find. This way you never get anywhere and it is the beginning of the learning curve for undergraduates.
If you are surveying a field, you skim through by reading the titles first of all just to spot the ones of interest. This reading takes much less time than to actually find the title. Once you are past this you may take on the abstracts to weed out the ones that sounded right but were off topic. This will take a few minutes per paper. The next step is to read the parts that are of interest to you. Are your summarizing a field then conclusions and the discussion may be what you focus on. Maybe your summarizing methodology then those chapters are of interest. In any case, you will read parts of the paper that are mostly relevant to what you are trying to find out. This may take a on the order of hours, sometimes less per paper.
Sometimes you need to spend time on papers to understand the nitty gritty details. I spent 4 days reading three papers to understand the details. I needed to write down equations and try to see the missing steps between the paper equations to understand the derivations etc. This type of reading is not what you normally do but it certainly happens.
So in the end, what you will learn through your PhD is to hone your skills to be able to focus on the details you really need from any paper. It is rare that one reads one paper at a time, usually it is a collection of papers and one often has to return to check on details that you either have forgotten, or may have missed, or, in fact, the author has missed. The need to go into the smallest detail of a paper depends on what you need to get out of the paper and with time (continuing through your professional life) you will improve on these skills through additional reading.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: Firstly, I agree with the first response, that , in very well written terms the question has pointed out tthe diverse ways to attack a diligently written paper. In fact I would define a typical paper to be read as a slight variation of the same.
I usually let the first read be to grasp the salient points from the paper, and also define:
1. whether i need it as ateast a typical paper for my future work
2. if the paper needs to be stored in memory and needs to be noted and annotated.
If the paper does not satisfy the above, it is as good as read.
If the paper satisfies any of these two conditions or both, I would prefer, rather than assigning a long private time for it to be read ( which I have found can absorb as much time as i have) to tackle as under
1. reread it on the flip side of another paper i am conversant with , in a similar area ( I always have more than one paper to tackle)
2. reread tougher sections, important sections separately in 20 minute capsules and be sure to carry the conversant science of the paper ( I work in the Finance area and handle complex modelling etc, but I find it also works for any complex management/strategy/organization/communication construct)
3. Set down a one hour-90 minute window to annotate all the sections and write out the notes for further dissemination or review
Let me know your thoughts on the strategy
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: So this IS my field, but I can obviously only answer for me.
The first thing to say is that this is going to change a lot during your career, and different people will take different amounts of time to reach various milestones.
Assuming we are not taking about a "quick skim", I'd say I now take about an hour to read you average Mol/Sys bio paper. This would be well enough to lead an informal discussion of it (which is how we do our journal clubs), if not quite present a full stand-at-the-front and deliver journal club.
When I started my PhD (17 years ago), reading to the same level would take me a full day. I guess when I started my postdoc it was somewhere in between. Maybe 2-3 hours.
Obviously, if its a paper I need to know back-to-front, inside out, and be able to disect every possible problem or highlight, then its going to take me longer, but I probably wouldn't do that all at once. I'd probably do my 1-hour read, and then come back to particular bits, as and when needed.
Because of my dylexia and dyspraxia, I've never been much of a skimmer. I think this was a benefit when I was a PhD/postdoc, as I was always more aware of the subtleties of papers, and all of the caveats, and methodological quirks of the papers in my field. Now I am faculty, its a real problem, as I just can't keep up with everything I need to be aware of. So different career stages also require different strategies.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/12 | 940 | 4,083 | <issue_start>username_0: Do a lot of graduate programs provide assistantships to their students (e.g. teaching or research assistantships)? How common is it for graduate students to be paid while going to graduate school?<issue_comment>username_1: This depends on many factors, including the discipline, the degree, and the institution. Some disciplines have a lot more research dollars to support research assistants. For example, scientifically oriented programs tend to have more money to support students than liberal arts degrees; PhD programs tend to have more money than terminal Master's programs; and, of course, educational institutions exhibit a lot variability in terms of their overall resources.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer your first question:
>
> Do a lot of graduate programs provide assistantships to their students
> (e.g. teaching or research assistantships)?
>
>
>
In my experience, programs do not provide assistantships -- professors do. When you are applying to a program, whether Master's or PhD, your application is considered in relation to work that the faculty of that department have on the table for the next year or several years. For RAships this is grant-funded projects; for TAships these are large-workload courses.
In my understanding, just about all graduate programs (except not so much in professional degrees like business, law, medicine, and perhaps a couple others - although there are definitely exceptions) provide R/TAships. This is so for simple reasons that there is research and teaching to be done, faculty don't have time to do it all by themselves, and graduate students are the cheapest workforce with post-Bachelor credentials for an institution of higher education.
So, yes, a lot of programs provide these assistantships. You should assume the program you are applying to does. This is easily confirmed by reviewing the websites of current grant-funded projects run by the faculty (research groups/labs/centers) and seeing if they have graduate students on their rosters.
To the second question:
>
> How common is it for graduate students to be paid while going to
> graduate school?
>
>
>
This largely depends on the size (for TAships) and/or amount of research activity (for RAships) at the institution and the department in question. The typical heuristic applies: engineering and engineering-like hard sciences tend to be better funded, philosophy and theater tend to be barely scraping by, and the social sciences are somewhere in between. (Of course there are exceptions to every rule, and you might find a truly flourishing social science program here and there, just as you might find a relatively cash-light hard science program.)
Beyond these generalities, it depends on the fit between you (your qualifications and goals) and the on-going projects and needs of the faculty who will be advising you and whose research you are interested in. Most likely you will at times have to reconcile the trade-off between seeking an RAship on a project you are not really interested in, or proudly sticking with doing exactly what you want to be doing while paying out-of-pocket or debt financing your studies. This is the nature of the graduate game, and THAT is indeed common. Good Luck!
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: Generally, if it's a research degree (i.e., a PhD or a research-focused Masters designed to lead to a PhD), some form of assistantship or fellowship will be provided to cover tuition and a stipend. The details including the nature, requirements, stipend size, and other perks will vary by field, institution, and department and sometimes even by how much a department or professor wants a particular student. The degree to which this funding or these assistantships are guaranteed — and the periods during which they are guaranteed — can vary as well.
If the graduate degree is a non-research masters (e.g., an MBA) assistantships will almost never be offered or guaranteed although they are sometimes possible. Most students are expected to pay.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/12 | 655 | 2,787 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student studying in the US and I am interested in finding research-grants relevant to the research area to which I have recently switched to, viz. computational geometry problems in robotics.
As of now, I don't want to apply for a grant, but I want to get an
overview for what kinds of problems do public and private research grants get offered to researchers in my field.
While googling I stumbled upon [grants.gov](http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/home.html) on which different government agencies post funding opportunities relevant to their interests, and that this
database is searchable by keyword.
The NSF website is also very useful. However
their grant solicitations like this [one](http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13579/nsf13579.htm) seem quite open-ended
and are not more specific on what kinds of problems need to be solved, (but please correct me if I am wrong, I am still exploring this website! :-D )
**QUESTION:**
Are there similar "messaging-boards" where **private** companies, interested in funding university research for a relevant problem post their funding opportunities? If not, how do you efficiently find such grants ?
I am interested in this because I feel private companies will be more specific on what kinds of problems they encounter and would like to be solved.<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that you avoid the message board approach to locating funding and learn about the major funders in your particular area of study. You can do this by looking at the CV's of leading researchers (in your area) and see where they have received their funding. Some areas are pretty clear -- for example, most of the allied health disciplines receive funding from the National Institutes of Health. Other areas might be supported by the National Science Foundation, whereas others might be funded by private foundation with very specific interests. So, learn the entities that are interested in your area of study, as they all do not post to the same message boards.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: In the US, students generally do not apply for grants (except for specific fellowships for graduate students - NSF, DoD, Hertz, and the like); it is the advisor's job to find funding for the student.
If you want to get a general sense of the funding picture in computational geometry, I suggest you look at recently funded proposals on nsf.gov (their abstracts should be publicly visible) and follow up directly (and with due preparation) with the principal investigator of the corresponding grant.
Your best bet is to attract the attention of a well-known researcher in the field, and, given the current academic pressures, they are very likely to have some funding for students.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/12 | 587 | 2,406 | <issue_start>username_0: Some years ago, I studied in a small training center that had a "cooperative arrangement" with a larger university. I earned a graduate certificate bearing the name of the university along with graduate credits and a transcript from the university, but attended courses in the training center. I put these details on my CV:
```
2005 Graduate Certificate in X , University of X
```
Recently, the training center and university ended their cooperative arrangement and the training center has a new partnership with another university. Do I need to adjust my CV to reflect the change?<issue_comment>username_1: Funny, this just happened to me!
On my CV/resume I now have the title of the section as":
*Masters of Science, University of XXXXX (now called XXXX University)*
My degree *is* from "University of XXXX" and so I feel that should go first. BUT, it would be a good idea to acknowledge the name change, as people will get confused, and so I added it as a parenthetical comment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the best approach is to keep the original CV entry, as this represents the *actual* qualification that you received. However, you might choose to add a note explaining the history, if you think this is likely to be helpful to prospective readers.
I agree that in the case described by @username_1, where a university has changed its name, providing this information is likely to be useful. It's less clear to me that this is true in the OP's case: it seems (essentially) that the qualification he has used to be accredited by University X, and is now accredited by University Y. It's not clear to me why this would be useful information to someone reading the CV. I guess it might be relevant if the training centre has a high enough profile that people now naturally associate it with University Y, and would think that something listed with University X must be a different centre. Otherwise, I suspect noting the change is more likely to confuse people than help them...
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: To use the example provided by username_1.
>
> Master of Science, XXXX University (formerly University of XXXXX)
>
>
>
Have used this alternative in my cv.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: ```
2005 Graduate Certificate in X , at that time affiliated with University of Y
```
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/12 | 1,352 | 5,975 | <issue_start>username_0: I developed a medical device for my master's project. The general idea was initiated by my supervisor but the rest of the work is mine (Design, build up, test, measurements, results and some additional functions I added to the idea).
After finishing the master thesis my supervisor started to write a paper about my project. The information in the paper comes from my master thesis and it merely rewrites and summarizes ideas from my thesis. Additionally, all the results and discussions were also picked from it. I was away during this because I found a job in a different city. My supervisor then started to contact me and asked me to give him feedback about what he wrote and to explain the results and said that he would name me as the co-author. I was supporting until the point that I got very busy, but soon his questions become orders and he started to ask very silly questions so I stopped responding.
Finally, he threatened to acknowledge my contribution only, that is, to only mention my name in the acknowledgement and not as a co-author, because he was not satisfied with my support / me not responding to his requests for help with the paper.
The whole paper is taken from my thesis and all the results are mine on top of the added support that I gave but finally, he'll mention me in the acknowledgements only.
Is he right in doing this / allowed to do this and if not what can I do?
I am thinking of contacting the journal and explain all of this. What do you think?<issue_comment>username_1: As described by you, the situation demonstrates completely unethical behavior by your supervisor. You should not only be an author, you should be first author. However, your options may be limited by the fact that you have no way to exert leverage on him and/or by your need to maintain a relationship with him.
It's not completely clear what you mean when you say that you "stopped supporting" him in writing up the paper. At a minimum, you need to read one draft of the paper and give substantive comments before it goes out with your name on it. If you are willing to do that much, then any threat by your supervisor to remove your name is a major ethical breach.
You say that his questions were "very silly" and that his question became orders. Keep in mind that your supervisor wouldn't ask the questions if he believed they were silly. If you haven't told him that it's a problem that he's giving you orders, then he doesn't know that it's a problem. If "stopped supporting" just means that you stopped answering his emails, then his reaction becomes more understandable. If you simply stop communicating without telling him there's a problem, then he doesn't know that his style of interaction is a problem for you.
This depends somewhat on culture -- what country are you in? In US academic culture, the way I would suggest handling this is to send him an email saying something like the following.
>
> Joe, I used to be your student, but now I've graduated, and our relationship is a relationship between colleagues. I have a problem with the language you've been using in your emails to me, because your phrasing sounds like you're giving orders. Moving forward, please use more respectful language. I am willing to provide a reasonable amount of help with any difficulties you have in interpreting my old lab notes, etc., and putting my thesis in shape as a scientific paper. But I have a new job, and the time I have for this kind of thing is limited. I would like to advise you formally at this time that it is not acceptable to me for these results to be published without my name as an author; in fact, I should be first author on any paper that comes out of this. It is also not acceptable to me to enter into discussions in which putting my name on the paper is a bargaining chip. That issue is not negotiable.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I will try to give my perspective, on both sides if possible. In many countries, most incentive professors have for supervising undergraduate or MSc theses, is that some of them (or all if possible) may actually lead to a publication. There is a problem though: Most of the time undergraduate or MSc students leave the university and the paper usually can only be prepared after the student graduates. Unfortunately, at that time the student has already left academia and has really no interest in publishing, since he has more important things to do (like finding a job). This is quite the setting that the OP describes.
Still in your case, your supervisor of the thesis has started writing the paper himself and he needs your help. Initially you provided the help needed but you became frustrated because it was more work than you wanted / expected to do, because (let's face it) the paper really does not make a huge difference to you. On the other hand, you want to stop him from publishing it solo. So, both parties are partially right to be angry at each other. You do not want to take orders from him and he does not want to be treated like an idiot (who calls his questions silly) from his former student.
So, how can you fix this? For me, writing emails back and forth is not the way to discuss details for a paper. Why don't you use a better mean of communication such as skype, face-to-face meeting, phone call etc. You can there discuss all the details and your problem will be resolved. Of course he writes the paper and he will be the first author. But you get a publication and everyone is happy. And who knows? In the future you may collaborate further.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Publish the paper by yourself. Just put it in the archive. Don't let him steal your work. Seems like your adviser just manipulated the situation so you lost the will to publish your work. As you mentioned he made it impossible for you to publish and he asks silly questions, its the very same experience that I had with my adviser.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/06/12 | 358 | 1,401 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently writing a thesis in which a lot of derivations are moved to the appendix. To make these derivations readable, I sometimes write sentences like "As we saw in equation X...", where equation X is present both in the main text as well as in the appendix.
My question: should I, while writing the appendix, reference the instance of the equation in the main text, or the one in the appendix?<issue_comment>username_1: In general, it is always easier if your cross-reference is relatively nearby—flipping between multiple parts of a text makes the whole thing harder to understand.
So I'd lean towards referencing the version in the appendix, all other things being equal. However, if you are referencing a whole series of equations in the main text, including one duplicated in the Appendix, then it would be OK to preserve the main-text reference.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I would reference the appendix number in the appendix so as not to break the flow, but you might also footnote a cross-reference to the place where it appeared in the main text if it helps remind the reader.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My approach is usually to write something like
>
> "... and we arrive at
>
>
> (A3) E=mc^2
>
>
> as in equation (42) of the main text. Now, substituting for m in (A3) we obtain..."
>
>
>
etc.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/12 | 694 | 2,824 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been a PhD student in an institute for the last 4 years and now my deadline to submit my thesis is in another 40 days. When I joined the institute, official papers were signed stating that Professor X will be my first reviewer and will grade my thesis. By regulation, the first reviewer has to belong to the same faculty, but he was not from our group, and we did not have much contact with each other.
Now that I am ready to submit my thesis, he decides to back out on reasons stating that I was not in touch with him (but I was never told by my supervisor or by him that I need to regularly contact him).
Does this happen and is this allowed since official University papers were signed 4 years ago saying he will be my first reviewer?<issue_comment>username_1: Such situations are not uncommon in academia. I would caution you against trying to get this person back as a reviewer, even though you have signed papers from 4 years ago. Simply respect that person's decision to back out, thank her or she for their time thus far, and invest your energies finding somebody that will serve as a reviewer so you can graduate. Perhaps this sounds like rather odd advice. Just put yourself in the shoes of a person who doesn't want to serve as a reviewer but is subsequently forced to do so. You are at risk of getting a very unfavorable review, and the 40 days could become much longer. You have plenty of time to get somebody on board, and you will certainly encounter situations in your future career that are far more egregious.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: This happened to me, too: one of my committee members was suddenly unavailable for several months and unable/unwilling to work with me on scheduling my defense.
My process:
0. Took deep breaths and stopped panicking.
1. Reviewed the profiles of all eligible faculty members in the university
2. Picked a shortlist of 3 people in related fields that I wanted to meet
3. Asked my advisors for feedback (valuable - they knew who was a difficult committee member)
4. Emailed my top choice, Prof. S, to be on my committee.
5. Got a positive reception, met with Prof. S to discuss my work; they were friendly and mildly interested.
6. Scheduled the defense (tough, with five professors).
7. Sent my thesis out for reading, defended, and passed!
I believe this worked out well, and instead of a reluctant committee member, I got exposure to the leader of a significant program in my field. It still wasn't ideal, however, and I would've been in a bad position if Prof. S took issue with me, my other committee members, or my work.
You could also skip to step (3) and ask your advisors for advice - but I think it's worth taking control of an issue with so much potential influence on your career.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/12 | 1,427 | 5,621 | <issue_start>username_0: I want to obtain a masters degree at a certain top university (in Canada).
However, I was kicked out of the department due to my bad performance. Repeated attempts at getting back in were unsuccessful.
I have since then fixed my lack of discipline, achieved top grades at a "lesser" university, graduated with a bachelor's degree, and have worked (in a relevant field) for 7 years.
I was wondering how, or if I should even consider applying to my original university.
The reason is purely for my self confidence and, I guess, my ego. I got into that top university with excellent grades, but I was not ready to become an independent adult; computer games dominated my life until my final semester when I finally couldn't hang on anymore.
Graduating with top grades at another university showed that I picked myself up, but I want to prove to my family, the university, and mostly to myself, that I have the abilities to achieve what I could not 7 years ago.
The university is the *top* university at the field I study, in Canada. US have a couple comparable or better ones, but I cannot afford to go to those...
I know I can apply to another university, but I really want to find a way back in to my old university, and only apply elsewhere if no other options are available...
Any advice is fully appreciated.
**Update**:
Clarification - I am asking this because that university has my status listed as "may not continue in Faculty"<issue_comment>username_1: Keep trying! I was on academic probation (at a Canadian university :-) ) after my first year of undergrad (2.88 gpa). Thankfully I did not get kicked out. I persevered and now have an MSc and PhD and have been doing medical research for many years. Don't take this as gloating, just trying to say anything is possible :-).
Now, it will depend a lot on the university or department, but if you can convince a faculty member in the department that you want to do research and that you have completely changed your attitude, maybe they will have some sway (at least with the department). In my field, it is primarily a matter of convincing a faculty member (assuming the grades in the "lesser" university were good). Again, this will depend on the department.
Alternatively, maybe you can make an appointment with the admissions department and make a case to them why you should be allowed back in to the university. I suspect many would take your 7 years of experience as a growth experience.
Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Usually, in Canada there's a limit for that kind of status. For example if you drop a Master program from Concordia (like I did)there's a five terms period before reapplying. Here's an extract from the regulation that [applies](http://web2.concordia.ca/graduatestudies/publications/graduatecalendar/current/graduateadmission/):
>
> Re-Admission of Withdrawn Students
>
>
> Students who have been withdrawn from a graduate program for academic
> reasons (e.g. **low GPA, C or F grades)** may wish to be considered for
> re-admission into the program. Normally, students must have been
> withdrawn from the program for a minimum of five terms in order to be
> reconsidered. A request for re-admission is considered to be a new
> application. Students who wish to be considered for re-admission must
> submit an on-line application, along with the required application
> fee. Documentation (e.g. CV, transcripts) **showing professional or
> educational accomplishments since the student was withdrawn must be
> submitted** along with a recommendation for re-admission by the degree
> program.
>
>
>
At McGill (in the top 20 of univerties in North-America) it's two years for [medicine](http://www.mcgill.ca/study/2012-2013/faculties/medicine/graduate/gps_gen_admission_for_grad_studies)
>
> If an individual has not registered for a period of more than two
> years, their student file will be closed. **These individuals and
> those who have formally withdrawn** may be considered for admission.
> Applicants' admission applications will be considered as part of the
> current admission cycle, in competition with other people applying
> during that cycle and in accordance with current graduate admission
> procedures and policies.
>
>
>
Also for Graduate studies in Canada there's a lot of exceptions made, whatever regulation says. Try to contact the head of the department you're interested in.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I don't know what conditions are like at a Canadian University, but I graduated from a top American university and am basing my answer on this background.
Most universities, graduate faculties included, will base their decisions on an applicant's more recent experience. If you have top grades from a "lesser" university, that should be good enough (provided of course, that your target university routinely admits students from the other university). The seven years of work experience further separate you from your unfortunate undergraduate experience. College faculties are aware of "youthful indiscretions" with drinking, partying, etc. and are looking for signs that you have progressed beyond that point.
When I was admitted to a graduate school, I was told, "you only have to prove yourself once." That is, you will be admitted (or not), based on your "high water mark;" your highest level of achievement. They're not looking to disqualify you for things that happened maybe ten years ago; they're looking to see if your highest level of demonstrated aptitude meets their requirements. Good luck.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/12 | 505 | 2,138 | <issue_start>username_0: I just finished my first year of my Master's program in Atmospheric Sciences, and during this time I was a teaching assistant. Now that the summer has arrived, I'm starting as a research assistant with my advisor at the university I'm enrolled at, as well as a research assistant with a government organization. I'm currently working at this government organization, but I'm still getting paid equally between my two advisors.
Getting to the point, my research is a bit ambiguous at the moment. My advisor from my university doesn't have a clear project for me to work on, and my other advisor has provided some insight into what I can work on, but it isn't much better. I'm worried that the summer will be unproductive, and my chances of graduating on time (2 years total for me degree) will be put into jeopardy. Can anyone offer advice/insight into this? It would be greatly appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: You need to press your advisors for more guidance. Although it is appropriate (and valuable) to give a PhD student room to develop his/her own research ideas, a Masters student typically needs guidance, at least a promising direction that the advisor can see resulting in a thesis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say this is your opportunity to explore and find a (hopefully small) gap in the literature that you can fill. Reading literature reviews is the best way to start. I had a similar experience a little earlier in my degree (masters), and I was able to pick a topic that I loved, and it kept me going; I am almost finished, and it has been, IMO, a successful endeavor.
If you are applying to a PhD program after, you will have experience exploring a little on your own. Your advisor will be able to say in their recommendation letter that you took initiative in your research.
The difficult part will be carving out something meaningful that you can do in 7-9 months (1 month to research and decide & 2-4 months for thesis writing and defense at the end). Your advisor should be able to help you to narrow the scope to something manageable.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/12 | 696 | 3,176 | <issue_start>username_0: As a recent B.S. recipient interested in pursuing a PhD in molecular biology in the future, are there any disadvantages to publishing outside of that field? I have a strong background in computer science and have been approached separately by a public health professor and a linguistics professor who are interested in collaborating on their respective projects and perhaps working towards a paper over the summer.
While I enjoy solving computational problems, I'm not sure whether this is a good idea professionally. Does publishing papers in other fields take away from the research I've already done? I've so far only contributed to two papers in my "field of expertise".
**What are the downsides to collaborating on a paper outside of one's field?** Is this frowned upon by the academic community/graduate admission programs?
Related question -- [advantages to publishing outside of primary research field](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/814/is-it-beneficial-to-publish-papers-not-related-to-your-primary-research-field)<issue_comment>username_1: Although I cannot speak directly to the field of computer sciences, I can say that in social sciences *any* peer reviewed publications would be viewed positively on an applicant's CV. At this stage in your career this shows you're motivated, capable of contributing to academic work, and have some familiarity with the writing process. The fact is that many undergraduates may not have access to opportunities to publish in the field they hope to enter, but instead seek to gain research experience and publication opportunities with faculty who are willing to work with and train them. Many academic skills, such as writing articles, are transferable between disciplines, and working with these professors may provide you with strong reference letters when you do apply to graduate school. So long as this opportunity is not coming at the expense of something more directly related to your major, I think it could be a very valuable experience which could positively impact (or at least will not hurt) your future applications.
As a final note, be sure that you are able to explain the project and your role in the project in future application materials and interviews. If this is outside your field of study, don't be shy about asking the professors questions so that you have a solid grasp of the project's purpose. The only time I have seen undergraduate publications backfire is when the person is unable to explain the work, and it becomes clear they did nothing but data entry.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Interdisciplinarity is a positive benefit in the sciences, collaborations have the capacity to be more than just the sum of their parts. The thing that is required is the ability for e.g. molecular biologists and computer scientists to have a common frame of reference to communicate effectively, so as a molecular biologist with some computational experience, that is extremely valuable in facilitating collaborations. I'd say there is no disadvantage to this, you are demonstrating a really useful skill for molecular biology.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/13 | 1,860 | 7,681 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently got an unsolicited email advertising a questionable-looking mathematics journal. Upon investigation, it looks pretty shady: page charges, manuscripts to be submitted in Microsoft Word (legitimate math journals *always* use LaTeX), overbroad scope, and a promise for peer review within two months (unreasonably short for mathematics).
In its three years of operation, one particular author has been published in it three times, including an “elementary” proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem, and another paper that appears to be a proof of a statement for which an explicit numerical counterexample is known. (Interestingly, it appears the same author has also published a proof of the Goldbach conjecture in a journal with a nearly identical name from another publisher indexed in MathSciNet, and has also apparently settled the Twin Primes and Collatz conjectures!)
(Since the preceding paragraph may not make any sense to non-mathematicians, let me say: this is roughly the equivalent of a physics journal publishing a paper that claims to have achieved time travel with household materials. I should note that the journal has a subscription fee (which I have no intention of paying), so I can't actually read the articles in question; but their abstracts are pretty damning.)
However, the journal’s editorial board includes some names from reputable institutions; people with many publications in high-quality journals. (There are many other names from institutions I know nothing about.) Giving them the benefit of the doubt, it’s entirely possible that they are not paying attention to what the journal is doing, or they agreed to be editors without checking on the journal, or even that they have been listed without their knowledge (this has been known to happen).
**Is it appropriate to try to inform these editors what’s happening in their names? If so, how can I do it tactfully?**
On the one hand, if someone was using my name on a shady journal, I’d want to know. On the other hand, I don’t want to offend or embarrass them by just sending an email saying: “this journal you edit is crap”. It’s even possible that they somehow approve of the journal (e.g. they have a philosophy that the world generally needs more journals and fewer barriers to publication), in which case, I fear no good can come of me criticizing it to them.<issue_comment>username_1: You could phrase your concern in the form of a technical question:
>
> Dear Prof. So-and-so,
> I noticed that you are on the editorial board of the Journal of Shady
> Results, which recently published the proof of a statement for which
> Other-Person provided a numerical counter-example [1]. Is the journal
> claiming [1]'s counter-example was incorrect?
>
>
>
If you prefer a more indirect route, write your concerns to Beall to help expedite the journal's blacklisting. Once on the list, you can send an incredulous e-mail to the well-known person asking if he is actually involved with this journal.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: I wouldn't worry too much about tact. There's enough information in your question to identify the journal, and it looks impressively bad, even by the dismal standards of junk journals. It's so terrible that I'd consider it unethical to be actively involved as an editor, and humiliating to be passively involved. Bringing this to the editors' attention would be doing them a favor: if their names are being used without their knowledge, then they'll find out, if they haven't been paying close enough attention, then they'll get a valuable wake-up call, and if they are already well aware of how terrible the journal is, then at least they'll learn that someone has noticed their involvement and disapproves. Of course it would be quite an awkward e-mail. Perhaps the easiest solution is an anonymous e-mail: it won't make things less painful for the editors, but at least it won't affect your relationship with them.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_3: You are under no obligation to tell the editors, but if you chose to email them, it would not be out of place. The key is to not insult them or the journal. Something along the lines of "I see you are the editor of X. I research topic Y. Do you think my research is in scope at the journal? It seems like some of the articles take a less rigorous approach than others. Can you tell me about the peer review process and any publication fees?"
The email handles a number of cases. If they didn't know they are an editor, they now do. If they thought the journal was thoroughly peer reviewing stuff, they now know it is not. If they did it to be able to say they are an editor, they now realise that they have been caught. If they did it because they support this type of publishing model, it will give them a chance to express their views and since they are willing to sign on as an editor, they probably are happy to express their views.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: I put this somewhat to the test.
I stumbled upon a journal with very similar characteristics in another field.
The main difference is that it has operated for over three decades.
I tried to contact all editors, except the top two, who were obviously “in on it”.
1. I could find current contact informations for eight editors and assumed them to be somewhat active, though many of those were older than seventy.
2. I could not find contact information for five editors, but I could reasonably guess their current or last institution. I presumed those to be very likely dead or at least retired.
3. I found three editors to be certainly dead, one since more than a decade.
4. I failed to identify or find any information about two editors.
I started with e-mails to two editors from Group 1, whom I considered least likely to condone the journal’s actions. One month later, I contacted the rest from Group 1 and the last institutions for Groups 2 and 3. Another month later (now), I evaluated this. I should note that none of the editors were even remotely in my own topical vicinity, so there was very little risk of this backfiring at me.
The basic e-mail I sent was (with some modifications when contacting the former institution and similar):
>
> ### A dubious journal lists you as editor
>
>
> Dear Prof. [name]
>
>
> It might interest you that a allegedly scientific journal called [name]¹ lists you as an editor. Given the state of the journal², I presume that this is without your consent or that the journal has gone south since. Please note that this is not your typical pay-to-publish predator.
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> [my name]
>
>
> ¹ [link to journal]
>
> ² [links to exemplary, recent, and clearly unscientific articles]
>
>
>
My result was:
* The first two editors I contacted responded:
+ One was grateful for being informed and quickly managed to get their name removed from the journal’s list of editors.
+ One told me that they edited some special issue for the journal decades ago and never did anything since. They shared my concerns and acknowledge that many papers are “silly”, but rather see the journal as “taking chances”. Their name is still on the list of editors.
* One former institution replied that they were looking into it. The respective editor is still on the list.
* Nobody else responded and no other name was removed from the list of editors.
I don’t know whether I had a good hand picking the first two editors or whether the journal took some measures after I contacted them and before I contacted the second batch. I also have to assume that many of my e-mails to Group 1 went to inboxes that are no longer used.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/13 | 785 | 3,550 | <issue_start>username_0: I published paper 1 with a co-author A, who drew a very good illustrative figure in the introduction.
I want to submit paper 2 which addresses the same problem (but uses a completely different approach), so the introduction of the problem is pretty much the same. Do I need to ask A for permission to include the figure in paper 2?<issue_comment>username_1: I was at the "receiving end" of such a case once. One of my collaborators has used a figure I have drawn for another paper that I was not a co-author of without asking me first. I did not consider this intellectual dishonesty (the figure was neither particularly brilliant nor a lot of work), but I do admit that it stung a little bit to see my own work (however tiny this "work" was) being used without telling. If the collaborator had just dropped a brief email before, I would have certainly not minded.
Bottom line:
>
> Do I need to ask A for permission to include the figure in paper 2?
>
>
>
Strictly speaking probably not, but you really *should* tell A.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You need to first check the copyright information (you have probably signed) from the journal/publisher where the figure is published. This will determine where the copyright for the typeset article lies. The figure is art and as such should be covered by an intellectual property, which then clearly belongs to your colleague. This issue seems to be overlooked by many copyright notices. As you probably know many publishers allow authors to post submitted (unedited) manuscripts to be posted on web-sites and repositories, but not the final typeset version. This is because the journal really does not own the intellectual thoughts in a paper but the right to publish and distribute the final version.
To me this becomes quite confused and it is not clear if all publishers have considered the true ownership of figures. It would be useful to survey the copyrights to see how these issues are dealt with and if, for example, country specific rules apply.
Anyway, to answer your question: tell your colleague of your intention. It is good etiquette regardless of whether or not it is necessary. When it comes to copyright of a journal: better safe than sorry; get permission. You of course need to reference your other publication and any permission that is needed. You should add your colleague's name to the acknowledgement as the originator of the figure; again etiquette.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: When you published the original article the publisher may have required the copyright on the text and all figures to be transfer to them or for them to be granted exclusive rights. Presumably based on this question, you believe that the publisher does not have exclusive rights.
In the sciences figures are often not that valuable, but in the arts, figures can be very valuable. If someone takes a valuable photograph and grants you permission to publish that photo in a single article, then you clearly do not have the right to reproduce that photo in other articles. It is not uncommon for the artist who took the photo to be a coauthor on papers involving their photos. This doesn't change the "ownership" of the photo. The person who produces a photo/figure the figure is generally the copyright holder unless they sign the rights away.
You must ask the copyright holder for permission to use the figure again. The copyright holder is likely either the person who created the figure or the publisher of the original article.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/13 | 1,000 | 3,573 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it possible to crowdfund a PhD, like [crowdfunding business](http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/0/26978816)?<issue_comment>username_1: While I'm sure its possible I haven't been able to find any examples of funding an entire PhD. However, there are quite a few examples of people crowd funding smaller individual research projects. I think there are two main reasons for this cost and accessibility.
**Cost**
It is really quite expensive to fund an entire PhD. If we look at the costs of a PhD (in the UK) we get.
* University fees: ~£4000 per year (~£15000 for non-EU students)
* Living expenses/stipend: ~£12000 per year
* Conferences/equipment/other stuff: ~£2-3000 per year +
* approx £20000 per year for 3-4 years = ~£60000 (>$100,000)
Compare this to the average successful crowdfunding amount of [$7000](http://blog.gogetfunding.com/crowdfunding-statistics-and-trends-infographic/) and you'll see why it'll be hard to raise that sort of money and would require a very strong marketing campaign. Which brings us nicely onto
**Accessibility**
One of the things a successful crowd funding project needs is a good sales pitch. You need to have a very clear goal that will excite lots of people to fund you. Not many PhD projects I know could possibly fall into this category.
For conventional crowd funding you also need to give something back to supporters to make it worth their while. While I suspect this would be less true for crowd funded research there are many people who might like to support you but cannot/will not without the prospect of some tangible return.
What seems to be more common is to fund smaller individual projects for ~$10-20000. For example <http://blog.gogetfunding.com/crowdfunding-statistics-and-trends-infographic/> although there are some bigger and smaller examples in this article <http://www.onlinephdprograms.com/dollars-for-doctors-a-guide-to-crowdfunding-academic-research/>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: a) People crowdfunding because they want something in exchange, a better world,clean some shame, a videogame and such.
b) PhD is a personal matter where the only people that earn something is the student. In a personal case, i want to obtain a PhD, however, i don't want others to obtain it, specially colleagues.
So a) and b) are opposite.
Then, the best way to achieve b) using a) is cheating. Like already said, for example, using marketing or being creative.
I believe your question is wrong, because if you are thinking in a PhD then, if you are reached at this stage of your life then you must have enough experience to know how this World works.
PhDs are expensive for many reasons, one of them is to "separate the wheat from the chaff", they think that if you are enough smart to accumulate such money then, you are enough smart to take the PhD (IMHO: but not enough smart to decide to not to do it and run your own business). However, it is not always true, some PhD are not quite rich nor brilliants, they are just "floating around here" (yes, im recalling some teacher that i had).
PS: it is not a personal attack but more likely an analysis to your question.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: There is a [crowdfunding platform](http://fundmyphd.com/) for PhD students. Archived version is [here](https://web-beta.archive.org/web/20161017150741/fundmyphd.com). The portal matches your research topics to the right commercial interests. Right now it contains 6808 students, but only 51 projects and 10 sponsors so I doubt about the activity of the site.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/13 | 1,149 | 4,661 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm traveling a lot this summer, and I [invited myself](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1944/how-to-invite-yourself-to-present-at-another-university) to visit and give talks at a couple of universities in other countries.
Do I list these talks on my CV? If so, under what heading? They're not exactly "Invited Talks." I don't have a general "Talks" section on my CV because I want to exclude conference presentations (which are already represented as publications, and which nobody lists in my field). I could have a "Seminars and Colloquia" heading, but people might assume these were invited.<issue_comment>username_1: What you list on a CV depends on the purpose of the CV. The idea that you have a single CV isn't really accurate. For example, using an [NIH CV/biosketch](http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/biosketch.pdf) for a job application would not be a good strategy. I believe that a "long" CV should have everything on it. I add things to my long CV as I do them which makes creating shorter CVs tailored for a particular purpose much easier since deleting is much easier than adding.
There are many things for which there is a benefit of listing talks that you have given at other departments/labs on the CV, the issue is really what "heading" they come under. The most critical thing when divining things up is that each item on your CV can only be listed once. You cannot list a conference you attended, gave a talk at, had an abstract published for, and a paper published for four times. It can only go on the CV once.
I try and only divide things into sections based on "concrete" criteria. It is clear when you are giving an invited talk at a conference, but it is not clear whether a departmental talk is invited or not. Similarly, it is not always clear whether a departmental seminar is a job talk or not.
The relevant sections on my CV are (a) Conference Papers, (b) Conference Abstracts, and (c) Research Presentations. Each "presentation" only goes under one category. I limit the "abstract" category to conferences that produce archival abstract books that people have a fighting chance of finding. Talks and poster presentations at conferences that don't have archival abstract, departmental seminars, talks to research groups, and job talks, go under "research presentations". I have a separate teaching presentations section for teaching based job talks.
I split the papers and abstracts sections into posters/talks and invited/submitted (someday hopefully I will add key note). The presentations I split into internal and external. I like to keep track of my internal presentations for annual review CV since it lets me demonstrate departmental citizenship. I tend not to split the presentations into posters/talks or invited/submitted since as I mention before, it is too difficult.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Younger faculty (with smaller vitas) tend to include less prestigious colloquium talks on their vitas. More established faculty, who have longer lists of more prestigious talks, may just have one line saying "colloquia and seminar talks at many universities." (That's a real example from a senior professor.) I tend to agree: if you have done *something*, you don't want your vita to suggest you've done *nothing*.
The main thing I tell my students is that a vita has to pass the "straight face test". If someone asks you in person whether some line "truly" deserves to be on your vita, you need to be able to justify it with a straight face. This is also how you know whether to include e.g. prizes that you won as an undergraduate: when you can no longer justify them with a straight face, it's time to remove them.
As long as you can do that, it's unlikely anyone will press you too hard on it. Other people in your field will understand how things work, so the main goal of the vita is to present yourself clearly to them. They can make their own judgement about the value of each activity. Unless you can't include something with a straight face, you can only hurt yourself by leaving out "minor" activities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Yes.
----
If you discover that a friend in a distant city is having a birthday party, and you ask "Hey, can I come?" and they say "Sure!", you've been invited to the party.
Same thing goes for talks. When the host institution agreed to let you talk, that was your invitation, which makes it an invited talk.
That said, you may want to distinguish plenary talks at conferences and formally organized departmental colloquia from random seminars run by individual faculty.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/13 | 1,570 | 6,684 | <issue_start>username_0: So, last week I refereed a paper for a journal. The paper in question is a reply to a previous paper by a different author: it points out a serious problem in the original paper and then proposes a solution. The evaluation I sent back to the editors is that, while the problem is real (to the extent that a different researcher has independently identified it), there are a number of reasons why the proposed solution is not going to work.
Over the weekend, I started thinking about the paper in question again and suddenly realized that I know how to solve the problem (in a nutshell: you need to use a technique originally developed to solve a mildly related class of problems, but which nobody had yet thought of applying to this particular domain). Right now, I have a bunch of handwritten notebook pages with everything I need to write a paper, and all I have left to do is to find a couple of hours to sit in front of my computer and type it up properly.
The question is, how should I proceed now? On the one hand, given that I've developed my own solution, I'm not plagiarizing the paper I refereed (in fact, I intend to give it proper credit for discovering the problem). On the other hand, if I hadn't been asked to referee this paper, I wouldn't have put enough thought into it to come up with my own solution. More generally, to what extent is it acceptable to write a paper that directly builds on a paper you've been asked to referee?<issue_comment>username_1: You really do have three options: 1) don't write a paper (ok, not an option), 2) write it by yourself (I don't think a great option), or 3) write it with the other person as a co-author. It depends a little on how your field assigns authorship.
Here is what I think I would suggest. Write the paper and when it is basically complete, email the author of the paper you reviewed and let them know you came up with a solution and have written a paper on it. Offer them an authorship on your paper and then send them your paper with a timeline of when to get back to you.
This way you are not burning bridges and you are collegial. Then they can decide if they want to be on the paper or not.
It is a tough position to be in but given their paper got you thinking it is probably best to ask if they would like to be an author.
BTW, if you are a student, discuss with your supervisor. :-)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think there are two questions that need to be answered first.
* Is it important to you (e.g. for career reasons) to publish solo, or would you consider publishing with the other author? Keep in mind that publishing jointly may have extra benefits: the two of you together might come up with an even better solution, or it may lead to future collaborations on other projects. Or do you perhaps not care about getting credit at all?
* Is the manuscript public? Has it been posted as a preprint on arXiv or a similar server, or on the author's website, etc?
Depending on the answers, there are a few cases:
1. **You don't care about getting credit.** Write your report on the paper: "The approach to agrobaric frobotzim via PDQ analysis is unworkable because of foo, bar and baz. However, this could be fixed by using QPM analysis instead. [Sketch your idea here.] Pending this fix [and any other suggested revisions], I recommend the paper for publication." Expect that when the paper is published, there will be an acknowledgement: "We thank the anonymous referee for suggesting the approach used in Section 5."
2. **You want to publish jointly.** Contact the editor: "The author's approach to agrobaric frobotzim via PDQ analysis is unworkable, and as such I cannot recommend the paper for publication as it stands. However, I have some ideas about how to resolve the problem, and I would be interested in collaborating with the author to work them out. Would you be willing to put me in touch with her?"
1. **The editor says yes.** Great!
2. **The editor says no, and the manuscript is public.** Submit your report pointing out the flaws and recommending rejection. After a decent interval contact the author: "I saw your preprint, and had an idea to improve the results using QPM analysis. Would you be interested in working together on this?" Opinions vary on whether you should reveal that you were the referee; it is possible the author will guess anyway.
3. **The editor says no, and the manuscript is not public, but you know who the author is.** Submit your report pointing out the flaws and recommending rejection. The next step is a bit controversial. Some would say you should wait until it is public, so as not to break the anonymity of the reviewing process. Others think it is fine to reveal yourself and contact the author directly to suggest collaboration. I am not sure what to say here.
4. **The editor says no, and the manuscript is not public, and you do not know who the author is (double-blind reviewing).** You have no choice but to wait until the manuscript is made public (maybe until it is published somewhere else), since that's the only way to find the author and suggest collaboration. If you think you should give up on finding the author and publish solo instead, see below.
3. **You want to publish solo**. Write and submit your report. Now, is the manuscript public?
1. **The manuscript is public.** You may write your paper, citing the other author's preprint and giving her due credit for noticing the problem. This is ethical, but if you meet the author at a conference, don't expect her to buy you a beer: she was hoping to solve this problem but you beat her to it.
2. **The manuscript is not public.** You may not proceed. As a reviewer, you received the manuscript in confidence, and to write a solo paper based on it would be to take unfair advantage of that access. You must wait until the preprint appears publicly. (This might be when it is published in another journal, or maybe never.) It's possible that in the meantime, the author will discover your solution independently; those are the breaks. This would be a great time to reconsider seeking joint authorship.
In case 2, if your field has a notion of "first authorship", that would be something you'd need to negotiate with the other author, based on your field's norms. (Mine uses alphabetical ordering almost exclusively, so this issue wouldn't arise.)
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Co author.... all the way.
But don't ask if he wants to coauthor after you've completed the paper 100% because then you're not really asking, your telling him. Which is generous true... but in a sort of superior way.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/13 | 1,051 | 4,442 | <issue_start>username_0: I have completed my Bachelor's degree (3 years) in Mathematics and pursuing MSc(2 years). Currently I am in final year and expect to obtain MSc degree in next May. I am willing to do my PhD (in Mathematics) in USA.
From the information obtained from my seniors and friends, I found that most of the USA institutions ask for GRE and TOEFL score. But are there universities of USA which do not need GRE and/or TOEFL score for admission in Phd in Mathematics?<issue_comment>username_1: The truth of the matter is that while you may find many schools that do not require the GRE, virtually every US school is going to require either the TOEFL or a similar test such as the IELTS.
The reason for this is that one of the important criteria for admission to most US graduate programs is the ability to do coursework and interact with fellow graduate students and faculty in their *lingua franca*, which in the US is English. Consequently, schools need to ensure that the students they accept have a certain level of proficiency in English before they enroll. (A number of grad school admissions officers have mentioned that they blacklisted candidates from certain countries because of problems related to fraud—candidates would hire other people to conduct telephone interviews with universities in the US, and the actual candidate would come with hardly any English whatsoever.)
So, for most schools, you will find it a requirement to be able to speak the dominant language of instruction—and not just in the United States. (For instance, all students at our university must show the ability to speak either German or English, depending on the program to which they apply.)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think you should change your strategy for choosing a doctoral program. That is, determine which programs would provide you with the best training for the work you want to do. It might (probably will) involve these standardized test scores. You run the risk of narrowing your choices by starting with these types of requirements.
Also, you stated that you are "willing to do my PhD." Your decision for doing a PhD should be motivated by your ultimate career trajectory. I think you should clarify this career trajectory (i.e., Why do you want to do a PhD? Because it will prepare me for ...). Then, you should find a PhD program that would be best suited to help you establish this career trajectory. You don't want to get into a PhD program that is inappropriately matched with your trajectory, even though they don't require GRE and TOEFL scores. If you have scores that are not competitive, then it would be a good idea to focus on improving those scores.
Bottom line is you want good training.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: To answer your question, **no: all schools of reasonably well-known merit require a GRE**. Shopping for schools that don't is only harmful. I am guessing your mindset is simply wondering if within, say, the top 100 programs there might be exceptions, perhaps because the test is a financial burden, but no, the GRE is *the* standard for admission. It's not the only important factor, but every school will require it. I've heard it described as a "sanity check" to make sure the student's abilities pass a check relative to what the recommendation letters and transcript advertise.
To flip the coin, imagine a school that *doesn't* require the GRE. Why not: what's wrong with it? Does it let students in who would have performed terribly, and risk a remedial first year? Does it let students in who are likely to drop out and simply don't fund them? Is it just really lacking merit? I would be *extremely* leery of such a school.
Regarding the TOEFL, the situation is simple. It would be foolish for a university to not make sure incoming students speak English. Even if you are sure of your ability and don't have the time to study or the money for the test, you should be leery of going to a school where there's a pretty good chance your classmates will include German, French, Japanese and Mexican students who don't actually speak English and went to the only school that admitted them after they failed the TOEFL.
On the other hand it is of course very important that *you* can pass. It would be miserable to marginally fail but not be able to teach a course effectively (which is how you pay for grad school in part) or collaborate with peers.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/13 | 1,747 | 7,427 | <issue_start>username_0: I was reading [an answer to another question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/23361/103), which says on the topic of a reviewer potentially contacting an author under a special set of circumstances
>
> Some would say you should wait until it is public, so as not to break the anonymity of the reviewing process. Others think it is fine to reveal yourself and contact the author directly
>
>
>
My first thought was "The anonymity is there to protect the reviewer, so of course he can give up the protection and initiate contact". But then I realized that maybe there are other people whose interests might be hurt if this happens.
So, let's assume that the anonymous person (the reviewer, and in some cases also the author), always benefits from his own anonymity. Is there somebody else who is interested in the reviewer remaining anonymous?<issue_comment>username_1: The readers and the editors can benefit.
I know this is a contended issue, and there are many different views.
But as you've asked specifically whether there's somebody else who is interested in the reviewer remaining anonymous, let's just look at that.
As a reader, I want the peer review to have been fair and thorough.
If the reviewer is able to review freely, without fear of comeback, then they can be much more frank. They can shoot down a bad paper, even if one of the authors or one of their colleagues could hold some kind of power over the reviewer, whether it be funding, future job applications, peer reviews with the roles switched, whatever. Anonymity may enable reviewers to be more frank, more honest, and more direct in their reviews. And that directness can be of benefit to the editors, too.
I'm not saying this is the way. I'm not saying this has to be the way. I'm discussing possibilities here.
It would be great to have some solid evidence on the pros and cons of anonymity. At the moment, there seems to be a great deal of discussion, but I don't see much science on the subject.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Since I do not see benefits this answer will in essence not answer your question. It is possible to imagine benefits but reality is what counts and that tells a different story in my experience.
So, from my experience as editor, author and reviewer, I have to say, I am not impressed by anonymity in this process. Anonymity has a tendency to free some people from much of their socially acceptable behaviour and the review process is not the place for anything other than objective criticism. I should also add that in my field reviewers are more often known than anonymous and the general trend is towards more openness.
When I receive reviews as an author, I find that i am far more likely to take suggestions seriously if the reviewer is known than when there is an anonymous reviewer. There are probably several reasons for this. If I know the reviewer (as a peer in the subject) I can better read between the lines and understand from where the comments come from. with an anonymous review you loose that possibility. If there is a name at the other end, it becomes more of a person than otherwise so I believe anonymity makes it easier to disregard from criticism or take it less seriously.
As an editor, I can see many anonymous reviews containing quite rude remarks. As an editor, you have the right, perhaps obligation, to convey what you perceive as being constructive information to the authors for their revision. If I get a rude review, I may not convey the entire review to the author, or more commonly, I will excuse for the poor behaviour of the reviewer and highlight the parts that the author should focus upon. So an editor has a moderating role in such cases. But, most bad (in one way or another) reviews come from anonymous reviewers. In some ways reviewers may of course feel awkward for providing a very negative review that they wish to remain anonymous.
So to try to look at the big picture, I would say that most reviewers do a good job but anonymity seems to bring out the worst in lots of cases and in ways that are not founded in what should be in a scientific review.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The other answers and comments are completely reasonable, and/but, seriously, there is the obvious synthesis, which we all really know, namely, that human behavior has a certain range...
So, yes, ideally, it would even be better to have a double-blind system... or, wait, ideally, no one would behave prejudicially. :)
Ok, start over. So, assuming people might react prejudicially, the typical single-blind system only protects the reviewer/referee, not the author, from subsequent complaints. No, it does not protect authors from the many different possible prejudices of referees. Yes, it does allow referees to be bitchier than they'd be if they were in a public place. This conceivably has some purpose, but, also, it might just be venting.
And, then, there's the point that with substantial work, the coterie of competent referees is small, and that an observant author can infer the referee by use of language and other mathematical details. "We're not stupid". :)
At this point in my life, I think a not-at-all-blind system would work better. In particular, referees *would* be culpable for blocking competitors' work, or for gratuitously disparaging novices' work.
Next, we can ask why the traditional publishing houses control scholarly "publication" ...
... nevermind...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The only one who benefits is **the community**, or, if you wish, the science itself. Blind review allows more fair reviews, the reviewers need not to fear getting revealed (in the ideal world).
I don't see how I as a reviewer benefit from it. When blind review is dropped, I start to make not-really-honest reviews because I don't want to be frowned at by my colleagues, no gain nor loss for me personally, it's loss for everybody. Unfortunately, the authors often think that the reviewers are responsible for the fact that the article is a crap, which causes all this. We aren't able to accept honest opinions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I always thought the revised paper will benefit, in that objective comments will be taken into account based on what they say rather than who wrote them. My impression is that keeping reviewers anonymous serves to avoid a certain bias that would be present if certain referees were recognizable as much more senior than others.
When referees are known, a nonsensical suggestion by a well-known researcher might be applied out of the authors' respect for the "big name". Likewise, a well-justified comment by a junior researcher could be ignored due to the perceived irrelevance of the referee.
Along the same vein, I feel remarks that might come across as "rude" are easier to ignore that way: You can simply discard the respective statement without having to consider the ramifications about a fellow reeearcher's personality or their stance towards your work (which means, probably, overthinking things, anyway). Instead, as an author, you can fully tocus on the provided suggestions and weigh the indicated justifications.
In this sense, the effect of making referees anonymous towards authors mirrors the effect of making authors anonymous towards referees. In both cases, an intention is to avoid a bias based upon the writer's name.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/13 | 1,809 | 7,216 | <issue_start>username_0: If I have a DB or set of data, and want to grant access to it to a limited group of experts in a field (not general access), and don't want others using it for their own publications, nor seeing the information being offered for free on the Internet.
What is the best approach to deposit the information somewhere to make sure, in a hypothetical future, that I can claim copyright over it?
Basically, I want to protect myself upfront against [My research work stolen and published as his own by the co-author without my consent](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/975/my-research-work-stolen-and-published-as-his-own-by-the-co-author-without-my-con)<issue_comment>username_1: This is country dependent and more of a legal question, but basically you have to register your work.
Most of the people in academia SE seem to be from USA, so you can check [the process for USA](http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/how-do-you-register-database.html). I was not aware of this, but the site is well ranked in Google and seems properly informing.
Your country should provide some similar mechanism. This kind of mechanisms are the best option if you want to be sure. Otherwise, you can use other kind of mechanism as [proof of existence](http://www.proofofexistence.com/) or [CKAN](http://ckan.org/) and then use that as a proof to register the copyright if needed (but you may as well register in the office up front instead of worrying about doing something else and then registering).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: See this question on StackOverflow: [Is there a way to digitally sign documents to prove they existed at a certain point in time](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6726382/is-there-a-way-to-digitally-sign-documents-to-prove-they-existed-at-a-certain-po).
The answer is yes. Several solutions were suggested; [my answer](https://stackoverflow.com/a/23421215/634919) involves an Internet time-stamping service which signs a cryptographic hash of your document. So if you keep that version of the document, you can prove that it existed on the date in question; but otherwise, nobody ever sees the document except you.
However, if you are actually expecting copyright or IP challenges, I cannot promise that this will stand up legally; you should consult a lawyer.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> Basically, I want to protect myself upfront against [My research work stolen and published as his own by the co-author without my consent](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/975/my-research-work-stolen-and-published-as-his-own-by-the-co-author-without-my-con)
>
>
>
What you need is to convince the research community that this is your work, so that if anyone tries to steal it, then it will be considered professional misconduct, they won't be able to publish their theft, etc. I'm not convinced copyright law is the right tool for this. Sure, being able to sue someone for copyright violation could be useful in certain circumstances, but often it won't actually settle the academic issues. For example, collaboration. I might claim to have collaborated with you on the research contained in the database, in which case I would be entitled to be a coauthor on academic publications, and you would be considered to be acting unethically if you denied me coauthorship. There's no way to defend against this using copyright registration, cryptographic time-stamping, etc. You might be able to prove that you already had a copy of the database in the past, but it's much harder to prove that I didn't somehow contribute to it, except in extreme cases such as having had a copy before I first studied this field.
In practice, people often deal with this difficulty by telling *more* people. If you tell just one person about your work, then they can steal it, and it's your word against theirs. If you tell ten people, then it's much harder for a thief to get away with it, since there are nine other witnesses. If you tell a hundred, then it becomes really difficult to steal your work. Unless someone immediately tries hard to steal it, it will become impossible: the community will react by saying "Wait, <NAME> told all of us about this database last year. If it was your work, why didn't you say anything back then?"
Whether more publicity is a viable solution depends on your circumstances, but there's a fundamental trade-off here. Ultimately, academia cares about credit for the ideas and research, not just who owns the copyright. (If I write a paper about your work, then I own the copyright to my words, but I don't deserve credit for the ideas.) The more you keep your work secret, the harder it is to prove anything about who deserves the intellectual credit.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: A good institutional data repository should be able to handle this for you. As an example, [The Dataverse Network](http://thedata.org/) allows you to deposit data, gives that data a persistent DOI, and then allows you to manage permissions. So you could, for example, deposit the data to make it citable and immediately establish your authorship but then only make it available to specified users (who would need to create Dataverse accounts). In the future, you could make the data more broadly available if you so desired.
Other institutional data repositories should be able to handle this process as well.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Use **[ProofOfExistence.com](https://proofofexistence.com/)** to put a hash of your data on the [Bitcoin](https://www.weusecoins.com/) [blockchain](http://chimera.labs.oreilly.com/books/1234000001802/ch07.html#_introduction_2). [Blocks in the blockchain are time-stamped.](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/q/42076/4334)
By putting a hash of your data on the blockchain, you are not publishing your data or making it in any way publicly available.\* In the future, when you release the data, anyone can perform a SHA256 hash of it and verify that it matches the hash in the time-stamped block on the blockchain, thereby proving your priority.
Cf. the ¶ "Demonstrating data ownership without revealing actual data" of [ProofOfExistence.com's about page](https://proofofexistence.com/about).
\*[ProofOfExistence.com](https://proofofexistence.com/) does client-side hashing (using a JavaScript library), so even that website doesn't ever access your data-set itself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: You can deposit the data in a research data repository that allows to restrict the access to the data while making the metadata available and citable, e.g. with a DOI. This could be your institutional research data repository (if your institution/institute has one and it has these features) or you could use [Zenodo](https://zenodo.org/) run by CERN which is open for everyone to register and deposit data and publications.
>
> Restricted Access: Users may deposit restricted files with the ability to share access with others if certain requirements are met. These files will not be made publicly available and sharing will be made possible only by the approval of depositor of the original file. [Source](http://about.zenodo.org/policies/)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/13 | 1,168 | 4,949 | <issue_start>username_0: I finished my PhD program in pure math a few years ago and have been in industry since then. I would love to continue my academic career, but (long story short) I was treated badly by my program and left with the doctorate but without a postdoc or much in the way of a publication record or connections (thus making the doctorate close to pointless) I haven't had much trouble finding jobs in software engineering or government labs, but I haven't found the work there to be interesting or satisfying.
Like pretty much everyone who goes into math, I love math for its own sake, and I love research. Is there anything available outside of academia where I could undertake something close to pure math research? Ideally, I'd like to beef up my publication record and make some connections, but a tech company doesn't seem to be the right place to do that. Although the jobs are certainly there, coding and engineering really aren't my things, and I'd like something more strongly related to math and more academic and research-oriented in nature.<issue_comment>username_1: If you are a US citizen living in the USA, you can work for [NSA](http://nsa.gov) (which, if I recall correctly, is known to be the largest employer of mathematicians in the country) provided you pass their background check and satisfy their other requirements. However, your research will likely be classified, so you will not be able to publish it in the regular math journals.
Should you happen to be in the UK, their counterpart of NSA is GCHQ. Many other countries also have similar organizations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My situation is different from yours, but analogous. I have observed a lot of academic discourse on MathOverflow, and even some on Math.stackexchange. I have registered for conferences online and participated, even without a current academic affiliation (industry affiliation is good but not required: check with conference organizers and your employer).
The real key is to find a group of people who will either a) work with you remotely (say by email) or locally (if you are lucky), or b) willing to critique and perhaps mentor you in some arrangement, or c) willing to spend a few minutes of time giving their opinion of what should happen, or d) willing to tolerate occasional communication and friendly interaction, on a fairly infrequent basis.
MathOverflow is a good way to start at d) and work your way up the chain. Answer a few questions, post some good (and I mean GOOD) questions, and you will more quickly find online presence to develop a relationship which may be useful in real life. You can show your technical chops, sometimes get the fast track on research, and get a lot out of it, even some socializing. However, follow the FAQ: MathOverflow is not for discussion, ill-formed questions, or solving homework, and they are not prone to giving hints to graduate exercises, especially if it smells like asking them to do the work for you. There are also some reasons to prefer math.SE over MathOverflow for submitting questions, but I think doing well at the latter will be more beneficial for you. My impression (but I could be wrong) is that your question above would not go over well at MathOverflow, since it deals more with "sociology of math" than with math itself.
It might be quicker to reach your goals by hanging out near a large Math department with free food, but I would bet cash money that the above is actually quicker. Good luck at MathOverflow. Once you get to b) or a), you will find out other opportunities outside academia to help you with research.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Microsoft Research might match your requirements. They have much going on in the way of academic math yet are outside of academia itself.
They have many groups around the world that might match your requirements, but the Theory group in Redmond, USA seems a good start:
<http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/groups/theory/>
Apply directly at <EMAIL>
From the page:
>
> Description: We work on fundamental problems in mathematics and
> theoretical computer science, interact extensively with the academic
> community and collaborate with other researchers at MSR on challenging
> applied problems. Among our areas of expertise are probability theory,
> combinatorics, statistical physics, metric geometry, fractals,
> algorithms and optimization. We host an amazing array of researchers
> in these areas: see a full list here.
>
>
> Applying for Positions Applications for a Postdoctoral Researcher
> position for 2014 received by December 15, 2013 will receive full
> consideration. Apply here, and in addition, have your application
> material (including references) sent to <EMAIL>. Apply
> here for a summer internship and inform us that you have applied by
> emailing <EMAIL>.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/14 | 732 | 3,209 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently I was handling submission of a paper to a journal. I was somewhat surprised that I was asked to return the corrections to galley proofs in 48 hours.
>
> To ensure fast publication of your paper please return your corrections within 48 hours. ... Note that may proceed with the publication of your article if no response is received.
>
>
>
**How usual is it, that only a short period is left for the authors to return page proofs? Do many journals allow similar time span? Or is a longer period customary?**
I can imagine situations in which I would not be able to respond in 48 hours.
**What would happen if I reacted only later, not within the time period required by publisher (48 hours in this case)?** Is it probable that they would still incorporate the corrections if I emailed a bit later? (Or if I emailed them that I am unable to complete this in 48 hours and explained the reasons.)<issue_comment>username_1: For journal articles 48 hours is not uncommon. I have never experienced less and I have never had considerably longer. If you let most journals know when you can return them, they will generally either allow you to submit them later, but this will often result in the article publication date being pushed back. In some cases the journal cannot comply (e.g., special issues) and then they may attempt to publish without you reviewing the page proofs.
The idea of page proofs is that you are checking to see if any copy edits they made are correct and that the proofs are an accurate representation of what you sent in. It shouldn't take very long to review the proofs (a couple of hours at most).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: With Wiley, the journal I edit has a one-week period for returning proofs. This is set by Wiley and not by the journal. If proofs are not sent in, at some point within another week, the typesetter will typically ask for the proofs through a production editor. This is because the typesetter has the manuscript along with, I would guess, hundreds of other proofs lined up in a production line and at some point they do not want things lying around for very long. So in this case, not much happens if proofs are late and I have never seen any serious repercussions from the publisher's side affecting authors. In the worst case a paper that has been assigned to a specific issue may be moved to a later issue since the production of issues (physical printing) is not possible to adjust other than under exceptional conditions. In the end, it will the author's loss if the paper is not published as early as it could. Since for most papers, electronic publication occurs before printing, the delay just means the paper appears online later by the same amount of time or more; it can be bumped in the production line of the typesetter in favour of those that come in on time.
In my experience, it is not possible to get corrections done after returning the proof corrections. One can always try but if the paper has been corrected and published online, there is no other option than to live with the problem or if it is in some way critical, go through the journal editors to possibly publish an errata.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/06/14 | 1,542 | 6,674 | <issue_start>username_0: I find that when I writing a paper,
I use the same phrases and sometimes the same sentences
in the abstract, introduction, and conclusions.
When I compare this to non-fiction writing
(e.g. <NAME> or <NAME>),
my impression is that they do not repeat themselves
in the prologue and epilogue.
However, I realize that they are writing non-fiction books/articles,
whereas we are writing scientific articles,
for a different audience and a different purpose.
My questions are:
1. Does using the same phrases and sentences
in the abstract, introduction and conclusions
make my paper boring to read?
2. Or is it easier to read and understand a paper if it repeats itself?<issue_comment>username_1: There are many examples of papers where there is repetition in these part. While this is not wrong, it is not something one should adopt as a way of writing. It is important to write each part so that the text is adapted to be included seamlessly in that part.
The discussion should lead up to the conclusion(s) of the paper and from this perspective it is the origin of the content that will be repeated (in context) in the other parts. The conclusion should summarize the main findings of the discussion. Since the point is to provide the important points in a brief way, one should at least try to write it with the summarizing in mind. The abstract should summarize the entire paper and lead up to the main conclusion(s) of the paper. This is most often focussing on a subset of what is summarized in the conclusions.
Copy-pasting sentences from discussion to conclusions and to abstract means you build in sentence structures that may not be optimal for the different parts. I therefore suggest at least trying to rewrite the information for each part so that they become optimized in each case. If a sentence you have already written fits very well, then its use is fine but if you simply try to force sentences in the resulting text might not be as clear as it could be. So, in general, write everything as a new text based on the story you are trying to convey rather than inheriting structure from what you have written already stemming from a different context.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The three things are doing pretty different jobs, and so should be pretty different in content.
The abstract is an *advert for your paper*. Someone might read a list of titles and abstracts (for example on arXiv) and decide on that basis whether it's worth their while downloading and reading the rest of the paper. The abstract has to be attractive, but not fraudulent ('truth in advertising'!). When you read an abstract, you're trying to find out: (i) is this paper in my area?, (ii) is it asking a question I care about? (iii) does the conclusion sound interesting? You don't have to summarise the whole paper, but you do have to answer those questions.
The introduction gives your reader *a map of the paper*. By the end of the introduction, your reader should have a pretty good idea of what they're in for, and where they're going to end up. They should know what sections they're probably going to skip, and which ones they look forward to disagreeing with. A paper is not a detective novel: you don't need cliffhangers or mysteries.
After that, the conclusion doesn't have a lot of work to do (at least in my experience). It might be the last thing the reader reads of your paper (that is, unless they care enough about its contents that they'll re-read it), so this is an opportunity for you to frame their memory of it. "We have shown that ..." is the sort of thing you'd find here.
Key points:
* Remember the reader is a human being, just like you – talk to them, as you'd like to be talked to (far far too many people bizarrely forget this).
* Make it easy for them to read the paper, and easy to agree with you (that's why the introduction has a map of the paper, to ease the reader's way through your golden prose).
* Your reader is asking themself "why am I reading this paper?" Make sure they have a good answer to that question by the end of the introduction. If you get a colleague to read your draft, get them to answer that question at that point. If they don't give the answer you want them to, it's *your* fault; so edit.
There will probably be some overlap in text in the three parts. That's OK, but it probably shouldn't be cut-and-paste.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I'm not bothered by the repetition of sentences if they are isolated sentences, that serve as a link. However it is inelegant, you can always put a cross reference and reword what you say in some other place, for several reasons:
* Style in writing, you should show some knowledge about the language and the capability of paraphrasing.
* Fit better the contents to the context where they are.
* Writing the same thing in several different ways helps people to understand what is written there. English, as most (probably all) other languages has an inherent level of ambiguity, some sentences can have several meanings. If you rewrite some sentence with some different words by doing so you can make clear that the meaning of both sentences is in the intersection of the potential meanings of both sentences.
I find the third reason is the most important and other answers were missing this aspect, so I had to drop another...
Having said this, the repetition of a paragraph is unacceptable for me. If there is some paragraph in some part of the paper and you want to refer to this same piece of information you should summarize the contents of the paragraph in a sentence (sometimes in a term, e.g. when the paragraph is a definition).
This answer isn't very constructive and I feel obliged to provide constructive answers so...
Take the abstract as a reference. It will summarize the paper, as the introduction does and also the conclusions.
1. In the abstract you provide the shortest summary and describe what have you done.
2. In the introduction you extend that summary and describe the context of your work (some people include the motivation). It is different from the abstract because you don't say what you have done, but why it was missing, why you have done it and where in the paper you explain into more detail these aspects.
3. In the conclusions you evaluate what you have done, how it serves to fill the gap that you identified in the introduction and the gaps that remain (future work).
All these are similar but not equal.
BTW: related question: <https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/181080/automate-the-description-of-the-paper> I should get back to that...
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/14 | 702 | 3,017 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm interested in pursuing a PhD in a particular humanities field and I feel that my undergraduate GPA is strong enough for me to get into such a program at a top school. However, my path to deciding this has been somewhat circuitous. Along the way, I completed a master's degree in a completely unrelated subject which I became uninterested in and disillusioned by while I was in the program. I decided to complete it anyway and as a result of my lack of passion for the field, I didn't perform very well in my master's program and just did the minimum to complete my degree.
Now when I look at PhD applications, I see that every school's admission page says you must submit transcripts from *all university level courses taken* even though only a bachelor's degree is required for admission. My question is, if by omitting transcripts from my master's program, would I be violating most admission policies and/or risk having a misleading or unethical application?<issue_comment>username_1: *"All university level courses taken"* means *"all university level courses taken"*, so yes, you should submit it too. Otherwise, if at any point they discover that you had been enrolled in that masters, you could be in trouble for lying.
Even if they don't require you to submit it, you will have to explain what were you doing during that time. And a bad master's is far better than sitting at home doing noting.
Now, you don't want it to hurt your application, so you should consider explaining in your cover letter why you did poorly. That shouldn't be too difficult, I think a good bachelor and a bad master is still better than just a good bachelor.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If the requirements say
>
> You must submit transcripts from all university level courses taken
>
>
>
Then yes, you must submit transcripts from your unrelated master's. To do otherwise would be a violation of the policy, which clearly states you must submit all university-level transcripts.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In fact completing a Masters degree is a positive aspect in your application, regardless of not being in the same (or similar) field of studies.
Since the topic of why you believe yourself to be a suitable candidate for the Ph.D. program will be part of your application at some point in the process, you should present the experience as a positive one, where you both demonstrated your ability to do graduate level work successfully, and that it lead (wholly or in part) to your realization that you were not as interested in that subject as you expected to be.
This should be followed up with some justification why you expect to remain focused and interested in the longer and more detailed Ph.D. program, but I view that as an essential requite to anyone's success in a graduate program
anyhow, so you will need to figure how to make a strong and convincing argument. For own state of mind, as well as your admissions application.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/14 | 1,380 | 4,589 | <issue_start>username_0: I have paid $1000 for PhD in mathematics. And I have sent them my book to be considered as a PhD thesis.
Now I suspect that I have lost the money.
But as far as I know they are not accredited by the U.S. Department of Education.
So, is it possible that I will find a job requiring a degree, using this (fake?) PhD?
Now they have told me that the U.S. Department of Education will send my diploma to US foreign affairs department and then they will make some "stumps" on my diploma. Do these stamps mean anything? Are these stamps just a formal thing which mean nothing and don't make my degree "official" ("real")? Moreover, to send my diploma to the departments costs additional $1000-$1750 (dependent on whether I pay right now or later).<issue_comment>username_1: **You have lost the money whether or not the "university" gives you the degree.**
You have given your money to what is known as a *diploma mill.* A long time ago (nearly two decades!), I received an email offering degrees from "prestigious, non-accredited universities" based on life experience. This is a complete and total scam. *Even if* you have a diploma, it will be useless for professional purposes. Anybody responsible for hiring a PhD will see that there is no work resulting from your "graduate career," which will be a tipoff that the degree is worthless, and you will be unlikely to receive a job offer. Worse still, even if you were to get an offer, it could be rescinded when the truth is uncovered.
Disengage now, before you lose any further money on this situation.
*Addendum*: I should also mention that I am unaware of the US Department of Education doing *any* certification of diplomas and certificates on an *individual* basis.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_2: In case there was any doubt, I have asked them. This is the conversation I had with them (some irrelevant parts omitted):
>
> **Albert:** Hello, I have written a book on Mathematics that I would like to turn into a PhD thesis
>
> **Albert:** what do I have to do?
>
> **Their Guy:** What is your highest level of education?
>
> **Albert:** I have a Masters degree in mathematics
>
> **Their Guy:** Ph.D degree will cost you $1100.00 (USD)
>
> **Their Guy:**
>
> • 1 Original Accredited Degree
>
> • 2 Original Transcripts
>
> • 1 Award of Excellence
>
> • 1 Certificate of Distinction
>
> • 1 Certificate of Membership
>
> • 4 Education Verification Letters
>
> **Albert:** how long will it take to complete it?
>
> **Albert:** I already have the thesis, it is a 300 pages book
>
> **Their Guy:** When are you planning to enroll?
>
> **Albert:** as soon as possible
>
> **Albert:** once the payment and the thesis are sent, how long will it take to have it accepted?
>
> **Senior Guy:** Alright you have been transferred to senior student counselor
>
> **Senior Guy:** Shipment Details :-
>
> **Senior Guy:** 2 set of documents we are going to send you in total in 2 separate shipments.
>
> -First set of degree documents will be sent in just 15 - 20 working days with all 10 degree documents without attestations.
>
> -Second set of documents will be sent in only 25 - 30 working days with complete and comprehensive attestations with all above mentioned authorities.
>
> **Senior Guy:** Total Fee Submission including all registrations would be $1700.00 USD ( $1100 + $600 )
>
> **Albert:** how long will it take you to review my thesis?
>
> **Senior Guy:** Well it will take us 24 Hours
>
> **Senior Guy:** Forward your resume & thesis on <EMAIL>
>
> **Albert:** thank you, you have been most enlightening
>
>
>
So, they are reviewing 300 pages in 24 h (where it should take like a year). They do no checking whatsoever on what I would be submitting.
I am sorry, but you have lost the money.
***Edit:***
I have found something funny. [The faculty](http://www.granttownuniversity.com/about/visiting-faculty/) (only visiting faculty seems visible for our university) is the same as, including pictures and order, in [another online university](http://www.hilluniversity.com/our-faculty/) and [another one](http://www.riverbanksuniversity.com/our-faculty/) and [another](http://www.wacuniversity.com/our-faculty/) and [yet another one](http://www.pittsforduniversity.com/our-faculty/), [¡and](http://headwayuniversity.com/our-faculty/) even [more!](http://www.olwauniversity.com/our-faculty/) (and at least, 5 more, but you get the point); all of them looking equally suspicious.
Upvotes: 6 |
2014/06/14 | 797 | 3,252 | <issue_start>username_0: My friend recently graduated with a bachelor degree in biology. He is thinking that he can help more people by studying a biomedical engineering Ph.D., rather than becoming a medical doctor. He is wondering, however, about the differences between these two paths from a career perspective. What the advantages and disadvantages of an academic career vs. a medical career?<issue_comment>username_1: One thing that comes to mind: for doctors, the move abroad is far more difficult than for the researchers in biomed, because the job market in healthcare is usually heavily protected against international workforce by licensing barriers, see e.g. <http://immigrationimpact.com/2013/12/17/licensing-barriers-leave-immigrant-doctors-driving-cabs-instead-of-practicing-medicine/> for the US.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: For medicine: "A doctor is a medical professional who examines the sick and tries to find a way to help them" [[1]](http://www.ehow.com/about_5139119_roles-doctors-nurses.html).
For biomedical engineering: "This field seeks to close the gap between engineering and medicine: It combines the design and problem solving skills of engineering with medical and biological sciences to advance healthcare treatment" [[2]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomedical_engineering).
So if your friend want to help patients intimately he should be a doctor but if he wants to help the doctors and advance healthcare and thus indirectly helping the patients he should be a biomedical engineer.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: As a person who faced a similar dilemma a few years ago, I think there are major practical differences:
1. The working environment. Every doctor will spend his early career in a hospital, whether he plans on practising in the community later or not. A hospital environment is really different than the research one. In the former you are constantly on your feet, working long hours, nights, etc. However, you are constantly working with the people to whom you're helping. In a "lucky" week (depends on the POV), you might save a life every day.
2. Taking work home. While a M.D works long and hard hours at his/er practice, when she goes home - she can rest. Her patients doesn't follow her home. As a researcher I can tell you that I'm even dreaming on my research.
3. Independence. The medical environment is a very hierarchical one. Starting out as a M.D, you can't even sign off your own orders (in first world countries, at least :) ), contrary to a graduate student who might be given an independent project very early in his or her study course.
4. Goals. As a researcher, you end up working for the sake of science. You might find yourself pursuing a direction which might take decades before it translates into helping people. As a practitioner - you're working for the people in front of you.
5. Demand for your skills. In general - there are hardly any M.Ds who go unemployed. Most healthcare systems are understaffed and there is always a demand for M.Ds. I wish we could say the same about positions in the academy, and the industry is never as stable (and here it's field specific and I can't say much about the specific field in question).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/15 | 1,085 | 4,572 | <issue_start>username_0: Almost every theoretical physicist (string theorists) that I meet tells me that it makes no sense to try do a PhD. in these subjects since there are simply no jobs available and things are only going to get worse for those seeking faculty jobs 8-10 years from now.<issue_comment>username_1: Your question assumes that the only possible job destination for theoretical and mathematical physics is in faculty positions. This is not the case. There are many additional fields (finance, consulting, computer gaming, medical imaging, and so on) where the demand for PhD's with training in mathematical analysis is growing.
Now if your goal is a faculty position, that may be a different matter. But clearly the overall demand is still great enough that people continue to get doctorates in the discipline, which suggests that people are still finding employment.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think username_1 made an important point, also when you didn't ask for jobs outside of faculty. I also started to study myself physics because of astro-/particle physics as many physicists do and did. But before choosing my master thesis, the question came up, how are the job perspectives in this field or other subfields of physics. Many students don't seem to think about this important question. I saw many of my old fellow students pursuing simply the field of their love and/or even doing a PhD in it, also the topic, or, even worse, the methods they learn are barely related to other fields in and outside of physics. Normally you don't have huge problems in finding a job nowadays with a PhD in physics, if your only criterion is finding a job at all.
Getting a faculty position or even professorship at a good university in Europe or US is an odyssey in this field of physics. You compete with very smart, very ambitious graduates from all over the world. If you are not very good, plan to have family life before 35, time for hobbies... I would not start a PhD in this field. Do a master thesis (in Germany you have to) in this field to see how good you are and what experts in this field think of your abilities. But after this really think about what you want to achieve/do the next 10 years in your life. If you want to work in physics research in any case, choose your PhD field and topic wisely. Average physics professor in Germany has around 20-40 PhD graduates during his professorship, so chances are 1:30 you achieve the same. I agree with <NAME> comment that most students pursuing a PhD and scientific career probably don't know this, but it's not so hard to find out. In US system, where many start PhD after bachelor degree, this is really a tricky decision so early in your scientific career.
Additionally, this is probably your actual question, the number of faculty jobs in this field is likely to decrease the next decades. [Take this link](http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=4605&cpage=1) as a start for google keywords.
Some of my friends did their PhD in astrophysics. Most now have well paid jobs in consulting and programming. Their knowledge of physics (higher math, programming languages, analytic thinking) helps them a lot to make career in their fields outside of physics research. For some it is great, some regret that they have only their spare time to read research articles still and cure their curiosity about nature, universe... You have to be honest, you cannot keep up to date in most physics research fields this way. This was the most important point for me to consider. I want to work my whole life in physics research and was sure I don't want to spend the time to try it and would never get a faculty position in astrophysics, so I did choose some other path. Fortunately there are so many interesting subfields in physics where one will have good options for scientific career and/or physics R&D later in industry that I don't regret my decision much.
This answer probably doesn't help you a lot, even if you have the will and abilities to pursue this odyssey, you need a lot of luck. But I know so many students that were talked into doing PhD in such risky and niche fields dreaming of a scientific career when the real chances are below 1:30 that I want to stress that this is a important, tricky, risky and life decision and that YOU should thoroughly think about it. Look at the CV's of some scholars with faculty position in this field and read the link above. Without a good plan B you stand behind I would not start or get talked into such an odyssey.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/15 | 3,358 | 14,379 | <issue_start>username_0: I teach a course consisting of about 50 assignments. These include readings, many short writing assignments, and group projects. Additionally, students complete 2 large projects as the mid-term and final, entirely covering all of the material.
I noticed many students skipped lots of homework. Some skipped 6 weeks of work completely. I assumed the workload was too high, but I surveyed those who did the work and nobody reported spending more than 2-3 hours per week. Some students had determined that each assignment had such a low value, they did not bother to complete the work. These students all did very poorly on the final.
My supervisor will not be happy to find that I am failing 25% of the students. For future terms, how can I motivate students to complete everything?<issue_comment>username_1: Make them worth more! You can do this by shifting more points onto them, or, maybe, by having less than 50 of them for what is presumably a 14 or 15 week semester.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Whether it's appropriate or inappropriate to fail 25% of your students depends on context. If this is a community college algebra course, then a 75% pass rate is insanely high, and would probably indicate that your standards are not high enough.
In general, it's not your job to motivate your students, nor is it your job to convince them to take a less immature attitude toward their own education. The fact that you assigned the homework put them on notice that you considered it necessary for them to do it in order to learn the material.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I typically make homework 40% of the course grade and divide the remaining points among midterm, final, and class participation. Then, on the first day, I tell students that they cannot pass the course without doing at least most of the homework.
I do not assign grades to reading assignments; instead, I make an assignment that can be assessed, but that cannot readily be completed without having done the assigned reading.
In a 16-week semester, I might have ten graded assignments, but each one will have multiple parts, so the students *do* perhaps 50 things, but they perceive that they have ten assignments, each worth perhaps four course points. I also require students to attempt every part of an assignment in order to receive any credit. In other words, half-done means not graded.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Sure, it is for their own good to do it. But frankly, college students are too immature to realize it, and even the ones who do realize it have to fight with very strong procrastination motivators. You can't expect them to deliver this kind of stuff based on internal motivation only, they don't have it.
If it is your goal to get them to pass, you have to give them external motivation here. The usual method is to make homework obligatory.
The idea behind it is simple. Anybody who gets less than 80% of the possible points on homework assignments is not allowed to take the final. If you want to be mild, or the homework is very tough, set a lower target in percent. If you want to include very interesting but very hard problems in the homework, mark them as "optional" and don't make them count towards the required points.
This also has the advantage (from a grader's perspective) that students who cannot muster the dilligence to achieve 80% correctness when working in a relaxed environment with little time pressure and with the help of their friends, their textbooks and the Internet, will not be present at the real written exam where they are only going to waste your time. But it also makes them learn for the homework, spaced over the semester, so the students who have the intelligence to beat the exam but procrastinate until the last two days to learn without deadlines are actually learning well and get their grade based on solid knowledge, instead of passing on bulimia learning or plainly failing.
You can alternatively declare a number of homework sheets which needs to be turned in. E.g. if there are 12 homework assignments for the semester, you can say that they need to turn in at least 10 to be allowed to take the exam. But this is more problematic - what do you do with students who turn in an empty sheet? The percentage system works, I have seen it employed by many departments at two different universities. I have been exposed to it on both sides, as a student and as a teaching assistant/grader. It is well accepted by students and staff alike, it is perceived as fair, and it works.
You will probably have some problems championing it, both from students and faculty, but once you get it established, everybody benefits.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The best way to motivate students in this regard is to create some form of competition.
Post the grades of the top 5 or 10 students after each assignment. If they choose, you don't have to publish their names but only their numbers.
Update the statistics after each assignment deadline and offer bonus points for finishing in certain positions (e.g. 1st places gets a bonus 10 points etc).
The atmosphere in the class will change quickly.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Taking
>
> Some students had determined that each assignment had such a low value, they did not bother to complete the work.
>
>
>
serious, it's tempting to suggest that you assign exactly the same work for exactly the same fraction of the course credit, but packaged into a smaller number of assignments so that each assignment looks more important to them.
But there are two issues:
* Frequent feedback is often alleged to be good for student learning, and your many small assignments support that while fewer large assignments do not.
* I'm also with the others: students who can't figure out that they have to do a large fraction of these assignments to pass are unlikely to be very successful *no matter* what you do for them.
So, perhaps you should just check progress at some early point in the course and lets the slackers know that they are on the road to poor grades if they don't shape up.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: >
> Some students had determined that each assignment had such a low
> value, they did not bother to complete the work. These students all
> did very poorly on the final.
>
>
>
One important way to combat this attitude is to show the actual statistics from the course you just completed.
"Here is the distribution of homework completion across last semester's course. And here is the distribution of final course grades. Notice that every student who completed less than XXX% of the homework failed the course."
Repeat this exercise after every midterm, showing similar statistics for the *current* class. "See, here is the distribution of homework completion so far, and here is the distribution of midterm grades. Notice that every student who completed less than XXX% of the homework failed the midterm, which is completely consistent with last semester."
In other words: "I am not bluffing."
If you want to be even more direct, you can announce in your syllabus that anyone not completing XXX% of the homework *automatically* fails the course, regardless of their performance on the final exam. Be sure to read this sentence out loud in class on the first day.
Of course, you also need some carrots to go with the stick. The homework should not only be *useful*, but also interesting. The students should have access to any resources they need to master the homework material, including rapid and useful feedback. The homework should be realistically tuned to the skill and maturity levels of the students, and you should carefully discuss your expectations with instructors of any prerequisite courses.
>
> My supervisor will not be happy to find that I am failing 25% of the students.
>
>
>
I assume you mentioned the abysmal homework completion rate to your supervisor as soon as you noticed it, which was relatively early in the semester. Right? So how did your supervisor respond?
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: First of all, I'm disappointed that you used the word "fail," which is a reflexive verb, rather than "flunk," which is the correct word to use.
You didn't state what level (college, elementary, etc) you're teaching. For very young kids, I would simply send notes home saying something like "Your child didn't complete last nite/week's assignment. Please make sure he completes it by XX date." For high school and above, my view is that they can dang well sink or swim on their own. If they don't understand that the point of each assignment is to learn something (not to get a grade on it), then they're lost to the world. It shouldn't be your job to babysit them.
If you have concerns about your supervisor's opinion of your teaching methods, the appropriate thing to do is talk with him a month or so into the term, not after the finals.
And finally, a personal viewpoint, but bolstered with a lot of reports from teachers and observations from other parents: groups projects are crap. They've always been crap, and always will be crap. They invariably end up with a few strong players whose efforts are not properly rewarded because the overall project's quality suffers from the slackers or incompetents in the group. School is not military training camp (where it *might* be justifiable to grade the group on getting everyone safely thru the course).
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_9: I tell the students that two exam questions will come from the homework: one exactly as it was on the homework, and one with only small changes. Doing all the homework is like getting one question on the midterm/final for free.
In class, I mention that usually the one that ends up on the exam with no changes is whichever one the fewest people turned in. Not always, but usually.
Added bonus: it seems to cut down on cheating, probably because if all you do is copy someone else's program, then you don't remember it well enough to reproduce it on the exam.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: I'm not an educator, but I have some experience on the matter of a course not engaging students enough to motivate them (I was one of those students).
I know I shouldn't place all the blame on the course material nor the instructor, but I cannot help but feel that if I failed sooner, I wouldn't have had to "suffer" as long as I did, hanging on to a diminishing sense of hope.
In my highschool, assignments were mandatory, you'd get punishment for not handing homework on time in addition to 0 marks, for disrespecting your teacher. However, the "freedom" I experienced immediately after entering university was too much for me to handle, and not handing in assignments was merely the first thing "to do" on my list of rebelliousness.
Different people handle situations differently, so I don't think having a blanket set of rules is good enough to handle all situations. I believe that each student should be treated according to their needs, but obviously that's a huge amount of resource needed, and is definitely not feasible... So I think there should at least be some sort of way to help groups of students with similar struggles, e.g. bored of class because they know it already, not knowing how to prioritise their work and ending up not finishing anything...etc.
Lastly regarding OP's question, my best advice right now is for the instructor to set aside some time to talk to their student's 1-to-1, at least once in a semester, before or after midterms (I'd say before is better, so they become more motivated for midterms). Student's who want to learn, will learn, but sometimes they just want to know that someone cares... a short chat (10min?) will let them feel that you care (whether you do or not... is another matter lol) And if that person didn't need a "pep talk", you can use it to learn from your students; yes, teachers should learn from their students as well, sometimes they have the brilliant ideas you could use.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_11: First, I think it's important to note a difference between external motivation (carrot + stick) and intrinsic motivation (pride in the work + knowledge that it will help). External motivation can increase completion rates in your class, but has been shown to decrease intrinsic motivation so it may have negative aftereffects. Thus, I would try to avoid solutions such as competitions (which have also been shown to actually have a negative effect for girls)
I'm a strong advocate of fostering pride in the work itself. This can be done with 1 on 1 chats as mentioned by Populous, and if there is time, then I would recommend that in addition to the below advice.
As mentioned in dmckee's answer. Frequency of feedback can be an important factor in education, including motivation. When assignments are returned with comments and in a timely manner the students feel that the instructor or grader cares about their work. This support can foster intrinsic motivation. Conversely, when assignments are returned with no comments, returned late, or never returned at all, students can be strongly demotivated.
I know this both from personal teaching (and student) experience and literature on intrinsic motivation.
Also I'd like to make a few comments on jeffE's answer but don't have the reputation:
Statistics may be motivating for the students that understand them in some situations. However, often the simple statistics won't show what you'd like; the highest scoring students may have low homework completion rates because they already know the material and find the homework boring. I know, I personally didn't do a single homework assignment in Geometry, Algebra II, or Pre-Calc, but was the school winner for most of the math competitions in my High School. This is especially true in classes that aren't tracked where there can be a very large variation of abilities. Looking at the test grades vs. homework completion of an inner city public school Algebra 1 class shows a negative correlation. Trying to explain the confounding variables to a class that's not proficient in statistics is a futile exercise, and if they've made it to the point where they are proficient in statistics then odds are they've already learned to be self motivated.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/15 | 2,754 | 11,517 | <issue_start>username_0: One day, I spoke with one of my professors about if it were possible for a blind person to obtain a professorship in my university. This was motivated by thinking on the Russian and blind mathematician [<NAME>](http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev_Semenovich_Pontryagin) who made important work in topological groups and control theory.
So my question, which is hypothetical, is the following one: Suppose that we have a blind person such that is a very "good" researcher in his/her field in the sense that he/she has "good" articles in his/her field, which problems would this person have in applying for a professorship in a University due to his condition?
Ii is important to address the problem that this person would probably need an assistant for continuing doing his/her research and for giving lectures at some extent. So, will this be something that would could count negatively?<issue_comment>username_1: [Here](http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB8QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ams.org%2Fnotices%2F200210%2Fcomm-morin.pdf&ei=faGdU__oG42nyASaroBw&usg=AFQjCNF8Qd3lofgUJCkY14U8KJLeXAYb5w&sig2=H-u8lqD5yyCrG0OEwnaBSA&bvm=bv.68911936,d.aWw&cad=rja) is a very interesting 2002 article on blind mathematicians from the Notices of the American Mathematical Society. Some quick highlights:
1) Although <NAME> is the best known blind mathematician -- and was a wonderful mathematician; "who made important work in topological groups and control theory" is quite true but may be an under-sell -- there have been others. If we count mathematicians who were blind for a substantial portion of their professional career then even Pontrjagin gets outclassed: there is, after all, [Leonhard Euler](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonhard_Euler). And there are more contemporary examples, such as [<NAME>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Morin) and [<NAME>](http://spot.colorado.edu/~baggett/). Both of the latter are still living but retired (on the other hand, the article is 12 years old). It would be interesting to have even more contemporary examples.
2) Being a blind mathematician is rare but not singular. In fact there are enough to notice that blind mathematicians tend to specialize in geometry and topology. This is very surprising, as these fields are thought of as requiring visualization skills beyond the norm (I for instance have felt a little locked out of certain parts of geometry and topology because of my limited skills in this area....though my vision is fine). The article really shines in the way it addresses this point: the insight it offers goes far beyond, um, sight. At the same time there are blind mathematicians in other fields: e.g. Baggett is an analyst.
3) Blind mathematicians must in many ways work harder than sighted mathematicians. But of course mathematics is hard for everyone, and much of being a successful mathematician is embracing the struggle and continually pushing yourself out of your comfort zone and beyond your current range. This is a key point of [Terry Tao's career advice](http://terrytao.wordpress.com/career-advice/continually-aim-just-beyond-your-current-range/). For that matter, I am suddenly struck by <NAME>'s famous description of mathematical research as exploring the rooms of a dark house one by one: you spend almost all of your time in the darkness; when you find the light switch you flip it and go on to the next room. (I don't mean to trivialize the challenges of *literally* living in the dark, just to indicate that the experience of dealing with and gradually surmounting challenges that to a static observer seem totally insurmountable is a somewhat familiar one.) Reading this article made me wonder about the OP's assertion "this person would probably need an assistant for continuing doing his/her research and for giving lectures at some extent." Some might need or want a formal assistant, but some might not and might be self-reliant and of course reliant on the informal assistance of colleagues, friends and family...as we all are. The mathematicians featured in the article are much more independent than one might have assumed possible.
The question was not specifically about blind *mathematicians*, but that was the example given, and I am a mathematician, so I ran with that. Off the top of my head I would suspect that blindness would be less of an issue in mathematics than most other academic fields...but as a sighted mathematician, how the heck could I possibly know that?!? I would be very interested to hear about blind academics in other fields and what challenges they face.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Specifically addressing *professorship*, as opposed to researcher, the most immediate question that comes to my mind would be one of teaching techniques. Much college education takes advantage of blackboards or other visuals to present the formulas and techniques that students will have to learn, to supplement the lecturer's voice. That could be a challenge for a blind instructor. You should probably be prepared to explain and/or demonstrate to the school how you will address this, perhaps with citation of other instructors who have used the same solution.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: A professor's principal job is conducting research. Depending on field, blindness may or may not be much of a problem at all. [<NAME>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheena_Iyengar) is an endowed full professor at Columbia Business School and is blind. Her research is fascinating and she seems to be doing pretty well for herself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The American higher education institutions I am familiar with have put a great deal of emphasis on improving diversity. So I would expect a successful blind researcher to do well on the faculty job market.
Otherwise healthy blind adults do not need assistants. Many sighted faculty do need assistants.
Presumably a successful blind researcher has already overcome significant barriers to access; as a faculty member I think the main barriers they would experience are a few faculty who are ignorant about disability.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I may add personal experience with a blind mathematican I've seen in an invited talk some time ago. He was giving two lectures about the same topic and I could only attend the second one. He worked on the blackboard an turned towards the audience to speak. He needed help in the beginning to get familiar with the size of the blackboard and also had help to clean the blackboard (he was already a senior mathematician but turned blind gradually in the last years). He started his lecture with a crystal clear recap of the previous one, without writing on the board. Then he started the new lecture and as usual, he wrote full theorems and formula at the board. I was shocked. What he wrote was totally unreadable. In most cases one could only read the first few letters of each word while the rest was just a wiggly line. Also he did not have a good orientation on the board. It happend frequently then he wrote directly over his own writing - sometimes three or four times over the same line. The blackboard was a hell of a mess. However, I usually listen more than I read in lectures and my notes reflect more what I hear than what is written on the board. Hence, I started to use the blackboard only for crude reference for what he referred to when he pointed to places where he suspected the formulas he needed, but took notes on the basis of what I heared. It turned out the be one of the best guest lectures I heared - ever. Even the mess on the blackboard was helpful. It gave the lecture some spatial structure although I could barely read the letters. I still knew what he had said at the respective points and could follow the lecture without problems although it was only loosely related to my own area.
Finally, I have been told that he still give lectures to students at his home university and the students are happy.
That story probably illustrates that at least lecturing should not be a great problem without eyesight.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: There are really two questions here:
1. What problems would a blind mathematician have in doing their research?
2. What problems would a blind professor have in handling their teaching/service responsibilities?
I think the first question has been answered fairly well by others. Since I'm not a mathematician but I am a (sighted) scholar in Disability Studies, let me address the second.
Academia is on the whole much more accessible to blind people than private industry. Most internal department administrative business is conducted over e-mail or in face to face meetings. For the most part, you're mostly doing your own research or teaching. There's little printed media that isn't renderable into an accessible format. For example, I have all of my students submit papers online, so I rarely deal with paper anymore.
However, there are very few scholars with disabilities and there is still prejudice in the academe. It will be key to establish a good track record of publications and some experience teaching so that you can put these fears and prejudices to rest.
Try to network with other scholars with disabilities whenever possible. There's strength in numbers.
Just as a total aside. One of my colleagues wanted to bring in a Deaf scholar to give a talk, but the scholar would give her talk using American Sign Language. While the university will provide enrolled Deaf *STUDENTS* with interpreters, there was no provision for providing external *SCHOLARS* with interpreters. We had to bring this up to the provost level in order to accomplish anything. But this is an example of the differential treatment of students with disabilities vs. scholars with disabilities that you might face in the future.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: It is impractical to pose this as a hypothetical question to people who are sighted and who do not understand how a person who is blind does his/her job. If the person is already established as a successful researcher, it should be understood that the person has demonstrated ability with or without assistance to do what is needed to serve in this capacity. The only question left to answer is whether the person actually does need an assistant. This will depend on the individual--some people do and some do not, depending on the skills and technology that each individual person uses--and whether the particular university is willing and/or able to provide an assistant. Many universities provide assistants whether a person is sighted or blind. If a professor who is blind asks their assistant to help with specific tasks related to use of sight, that is an individual matter. A different professor might have the assistant do something else that is equally useful to him/her.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_8: You would be surprised by modern technology and methods that a professor already as at her or his hands. Computers can read research papers to the person, they can help navigate the user interface through audio commands and feedback, etc.
The biggest issue I can think of today would be; getting acquainted with the campus at first, so one could navigate on their own. Besides that, I think issues of research would be very field based.
One modern day example (not in mathematics) is <NAME>'Modhrain.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/15 | 2,476 | 10,430 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a friend who is applying for teaching positions in biochemistry with no teaching experience. She has a strong research background, with several publications as a grad student and post doc, but is interested in transitioning into teaching (partially to gain employment and solve a two body problem, but also out of genuine interest). The position she is applying for asks for a "Statement of teaching interest". While, I think I can give good advice for someone who has taught before, what should someone write about if they have never taught or TAed a class. She does have some background tutoring and showing faculty, grad students, and undergrads how to use various machines in the lab. But that is about it. So
(1) What is a "statement of teaching interest?" How does it differ from a "teaching philosophy" or a "teaching statement"?
and
(2) How does one write this statement without any classroom teaching experience?<issue_comment>username_1: Answering 2 (though perhaps this is more relevant for a *teaching philosophy* statement): there are a number of resources you could use, but the key challenge is writing something that feels right for you. I would do the following:
1) Write your own version of a teaching statement. What do you feel about teaching? How would you approach it? What does it mean to you? What teaching experiences (as a student, for instance) have really influenced you?
2) Find out what other teaching statements say. You can readily find teaching statements by googling. Lots of people looking for jobs have theirs online. Highlight phrases that appeal to you. (Avoid copying at all cost.)
3) Look what the professionals say about teaching. For example, a book like *Teaching for Quality Learning at University* by <NAME> and <NAME> gives one very modern view on how it should be done. The approach differed significantly from how my lecturers approached teaching.
Perhaps even consult latest research. I always get surprised and get ideas when I read the teaching research literature.
4) Revisit the teaching statement you wrote in 1).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: About your first question, I don't really know if there is a difference, or if those are just different terms referring to the same document.
In context of a training program done at my university, one of our assignments was to write a personal teaching statement. We had several inputs to help us in doing this task, and one I found particularly useful was the following list of questions (credit to the Staff Development Unit of Newcastle University):
>
> 1. What Higher Education is for: what are students supposed to learn or how are they supposed to develop whilst studying?
> 2. How do you think students learn in your discipline, or in aspects of it? (You may of course be part of an inter-disciplinary area)
> 3. So, based on (1.) and (2.) what teaching methods do you use that reflect this position (with examples)?
> 4. What has informed your thinking here (experience, literature, colleagues, students)?
>
>
>
You can note that 1, 2 and 4 do not require strictly speaking to have teaching experience (although it's clearly helpful). For the point 3, you can replace the "*do you use*" by "*could you use*", and that should work.
Two aspects of this assignment that were really important for us were to use pedagogy literature (as username_1 pointed out) and to be reflective. Of course, such an assignment is not necessarily evaluated as would be a teaching statement by a recruiting committee, but I think the point was that, as a young academic, you cannot really be expected to be an expert in teaching. But you are expected to learn how to become one, and to reflect on your past experiences, interactions, discussions, etc, in order to improve your practice.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> (1) What is a "statement of teaching interest?" How does it differ from a "teaching philosophy" or a "teaching statement"?
>
>
>
I would guess that all three quoted phrases mean the same thing. The "teaching statement" is not as formalized a genre as the sonnet: there is a range of reasonable responses, and to my ear all three things are asking for the same range.
Of course, if one is especially interested in a specific teaching position it would be better not to guess but to inquire what they mean. I don't see any reason to be shy about that: just ask politely.
>
> (2) How does one write this statement without any classroom teaching experience?
>
>
>
Others have given some advice on this. It is certainly possible to literally *write a teaching statement* without any teaching experience -- one talks about one's teaching philosophy, teaching goals, and so forth, while not mentioning the experiences that one hasn't had. It's not like they're asking for the secret masonic handshake: anyone who has gotten a PhD has certainly experienced enough teaching to be able to write about it intelligibly (let me assume that someone who has gotten a PhD has learned to write intelligibly on academic matters!).
However, isn't there another key question here? Namely:
>
> (3) What are the chances that someone who has *absolutely no teaching or TAing experience whatsoever* will be seriously considered for a faculty position with emphasis on teaching?
>
>
>
I can answer this question from the perspective of a math department at a research university: it is very likely that I would not seriously consider any such candidate. Let me explain. "Even" at a research university, teaching is a big part of the job -- roughly half, according to university directives -- and someone who is a truly unsatisfactory teacher is going to be an eternal liability and problem. Well, you say, what if they are a truly outstanding researcher -- can't they learn to teach? It doesn't really work for me. If by "truly outstanding researcher" you mean that they've proven the Weil Conjectures, then they deserve to be at a truly top place which can afford to have faculty who literally never teach, or who only teach graduate seminars to their own brilliant students. Any candidate like that is not going to come to my public research university, and if anything still less is she going to go to a teaching college. If someone is simply a strong enough researcher that I would otherwise be very pleased to hire her, then her complete lack of teaching experience creates an insurmountable fairness issue when one compares her to other candidates with similar or moderately worse research profiles but who have devoted a substantial amount of time and energy over the years to teaching. Even serious research mathematicians work hard to be competent teachers: it takes time and energy. Sometimes people have less than stellar teaching, and it really can ding them a bit even at a "serious research university". Someone with *no teaching* has to get a zero averaged in to her total grade, so to speak.
I explained how it goes for mathematics at a research university. The OP's candidate is changed twice: from mathematics to biochemistry, and from a research university to a teaching college. From what I've heard on this site, teaching experience is valued significantly less in the non-mathematical sciences than in mathematics. On the other hand, I happen to know that teaching experience and credentials are valued way more highly in teaching colleges than at research universities: though I think of myself as a "serious teaching guy", when I visit a colleague at such a place I feel like I am hiding in a foxhole doing math all day compared to them. Moreover smaller places are smaller, so the "ethos of the college" is something which is more strongly felt by all, whereas being a scientist at a research university is almost a different job from being a humanities professor at a research university. My best guess: **there is little chance that someone without any teaching experience will get any real consideration at a reputable teaching college**.
So I would say to the OP: if your friend wants this job, it's not about how to write the teaching statement, it's about how she can acquire some actual teaching experience. One semester of good evaluations in any reputable post high school academic institution would make a world of difference. If she's not willing to acquire that, is she *really* that serious about a teaching career? Compared to the other candidates, I mean?
Two final points:
I. I do not want to leave the impression that one should write a "teaching statement" that hides the fact that someone has no teaching experience. Although this should come out elsewhere in the application -- e.g. on the CV -- in my view it would be dishonest not to at least remark on this in the statement itself.
II. Others have counseled that a teaching statement should "[l]ook at what the professionals say about teaching" and "use pedagogy literature". This is good advice, but it can be misapplied. Namely, you need to have real understanding and ideally mastery of anything you talk about in these job applications. Most people know not to talk about locally ringed topoi in their research statements if they do not want to get asked what a locally ringed topos is in an interview. However, at least in my line of work, it is something of a cliche that young people "use pedagogy literature" to the extent of absorbing some trendy buzzwords, which they then misuse. If you talk about flipped classrooms, IBL and so forth and reveal that you don't fully understand what these terms mean, that is so much worse than not using them at all.
In fact at my research university (it is a bit different at teaching colleges, I happen to know) most of the faculty are *not* familiar with the pedagogy literature, and if I'm honest, some people pride themselves on the conjunction of that ignorance and their superior teaching. I don't think pedagogical literature is BS (or not all BS, anyway; every branch of academic literature has some BS), and I do believe that if you actually learn these ideas and articulate them properly and well it will be to your credit. But be careful. Also be aware that the trendy technique that one committee member might like might make another one roll her eyes. So a good teaching statement succeeds independently of its use of this kind of terminology and ideas.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/06/15 | 1,858 | 7,894 | <issue_start>username_0: Bit about me: I recently graduated as an undergraduate in Statistics and would like to pursue graduate school. I will be working as an actuary starting this upcoming month and will be pursuing the GRE and Mathematics GRE Subject Test this September/October.
I'm struggling to write a CV for graduate school. It is not a requirement that I know of currently (I haven't looked at the application requirements yet at the places I plan on applying yet), but I know that I will need to have one ready in case I need it in the future. I have plenty of experience writing resumes for actuarial positions, but none whatsoever for grad school CVs.
I have **bolded** the questions that I would like answered.
Here's what I currently have so far (in chronological order):
Top: name, contact info
Body: Education, Academic Research, Teaching Experience, Volunteer Experience (**if I volunteered as a TA, should I throw this experience in teaching instead if I don't have any other volunteering experience?**), Work Experience (consists of an actuarial position + an assessment position), Leadership and Committee Experience, Actuarial Exams, Languages, Computer Skills, Research Interests
**Am I missing anything** that should be in a mathematics CV?
Also, **how much detail am I expected to put in for my experiences**? For example, on my research experience, I have the advisor's name, what I did, how I pursued the research, and in some cases, what the research led up to (e.g., one of my projects was used to supplement an already-published mathematics and music text). **Am I expected to talk about "excellent communication skills" or "teamwork" in any of my experiences, if applicable**? (For an actuarial resume, I would NEVER right anything like this, as it sounds like I'm just trying to fill up white space.)
Lastly, I realize that this isn't the most relevant pertaining to this website specifically, but **are there any online forums where I can get feedback on my CV (mathematics-specific would be extremely nice)**?<issue_comment>username_1: For a PhD in statistics, the non-math and interdisciplinary experiences are very important. Definitely the fact that you'll have an actuarial internship is good.
Teaching experience: also important. Many departments will like to know if you can teach.
Communication skills are good, if you can substantiate them.
Computer literacy (beyond html/MS office) is important.
Not directly answering your question, but when you ask for recommendation letters, make sure at least one addresses your teaching. And, if you can have one outlining your interdisciplinary prowess, that will be good, too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: First let me say that I have a lot of experience with math department admissions, all of it in a department which is separate from the statistics department. The title question is "Constructing a mathematics CV": I'll answer that. I would not assume that it's the same for statistics.
For a math admission -- either master's or PhD, it doesn't matter -- the CV is just about the least important part of the application that I can think of. At many places, it is probably being asked for as much out of force of habit as anything else: in academia, CV's are ubiquitous. However, most information that is provided on your CV is also provided elsewhere on the application: grades, coursework, research experiences, relevant personal experiences all have other outlets. I can only remember reaching for a candidate's CV when something was missing from some other part of the application (possibly because of a clerical error on our part) and I wanted to quickly put my hands on it. I **absolutely** don't care how the CV looks, how it is formatted, or anything like that. In fact I don't care about that stuff for any level of academic job. And *in fact* I myself have one of the more [unimpressively formatted CVs I've ever seen](http://alpha.math.uga.edu/%7Epete/cvfeb14.pdf), almost to the point of being unintentionally "unbusinesslike".
So I would say the key is this: whenever you're wondering whether to put something on your CV, also ask yourself: "If I do put it on my CV, how do I highlight it *elsewhere* in my application?" Because your CV might not even be specifically read by some (or all) committee members.
To answer your specific questions:
>
> if I volunteered as a TA, should I throw this experience in teaching instead if I don't have any other volunteering experience?
>
>
>
You should certainly include all TA experience, volunteer or otherwise. (Whenever you do something as a volunteer that one might reasonably think you've been paid for, it is only honorable to clarify that you were a volunteer.) I find your concern that you don't have any other kind of volunteer experience misplaced: we're not looking for volunteer experience, and volunteer experience that is not math related is not clearly relevant at all and should probably only be included if it is truly notable or substantial. Honestly, we're not selecting for candidates who are unusually socially conscious or unusually well-rounded, so your volunteer work would have to be successful enough to show exceptional drive and/or administrative skill.
>
> Am I missing anything?
>
>
>
No, I don't think so. Your research experience -- if you have any -- is one of the more important things to go on a CV, and you mentioned it. But in keeping with what I said before, it is really *too important* to just hide in a CV: if you had any research experience at all you should certainly mention it in your personal statement (and if you haven't had any at all, it would be a good idea to address that, at least by saying how excited you are and how much you welcome the opportunity). If your research experiences resulted in actual product, then include the product itself: papers can be part of the application, and you can also include links to websites.
>
> how much detail am I expected to put in for my experiences? Am I expected to talk about "excellent communication skills" or "teamwork" in any of my experiences, if applicable?
>
>
>
At this point I wonder if you're confusing the CV and the personal statement. You don't "talk about" anything in a CV: it just displays information. There is not a single complete sentence in my (eight page: yours should probably be one or two) CV. Information about relevant experiences should go prominently in your personal statement *and* you should do what you can to ensure that these experiences are also discussed in your recommendation letters (along with your coursework, these are the most important part of the application). I have no desire to hear about excellent communication skills or teamwork from the candidate herself, no. In fact, writing a personal statement that is literate and moderately compelling is your big chance to show your communication skills. Openly boasting about skills is something that academia largely frowns upon. This can get tricky when in certain contexts -- grant applications, introductions to papers -- you really *need* to describe your achievements, but in a way which is factual and not openly self-promotional. In a grad school application I would strive to look competent, eager and (reasonably) humble.
>
> are there any online forums where I can get feedback on my CV (mathematics-specific would be extremely nice)?
>
>
>
You should ask your recommenders for feedback on your CV. They are natural candidates, because (i) they're reading it anyway and (ii) they have already shown an interest in your academic career. The right way to do this is to first give them a CV and make it really clear that you want critical comments and that you've saved plenty of time for it -- more than a month! -- and then after that you would like a recommendation letter.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/16 | 2,724 | 11,528 | <issue_start>username_0: Every year, students seem to find new ways to "cheat" on the work. Every year, my course policies section grows longer and longer (a full page now) to match the newfound methods. I list all forms of plagiarism and exam rules and penalties. I additionally post similar rules on assignment instructions, particularly defining areas where I found students "cut corners" while still literally following the instructions. I teach many freshmen and foreign students who are not familiar with college expectations.
Do I need to define all forms of cheating on the syllabus? Is there some way to apply and enforce a blanket, "no other cheating permitted"?
Some examples include:
1. Copying and pasting text from Web sites.
2. Submitting classmate's returned assignment as late assignment with own name.
3. Foreign students using machine translation exclusively to write essays for writing courses.
4. Using TTS for speeches.
5. Peering at other papers during exams.
6. Copying from phone during exams.
7. Submitting work they made in other courses.
8. Adding names of extra non-contributors to group work.
9. Doing work for a classmate.
10. Pretending to be another student during an exam.
11. Attending different sections during exams to preview the exam or try different versions.<issue_comment>username_1: I think your problem *quite literally* is that you specify too much. If you provide a long list of things students are not allowed to do, it is natural that students assume that the list is comprehensive (that is, everything that is not on the list has to be legal). If you do what chubakueno proposes and have a single rule **Plagiarising == fail**, most people would be fully aware what that means.
**EDIT:** clearly, this does not mean that you should *never* go into more detail. Of course, if one has unusual or unexpected rules which other comparable lectures in the same university do not have, then of course they need to be explained. However, most of the examples given by Village are IMHO pretty obvious.
Frankly, many of the items on your list *cannot reasonably be assumed to be ok*, no matter the rules. For instance, did you really have a student tell you with a straight face he thought it was ok if he pretended to be somebody else to write the other guy's exam?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: Does your school not have an academic code of conduct? Usually schools have very comprehensive (but succinct) definitions of "cheating" and "academic honesty" simply so nobody has to roll their own. Every syllabus I've ever had or used in any school I've ever been to found it sufficient to say "in addition to the syllabus of this course, you are also required to follow the school's code of academic honesty. Failure to abide by this code will result in immediate failure and referral to the appropriate administration."
This is even easier with the advent of web resources where you can explicitly link to the academic code of conduct in the syllabus (or some mirror of it if it's not online for whatever reason).
If not, I definitely agree with xLetix. Providing a comprehensive list of "bads" subtly implies that everything else is valid. Certain you can say "among other things...", but you should not have pages of examples. Certainly you can give one or two examples of blatant plagiarism, but otherwise give a succinct definition that's broad enough to allow you to catch all cases and leave it at that.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: These basic ideas should be prominent:
1. Your work must be your own.
2. Your ideas must be your own - you must identify and give credit for any ideas which are not yours.
3. You must be honest and ethical in all behavior related to assessment.
You might want to provide some separate information about exams. For example, you are/are not allowed to have your book/notes in the exam. Suppose someone for instance has information on their phone (and they are not allowed to have notes or the book), but they claim that phones were not excluded. You can, when discussing it with them, ask them whether they think this was honest and ethical behavior.
Part of the point of this is that it is their responsibility to identify if work or ideas are not their own. If someone claims, for instance, that copying from a website does not mean that their work is not their own, you can ask them where and how they acknowledged the use of the ideas.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are generic expectations that are widely understood, and you don't need to spell those out. For example, you don't need to explicitly tell your students that it's not OK to pretend to be someone else and take their exam.
On the other hand, I find that there are certain specific things that I want to make clear in my syllabus because they may differ from other teachers' expectations. For example, I teach physics labs, and my expectation is that collecting raw data is group work, but analysis, making graphs, and doing the writeup is individual work. There are other teachers at my school who have different expectations about lab work, so I need to make my own policies clear.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: As suggested by a commenter, I am expanding my comment to that of an answer. Many colleges and universities have an 'academic integrity' policy or standards. For example, here is one such policy at the University of Michigan: <http://www.lsa.umich.edu/academicintegrity/>. You can find many other policies and standards regarding academic integrity.
I would include the exact language of any such policy in the syllabus. When you review your syllabus, you should draw explicit attention to this policy and indicate that all violations will be taken seriously and referred to any judiciary committee if necessary. You can also take it one step further by having students actually sign a statement that they have read and understood the policy. Once you have done this, students assume the burden of ensuring their academic behaviors are entirely consistent with the policy.
The other part of the process is actually following through on violations. I don't have problems with this issue in my class because students are very much aware of exactly what will happen if violations are observed. Of course, some students will claim that they "didn't know." Ignorance of violations of academic integrity are simply unacceptable among college / university students who should be treated like adults. You don't want to give the impression that you are lenient on any such policy.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: It seems like in your case, you might just list what *is* allowed.
>
> Imagine you have entered a room for the first time. You did not bring anything or anyone with you. This room has only a desk, a chair, a few blank sheets of paper, and a pencil. Anything that you would not be able to do in this room is not allowed in the exam.
>
>
>
Generally, you could just point out a few non-obvious things to adequately illustrate the spirit of the rule, and then say:
>
> This list is not comprehensive. I will punish anything that gives you an unfair advantage. Use your own judgement to decide what would be acceptable, and if in doubt, ask.
>
>
>
After all, you are not required to have every decision you make in class to have been written in exacting detail beforehand (at least in most schools). You can just say, "even though I didn't explicitly say copying from your friend is not allowed, it should have been obvious to you that I would consider it cheating". Also, some things on your list should not even be mentioned. Whatever excuse the student who tried to take an exam for someone else came up with, I guarantee that they knew full well they shouldn't have done it, and they knew you knew they knew. I don't see how
>
> No cooperating, no open book, no cheating
>
>
>
Doesn't cover everything except 7 and 8 on your list. Do your students honestly think that they're allowed to copy from a phone during an exam that isn't even open-book?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: The comments so far all seem to come from the perspective of the educator. Having recently made the transition from undergraduate completing exams and assessments, to postgraduate setting and marking them, I offer the following advice based on my experience.
My university requires every single student to complete an online "Plagiarism and Academic Honesty" course each year. This course takes the form of a few dozen slides detailing many complex rules and examples, attempting to cover every form of assessment in every academic department. No-one ever actually reads the content of this course; the old concept of "TL;DR" is true even when your academic or professional future is at stake. Based on this experience, *I rule out the "exhaustive restrictive list" approach*.
We also have the polar opposite as a University-wide policy: a very short, to-the-point statement about always behaving with complete academic honesty and integrity. This is always qualified, however, with a link to [the full "legalese" policy](http://admin.exeter.ac.uk/academic/tls/tqa/Part%208/8Mplag1_old_version.pdf). Again, no-one reads this. There are also numerous loopholes. For example, the policy states that you must not use another student's work without attribution. Copying an entire report and then scribbling "I copied all this from Dave" in the margin would therefore appear to be fine. This further leads me to the conclusion that *a restrictive list is not the way forward*.
So what do I see as the best option from both sides of the assessment process? Assume nothing of your students. They will have come from a wide variety of cultures where "academic honesty", "plagiarism", "cheating" and all related terms have very different definitions. Public exam processes used in schools also vary across the globe, so you cannot rely on "it's the same as it was before university". *I would therefore advocate a "permissive list" as the best policy*:
1. You are **only** permitted to take pens, calculators, and rulers into the examination room.
2. All work **must** consist solely of the thoughts, ideas and work of the named candidate (or group, where applicable).
3. Using the thoughts, ideas or work of others is permitted **only** where it is attributed and clearly marked as not your own.
4. All work **must** be original and created for the purpose of this assessment.
I believe those four rules cover everything in the eleven points above, plus other methods of cheating.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: This is bound to be country specific, but like most people here from US institutions, I refer to the University code of conduct. However, I highlight gray areas. This means I don't list obvious things like (2) or (6) on your list. I would say something like this
"In this class you must follow the academic code of conduct [link to code], all violations will be reported to the judiciary committee. Note, in college academic dishonesty extends a bit further than you might be used to, so read the code carefully. For example the following things are not allowed [insert a list of two or three non-obvious things - I include 1. not understanding something you write, 2. Turning in basically the same assignment as a collaborator, even when collaboration is permitted].
Don't make it sound like you are giving an exhaustive list, but it is good to highlight some gray areas.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/16 | 936 | 4,002 | <issue_start>username_0: Early on the research planning process, I would like to make use of the services offered by public libraries. Including online library services, what is the best way they could help a student researcher who is currently preparing a research proposal for a specialization?
Would it be wise to send them an email or give them a phone call, so that they could come up with a list of possibly useful and related research papers at their disposal?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't believe that a public library would be a useful resource for an academic literature review. You are likely to be better supported by a university librarian. But, I am not sure why you would be relying on a librarian to assist with obtaining resources for a literature review. My recommendation is that you develop the skills and knowledge to efficiently and effectively conduct a search for relevant resources, as opposed to relying on somebody else. You presumably have more background and knowledge in your substantive area, and this is something you will be doing throughout your academic career. Even if a librarian or somebody else culled sources for you, the burden is still on you to ensure the review was comprehensive.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If you mean "is it outrageous to ask a librarian to collect research papers for you," then no, it's not outrageous; **some** librarians do that, though rarely the librarians working in public libraries.
For most university students (at least in the US. You're in Indonesia so the system may vary,) they go to their school libraries because the collections are much closer to their fields of study. The librarians are also more proficient in handling academics-related questions. If you do have an affiliated university, I'll check with the librarians there first.
If you don't have one, then I'll next try to contact some librarians of state-funded or nationally funded universities (especially if you are a tax payer.) Most of these public schools open their libraries or provide limited consultation to the public. It would also be valuable to ask if they have any kind of borrower program or consortium you can join: later you may need to download a lot of journal articles and having an access to their server can save you a lot of money.
If both of these are no goes, then you can try the public libraries. However, the librarians may not be available to fetch articles for you. Instead, you may ask them for resources (pamphlet, booklet, website) on how to perform a literature search (I'm assuming literature, but they can also show you other curated forms such as microfilm, legal archive, etc.) Most public libraries do not subscribe highly professional/specialized journals due to the high price, so realize that your scope can be limited somewhat.
If all of these yield no results. I'd suggest at least pay a graduate students or instructor for 2-3 hours to give you a general rundown/tutorial.
As I have said, most librarians will not be able to do the search for you. And it's better for you, as the researcher, to have the first hand experience and control of the process. At the very least, try ask the librarians about database you should search, how to select keywords, how to export and keep results, what bibliography software is available, reference books on writing literature review etc.
Lastly, the quality of help you are going to get is proportional to the clarity of your vision about the work. The more concrete you can describe your work, the easier for them. Things you should consider are as follows:
* What is the topic?
* What is(are) the main question(s) you want to answer? -- in this
part, be very explicit about time, location, and other important
qualifier (think
[5W1H](http://coe.jmu.edu/learningtoolbox/5w1h.html))
* How far back in time do you need to go?
* What is the purpose of the document? E.g. For a blog, for a grant
proposal, or for an assignment?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/16 | 623 | 2,627 | <issue_start>username_0: Authorship order in life sciences is intricate and has many problems. By convention, order is by the amount of contribution (decreasing). Also by convention, the PI/supervisor/"senior author" appears last. Things start getting complicated when you have many contributors.
I would like to focus on the end of the author list. When there are several PIs, they all appear at the end. However, if you consider the before-last author, a reader would not be able to know whether this is the author with the least contribution or alternatively a co-PI. I have seen different "solutions" to this problem (e.g. marking all senior authors as corresponding authors).
**I would like to know what kind of solutions you have seen for this problem, and whether these solutions are recognized by institutions and funding agencies.**
For those of you wondering why these intricacies matter - authorship order can play an important role in getting a faculty position, awards, grants and tenure. For example, for some fellowships you may only list publications for which you are the first author.<issue_comment>username_1: Actually, I've never seen a paper where co-principal investigators (with respect to a grant) have been distinguished—and I was co-advised as a graduate student in exactly such a circumstance.
However, I don't think this is as big a problem as you think. If you were a co-PI, you would indicate the corresponding grant as part of your CV, as well as the resulting publications. So it shouldn't be too hard to figure out who contributed what.
Also, in my own circumstance, I am actively co-advising several students at the moment. In these collaborations, we assign the "senior author" position to the most "relevant" author for the publication. For instance, I'm in engineering and one of my collaborators is in CS. When we publish in a CS venue, he's the senior author; when we publish in an engineering venue, I'm the senior author.
If it's really important, though, to indicate the co-PI issue, you could mention this in the acknowledgments section, since that's where you'd list the grant support in any case. You could write something like
>
> F.O.O. and B.A.R. were co-principal investigators on grant XYZ from funding agency ABC.
>
>
>
or whatever comparable wording satisfies your needs as well as those of the funding agencies.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In some papers I've seen, in which there was apparently more than one PI, they were both (last and before last authors) correspondents on the paper. I guess this is a way to signal their equal status.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/16 | 2,054 | 8,351 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a graduate student, and because of the department's projects, partnerships with other institutions, and conferences, I am often out of office with the senior staff (supervisor, department head, other senior researchers and management, etc.).
After the work (e.g. meetings, presentations), it is often the case to attend social events (e.g. conference dinner or reception), or simply spend the free time with my colleagues (e.g. dinner in a hotel or somewhere out). During such events, which I consider also as partially work but not that official, people drink alcoholic beverages. Since I am often the only graduate student and the youngest person in the group (and usually the difference to the next person in age is >15 years), I am worried that in my case it might not be acceptable to drink and that it may project a bad image about myself. So I am wondering whether to always abstain in such occasions.
Of course this is not about getting drunk, it is about a glass of wine or two along a meal.
This also includes flights. When flying I always have a beer or glass of wine to fall asleep easily and to mitigate my fear of flying, but sometimes I am seated close to my supervisor or colleague.
I am not sure about the customs in academia, so I am asking: is it acceptable to drink alcoholic beverages in front of senior staff? (Again, to a limited extent.)
I could have asked in the Workplace SE, but I think that academia has a different etiquette.<issue_comment>username_1: Putting ice in good whiskey is universally unacceptable, but I think the answer may depend on which country you are in. If you are 20 in the USA, then no. Otherwise, you are an adult and you decide.
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_2: There will be people with strong feelings about what is acceptable regarding drinking, and it is impossible to satisfy them all. (I have heard reports of senior faculty expressing disapproval of a postdocs choice to only have two beers.)
When it comes to more institutional acceptance, the situation will vary. For example, when I came to Cambridge,UK, as a PhD student, there was a Wine & Cheese event to get to know the faculty members of the college. So drinking in front of them was not merely tolerated, but actively encouraged.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If the senior people are drinking too, there's no question that it's appropriate for you to. If you're at an event where drinks are provided, but the senior people aren't drinking then it should be fine for you to have a little to drink, unless you believe that they disapprove of drinking. And being on a plane is an event where drinks are provided, for the context of this answer. :-)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The safest rule is "do what others do." (But no more, and possibly less than, what they do.)
If everyone drinks, and you don't, that might be taken badly, as someone else pointed out. And if you drink and no one else does, that might be worse.
When I was younger, my rule was to drink if others did, but to have one or two less. If any one calls you on it, you can point to your "juniority." Otherwise, you're just "fitting in" without going overboard.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: This depends not only on where you are, but what group you are in and what people in particular you are speaking about.
I have met both "senior staff" who get so drunk that they wouldn't remember whether you were even present, and I've known those who would probably disapprove of an undergrad having a glass of wine. The majority fall somewhere in between.
At the end of the day, it is quite hard to tell. For instance, a very religious person may be against alcohol consumption. Or a person from a culture where deference from juniors is expected may consider drinking when with a senior disrespectful. On the other hand, people who grew up in a culture where drinking is a frequent pastime will have no issue with it (and may even be surprised if you don't participate).
The division is not even a matter of what country the person is from, because even within a given country there is a spectrum of attitudes which varies by what social circle a person interacts with. With the diversity of backgrounds you get in academia, any specific answer you get here is likely to be incorrect.
As username_4 suggests, your best bet is to do what others do. Especially convenient is if there is someone else of similar status to you, then you know whatever they do is very likely not improper for you.
If you are *really* unsure (or if you are the only junior member, or if you are new...), you can make a mental list of all the people present who you would not wish to embarrass yourself to. Keep an eye on how much they drink, and make sure to drink slightly less than whichever of these persons drinks the least. It's quite unlikely that they will disapprove of something they themselves do. Of course, if one of them happens to not drink anything at all, that means you shouldn't also, but on the flip side, in that case it's probably safer not to drink in the first place until you have a better idea of what everyone's attitude is.
Contrary to what others said, I doubt anyone will take issue if you drink too little. As I said, it is common to have people from very different backgrounds and cultures in academia, some of which do not drink at all. It is generally considered impolite to make assumptions on such things, so few would risk seeming insensitive by encouraging someone they don't know well to drink. The exception is if you know the other people well, or if you both come from very similar backgrounds so you know with certainty what your attitudes would be. But in that case, you can probably decide better yourself what is appropriate and what is not.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: When people serve something and you turn it down, you make them feel bad. So unless your mood turns foul or you become aggressive when drinking beer or wine, you should join the fun. Also, Academic people get very buried in their work, and spare time and work hours blend together. If you can't relax and enjoy the good things in life with your fellows, you risk having a rocky road and face alienation from your fellows.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: It is in situations like this where a shandy/rattler/spritzer comes into it's own. You're still having a drink, but it's a sociably acceptable way to water it down. It saves you from having to turn down a drink, and makes it *very* unlikely you'll get too drunk.
Mostly though, you seem to be feeling forced into one situation or another. I would wager that asserting your own opinion as to what is acceptable for yourself will get you more respect in the long term.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: Look around you. Observe the 25%ile pace of drinking. Do that. If everybody is drinking the same thing, you as well. If there’s a mixture (some beer, some wine, some sherry, etc), drink something that isn’t conceptually far from the observed distribution.
You fit in, are part of the team, but not in any way inappropriate.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_9: Isn't part of the point of working in Academia to forward the thinking of the age and challenge predetermined constructs? Whilst the question relates to being judged by others would it not also be appropriate to question the regard for those who would judge, and thus the value of regard for their judgement? To determine your own opinion to be higher than that of another is in my mind not a good methodology starting point unless you have an evidence base to back it up, and therefore should be challenged as a premise. To not question this leads to a lack of development in the area of society most in charge of development, with a hierarchy system of regard no better than that of the private corporation.
And if you can say all that without slurring any of it you've managed to avoid drinking too much!
In my mind it's a case of "do what you like". If what you like is to fit in, then fit in. Just don't be surprised if some people realise that this is what you did. I would however stress against the getting very drunk, or indeed being one of the heavier/faster drinkers, unless you don't mind the labelling that comes with this.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/16 | 459 | 1,782 | <issue_start>username_0: The announcement below from Japan sounds like one becomes an assistant professor at the end of the tenure process. I thought the tenure is always meant for becoming associate professor.
**Terms of Appointment:**
>
> Evaluated in the final year of the term, and if satisfactory, eligible
> to become a tenured assistant professor as of April 1, 2018.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Tenure is not always associated with the traditional assistant vs. associate/full distinction, especially not outside the United States. Even in the United States Associate does not always mean tenure nor does some other title necessarily imply untenured.
If you're applying for this specific position and it concerns you, you should probably just ask for clarification.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Japan's academic system is still closer to the continental system where there is only full Professor (教授） in a department and several assistant professors (助教授）and a mixture of adjunct and full-time readers/lecturers (講師）. The assistant professors can be tenured.
Some schools in Japan are moving to the American system where there can be several full professors in a department and there are now some colleges that are introducing the category of associate professor (准教授）).
Japanese labor laws tend to protect full-time faculty, so you can assume that you have lifetime employment if you pass the first employment review -- if and only if you haven't been hired as a part-time (非常勤) or otherwise term-contract employee (非正規雇用).
In this case, it sounds like they want to emphasize that you are NOT being hired as part-time or other non-tenure track (such as the new "jokyo" 助教 which is not the same as a tenure-track assistant professor 助教授).
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/06/16 | 614 | 2,246 | <issue_start>username_0: Since the Computer Science GRE exam was dropped, I have to take the normal GRE exam (*sighs*). I've looked at a few sample questions, and it's something I'm just not good at. I have a Bachelors in Computer Science with a 3.1 GPA (out of 4.0) I have two core questions:
1. How well do I have to do to get accepted into most decent universities for a Masters in Computer Science?
2. What is the best way to study and practice for GRE exams for a C.S. major?
**UPDATE (02/18/2015):**
I got my scores in for GRE. Verbal: 153, Quantitative: 160, Essays: 4.0. I'm not sure how *good* this is or not yet.
I studied for about 4 months. First 2 months it was little studying every week. The third month was studying every other everyday. The first 2 weeks of the 4th month studying everyday. The last 2 weeks were heavy studying.<issue_comment>username_1: Tenure is not always associated with the traditional assistant vs. associate/full distinction, especially not outside the United States. Even in the United States Associate does not always mean tenure nor does some other title necessarily imply untenured.
If you're applying for this specific position and it concerns you, you should probably just ask for clarification.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Japan's academic system is still closer to the continental system where there is only full Professor (教授） in a department and several assistant professors (助教授）and a mixture of adjunct and full-time readers/lecturers (講師）. The assistant professors can be tenured.
Some schools in Japan are moving to the American system where there can be several full professors in a department and there are now some colleges that are introducing the category of associate professor (准教授）).
Japanese labor laws tend to protect full-time faculty, so you can assume that you have lifetime employment if you pass the first employment review -- if and only if you haven't been hired as a part-time (非常勤) or otherwise term-contract employee (非正規雇用).
In this case, it sounds like they want to emphasize that you are NOT being hired as part-time or other non-tenure track (such as the new "jokyo" 助教 which is not the same as a tenure-track assistant professor 助教授).
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/06/16 | 485 | 2,028 | <issue_start>username_0: I've read in multiple places that it is important that your recommenders be known to the admission committee. If I were to have a letter of recommendation from a professor who is quite new (Assistant Prof), would their recommendation be discounted due to their lack of reputation or stature in the field?<issue_comment>username_1: As you said: Someone who is well-known is a good choice. If the new professor already has a good reputation in her field, it will most probably be a good decision to ask her. It's better to have a letter of recommendation from someone who knows you and who writes somethong personal, than a letter from someone just looking at your marks.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: An unestablished professor that knows you well, and writes a fantastic letter, is far better as a letter writer than a famous professor that will just write a generic "he was 3rd out of 38 students in my class" kind of letter.
There are two types of letters that will really help you in general. (1) A great letter from a professor who knows you well, regardless of their stature. This is likely someone you did research with, and (2) A famous professor that will write you a decent letter, saying you did well in his her/class and you show real potential, ideally you should have done a class project for them, so they can say something beyond basic things like class rank. Letters of type (1) are the most important (if the professor is famous that is a bonus). But you need 3 letters usually, so you are not likely going to have 3 professors that know you well (if you do you are in great shape). Type (2) is another good option for filling out 3 letters. If all your letters are of type (1) and (2) that is a really good sign. Most people will have at least one lackluster letter from an unestablished professor.
The next best bet is an unestablished professor that you did a good class project for or knows you well from a class. Generic letters really do not help your cause.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/16 | 1,978 | 8,982 | <issue_start>username_0: Since I graduated as an undergrad three years ago, I've been planning to go back into graduate school, so I saved all my assignments and heavily kept up on studying and research. My transcript looks good and I've had a lot of time to focus on GREs.
The most uncertain and anxious part is getting letter of recommendations from my former professors. Due to my nature, I haven't maintained contact with the three professors I have in mind, especially given the job I have. I'm confident that they'll remember me if I send them a quick e-mail, but I'm hesitant about the timing. It seems a bit awkward to re-establish contact out of nowhere without letting them know my intention, but at the same time, I feel it's a bit too early to let them know I would like to start looking into graduate school.
I was thinking of sending them e-mails stating my intention to apply to graduate schools, be able to provide documents/statements so they have something to remember and write about me, and ask if they were interested on writing the recommendation. If so, I would follow up and provide them the application details several months ahead.
Is this better than asking them out of the blue when graduate application crunch time starts?
Also, for professors and those who wrote letter of recommendations, what are your experiences of writing recommendations for former students reaching back 3 - 4 years later?
Edit: Update on this below<issue_comment>username_1: My recommendation is similar to those posted in comments. I worked for several years before applying to graduate school and did not stay in touch with my professors during that time. Approximately 4 months before I applied to graduate school, I sent each professor a brief (1 paragraph) email explaining my graduate education plans and career interests, and asking if they would be willing to write letters of recommendation, which would be due in November. I also indicated that if they were willing, I would send them my CV and a summary sheet of my college activities for their reference. I contacted them via email, as I lived in a different state than the college, and face-to-face meetings were impractical.
When they agreed to write the letters I sent them:
1. A summary sheet listing each program I was applying to. For each program I listed the address and contact person (so the letter could be properly addressed), 1 line about why the program interested me, the names of faculty I was interested in, the application deadline, and specific application letter forms or links to online applications, if relevant.
2. My CV
3. A summary sheet highlighting specific grades in major-related courses; research projects and activities I engaged in during college; a 1 paragraph narrative explaining what I had done since graduating and why I was interested in pursuing another degree; and a list of courses I took with that particular professor/letter writer, along with the grade for the course and any special projects completed in those courses. Try to keep this to 1 page.
Although this sounds like a lot of information, work to keep it as brief as possible, while ensuring the professor has the information they need to write a strong letter.
You may choose to time this differently, but the four month window ensured that I had committed to applying and gave me time to identify alternative writers if they had declined. I'm not sure it would be useful to ask your professors a year in advance, as 1) your plans may change, and 2) they may not recall a commitment they make that far in advance. That said, I would make initial contact in the summer before you apply; if you wait until the school year kicks into full gear, your email might get lost in the shuffle. When I was applying I was advised by multiple people to provide all materials to my letter-writers a minimum of 2 months prior to the deadline. Many schools require letters to be written on specific forms, have surveys your letter writers are asked to complete, or even ask the letters be submitted online; it's unlikely the most recent application will be available more than a few months prior to the application deadline.
A few final notes:
* Be sure to ask if they feel they can write you a *strong* letter, not just a letter of recommendation. Most faculty will be honest about this.
* Send your letter writers an email two weeks prior to the application deadline to thank them and remind them of the approaching deadline. Many online applications will indicate when your letters of recommendation have been uploaded.
* Be sure to thank them, both when they agree to write the letter and when the letter is submitted. Consider writing and mailing a formal thank you note, once the application is submitted. Also, contact them once you're accepted and have decided on a school; they like to know how it's worked out!
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: So it's been 4+ years since I graduated from undergrad and more than a year since I asked this. I should write an update since this one got a lot of visibility. To keep it short, I got accepted into graduate schools that required recommendations.
My earliest application deadline was at the end of December, so I sent out e-mails to my past professors in August and September. One declined but two responded enthusiastically. Most applications requiring 3 recommendations, I had my boss's boss in my workplace write one for me as well. He could at least speak for my character, performance, and professionalism.
I sent these writers my CV, unofficial transcripts, statement of purpose, and list of graduate schools that needed these recommendations. In that list, I included each school's application deadline, which specific program I was shooting for, and a short note why I chose each of them.
The tone of the e-mail was akin to coming with "hat in hand", being honest with the fact they probably do not remember me, and offering to send the mentioned documents for them to decide if they would write a positive letter. I didn't outright ask them if they could write a recommendation, but if they would simply consider it given more information.
I've read so much horror stories about writers not responding or sending their recommendations on time, but I experienced none of it. These writers were awesome and I'm extremely grateful for them. Every time I got an acknowledgement that a recommendation was received, I would send an e-mail out thanking them and attached an updated list of schools still needing recommendations.
Thanks for all the help and comments in this thread as well.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The above advice helped me so much. I needed at least 2 recommendations from professors who could attest to my quantitative skills. I reached out to two professors by email, asking for their office hours. Even though both showed some reluctance (one was on sabbatical and said that he could only write about how I did in his class and the other had some doubts and advised that I take additional courses), they ultimately wrote the letters. I asked them about a month before the earliest deadline but you should ask as early as possible (preferably over two months early because professors are busy). Definitely try to ask them in person and come prepared with anything that could help them write the letter (resume, transcripts, statement of purpose, info about each graduate program and their deadlines, and a few sentences about why you want to apply to each program).
When I first emailed them, I didn't get a response back saying that they were going to write the letter...so I decided that I won't be able to apply and stopped studying for the GRE. A month went by and then I received notifications that they both submitted a letter to the program with the earliest deadline! I then had only a week to cram for the GRE and applied two weeks late to my first choice. But despite all of this, I was accepted to my first choice.
What I learned is that even though I was afraid of asking, I should have emailed them again to confirm whether they would write the letter or not. I just assumed that no response meant they weren't going to write it. Also, I almost did not apply to my first choice because I knew my application would not be completed by their deadline. One of my transcripts, one of the recommendations, and my GRE scores were submitted late. However, if you believe you are a strong candidate (high GPA/GRE scores, excellent statement of purpose that clearly shows that your goals and interests align with the program, etc.) and it's a program that you are really interested in, the admissions office might be understanding and still consider your application even if it was completed late. Most of my application was submitted by their deadline, so if you are missing a few things, just try to get them submitted as soon as you can but no later than a week or two.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/17 | 610 | 2,236 | <issue_start>username_0: Many e-journals search tools contain much metadata in their database. For example, they have the "location" entry required for some citation formats, which at least shows the location of the journal, but the might also store the original authors' university name.
Is there any tool that can allow researchers to either (a) search a term and see a map of where the articles are coming from or (in some similar form or other) (b) see a world map showing where research in a particular area is geographically concentrated?<issue_comment>username_1: The closest I've seen to this is for Elsevier journals most (all?) have a journal insights page which among other useful information such as impact factor and review speed has the geographic location (country) of primary authors of all their articles. For example here is the page for [Measurement](http://journalinsights.elsevier.com/journals/0263-2241). Its only on the country level and doesn't link author and location but it's a start.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: this is an active aera of research in Geography of Science. We've been working with sociologists of science and bibliometricians to assemble a geocoded database of scientific publications, based on the Web of Science database.
We've not (yet) produced a publicly available interactive search tool like the one you describe, but it's a possibility. Instead, we have published several papers and an interactive tool to geovisualize the collaborations between co-authors of papers : <http://www.coscimo.net/> (in french)
If you're interested in this question, i can provide a bibliography.
* A conference paper :
<http://sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol1/Grossetti_Geographical_348.pdf>
* A research paper :
<http://usj.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/11/20/0042098013506047.full.pdf>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I just found an interesting paper :
<http://arxiv.org/abs/1406.2793>
Towards a Frontier of Spatial Scientometric Studies
by <NAME>
In this paper, the author cites several visualization tools :
<http://linkeddata.org/>
<http://spatial.linkedscience.org/>
<http://semantic-web-journal.com/SWJPortal/>
<http://stko-work.geog.ucsb.edu:8080/map/>
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/17 | 918 | 4,089 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently read a paper, which posed some interesting questions in a section named further research.
They concluded the section by writing, "we leave all these questions for our future research".
I am really interested in one of the questions, is it considered inappropriate to write a paper handling one of those questions? The pronoun "our" indicates that the author wish to dig in to this question himself. However the paper was published in 2012, and by browsing the authors personal webpage I get no sign of a paper like that in progress.
In case I wish to write a paper on that particular topic, should I notify the author who posed the question? (Say, by asking, is question X still open?)<issue_comment>username_1: Getting in touch with those authors might help you get to your answers quicker. They might have worked their questions without publishing. Estimated reason could be long term research is required to answer them. However, I am not aware of any rules that prevents you from addressing those questions (of your current interest) as long as the paper is published.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Just because an author puts forth a question doesn't mean that she or he owns that area of science. You are free to pursue any question that was posed in or inspired by an article. Even if the authors are actively pursuing the question, your research on the question will likely take a different form. It is unlikely that you will have exactly the same methodology, so the results will be different. And, even if the studies are exactly the same, the contribution you are making is important -- i.e., replication is essential to the advancement of science.
So, if you are inspired to pursue a given research question, full speed ahead!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: The *reason* I put questions into my papers is to try to get other people to work on them.
Once someone publishes a question, or even mentions it in a talk, it's fair game for other people to work on it. This has a flip side for authors: it's bad practice to publish questions that you could already address with the methods of the paper, with a modest amount of additional work.
It's not a bad idea, if you are going to work on a question that was published a long time in the past, to ask the authors if it is still open. But, unless you are trying to collaborate with them, you should write the request in a fairly generic way. Don't tell them your ideas, or ask them if they have ideas, since that is how you would start a collaboration. Just ask whether they know of any progress since the paper was published.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Go for it! As username_2 pointed out, nobody owns a question in science, and, as you observe, not everyone pursues the future research proposed in their papers. I usually include future research ideas in my papers, and I advise my students to also, but I can't think of a time the research has actually gotten done. I see it as a way of putting one's name on an idea without actually implementing it. (FWIW, my area is computer science.)
As to whether to contact the authors, that's optional. If it's a narrow problem with a straightforward solution, you might want to contact them to make sure you're not duplicating work that they've already started and are likely to complete before you can. You can also use it as a networking opportunity. Assuming you're not in a highly competitive field, I see no harm in writing that you were inspired by their paper to do the work they proposed and (optionally) would like to know if they are interested in collaborating. If you're a student or post-doc, collaborating with someone at another institution might help your career even more than being a sole author.
Your only responsibility is to cite the authors' paper(s) if you make use of their idea. Citations are the authors' reward. Send them a copy of your paper and a nice note (email). It will make them feel good, increases the chances of their citing your paper, and is good networking.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/17 | 921 | 3,480 | <issue_start>username_0: When I cite papers online, especially in Wikipedia pages, it is very convenient to use their DOI. However, some papers which I would like to cite (like [this](http://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4892932) and [that](http://www.combinatorics.org/ojs/index.php/eljc/article/view/v15i1r11)) have no DOI. Or at least, I haven't been able to find their DOI in the [crossref search form](http://www.crossref.org/guestquery).
Why isn't a DOI assigned to all papers? Is there something I can do to change this?
EDIT: I now found out that in ResearchGate, I can upload my paper and it automatically receives a DOI. So practically, my problem is solved.<issue_comment>username_1: A DOI is registered by a so-called *Registration Agency* (see FAQ 1 and 2 at [DOI](http://www.doi.org/faq.html)). Since there is a cost associated with the service, it may not be feasible for all to add such identifiers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A process exists for obtaining DOI's, including the submission of meta-data and fees. Thus, it is time and cost prohibitive for some authors / publishers to obtain DOI's for their published works.
You can find information about DOI's here: <http://www.doi.org/faq.html>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: DOIs are assigned by CrossRef on behalf of members. CrossRef is an association of scholarly publishers, so the members are therefore publishers rather than authors.
DOIs were introduce because of "link-rot": citing a paper by URL and within 6 months the URL doesn't work. When a publisher joins CrossRef they make a commitment to keep the DOI link metadata updated, so the DOI always points to the paper if, for example, the publisher is bought out and all the URLs change. This agreement is an important part of the DOI system and explains why publishers are members rather than authors.
Assigning a DOI is normally done during the process of publication, and will normally be done automatically. That's not to say that DOIs can't be assigned after publication: DOI [10.1098/rstl.1672.0051](http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1672.0051) is for a paper published in 1672. Publishers generally assign DOIs to new content but not to back files because new content is more likely to be cited.
It's not free to register a DOI, off the top of my head, around a dollar per DOI. It's normal (and cheaper) for publishers to deposit back-files, i.e. for publications older than 2 years (again, off the top of my head).
So, if you want to get a DOI assigned you can go to the publisher and request that they register a CrossRef DOI.
STM (Science Technology and Medicine) is a very fast-moving field with lots of papers published and cited. Humanities publishing tends to move at a different pace and tends to have different priorities. Therefore you may find STM publishers more likely to assign (and to need to assign) DOIs than in other fields.
The alternative is that you get a DOI from another organisation, for example [FigShare](http://figshare.com/). There are examples of people registering FigShare DOIs for their publications.
CrossRef was created to solve the problems of assigning persistent identifiers (DOIs) and linking between papers (one DOI cites another DOI). CrossRef also has lots of other infrastructure, such as bibliographic metadata, FundRef, CrossMark, metadata API etc so it's the best place to register scholarly publications.
---
Disclaimer: I work for CrossRef
Upvotes: 5 |
2014/06/17 | 898 | 3,536 | <issue_start>username_0: I notice that in the physics field, there are sometimes co-first authors, both names being followed by a footnote saying "These two authors contribute equally."
Even though explicitly labeled as so, one name still comes before the other. Also, as far as I know, the one believed to contribute a little bit more goes first. Hence, these are actually not real co-first authors.
Imagine in some journal with an author-title header on every page. The name of FirstAuthorB, the co-first author who comes after FirstAuthorA, will not be shown, as in
>
> FirstAuthorA et al.: Paper Title
>
>
>
So is there some other generally accepted ways to truly display two first authors as completely equal?<issue_comment>username_1: A DOI is registered by a so-called *Registration Agency* (see FAQ 1 and 2 at [DOI](http://www.doi.org/faq.html)). Since there is a cost associated with the service, it may not be feasible for all to add such identifiers.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A process exists for obtaining DOI's, including the submission of meta-data and fees. Thus, it is time and cost prohibitive for some authors / publishers to obtain DOI's for their published works.
You can find information about DOI's here: <http://www.doi.org/faq.html>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: DOIs are assigned by CrossRef on behalf of members. CrossRef is an association of scholarly publishers, so the members are therefore publishers rather than authors.
DOIs were introduce because of "link-rot": citing a paper by URL and within 6 months the URL doesn't work. When a publisher joins CrossRef they make a commitment to keep the DOI link metadata updated, so the DOI always points to the paper if, for example, the publisher is bought out and all the URLs change. This agreement is an important part of the DOI system and explains why publishers are members rather than authors.
Assigning a DOI is normally done during the process of publication, and will normally be done automatically. That's not to say that DOIs can't be assigned after publication: DOI [10.1098/rstl.1672.0051](http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1672.0051) is for a paper published in 1672. Publishers generally assign DOIs to new content but not to back files because new content is more likely to be cited.
It's not free to register a DOI, off the top of my head, around a dollar per DOI. It's normal (and cheaper) for publishers to deposit back-files, i.e. for publications older than 2 years (again, off the top of my head).
So, if you want to get a DOI assigned you can go to the publisher and request that they register a CrossRef DOI.
STM (Science Technology and Medicine) is a very fast-moving field with lots of papers published and cited. Humanities publishing tends to move at a different pace and tends to have different priorities. Therefore you may find STM publishers more likely to assign (and to need to assign) DOIs than in other fields.
The alternative is that you get a DOI from another organisation, for example [FigShare](http://figshare.com/). There are examples of people registering FigShare DOIs for their publications.
CrossRef was created to solve the problems of assigning persistent identifiers (DOIs) and linking between papers (one DOI cites another DOI). CrossRef also has lots of other infrastructure, such as bibliographic metadata, FundRef, CrossMark, metadata API etc so it's the best place to register scholarly publications.
---
Disclaimer: I work for CrossRef
Upvotes: 5 |
2014/06/17 | 542 | 2,232 | <issue_start>username_0: I took a class with a professor and really liked his teaching. Since then, we've had several conversations and I've gone to him for advice once. While I don't work with him and I don't know if he'd necessarily consider me a friend, I do feel like we've had a number of positive interactions.
He's going on sabbatical within the next few months, and I'm (crossed fingers) on track to graduate this next May, which means that there's a fairly high probability that I will be gone before he returns.
It feels premature to be saying goodbye to him now, around a year before I'm (possibly) leaving. If I graduate on time and he isn't back, do I just shoot him an e-mail which seems a little impersonal? Leave a handwritten note in his mailbox? Or is that really weird?
Is there a standard way of saying goodbye when I know there's a decent chance that I won't get to do it in-person a year from now? Or is it just normal that professors don't expect/aren't surprised when students they know are gone when they come back?<issue_comment>username_1: When a professor goes on sabbatical for a year they know full well that students will graduate in the meantime. They have seen this happen from both sides (they were students once and their professors took sabbaticals as well.) There is no standard way to say good-bye. A note, either electronic or physical, delivered before you leave is appropriate. So is asking the professor in question if they will be attending any of the graduation/end of year ceremonies that you will be having. Or you can simply say good-bye the last time you are going to see them before they leave since it may be the last time you see them.
General advice for keeping it from being "really weird" is to keep whatever you do short. Rambling will make it get uncomfortable for both of you. You have three basic things you might want to say: thank you, good-bye, best wishes for your sabbatical. You don't need a lot of words to get through those ideas.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Don't say goodbye until you graduate! Send a short note when you're done thanking the professor for the positive interactions ... that's usually more than enough.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/17 | 4,607 | 19,616 | <issue_start>username_0: During the process of writing my PhD thesis, I was close to falling out with my adviser, the advice I received from other staff at the lab (including the director) was unhelpful at best.
I have since made up with my adviser and have successfully defended the thesis.
I now have to publish my thesis.
The department says that one *can* include acknowledgements. All of the theses I have seen in my lab and in my department feature acknowledgements.
Due to this special situation, I don't quite feel that acknowledgements are called for. Yes, my adviser helped during the first half of the project but then almost completely reverted his stance. In terms of contribution, it is my opinion that he comes out at 0%.
I do not want to address any of the issues in the acknowledgements. I do not think that this is the right place. Likewise, I do not feel like thanking any of the involved people.
Therefore, I would just leave out the acknowledgements completely.
In academia, is this considered worse than lukewarm acknowledgements?
Should I actually care about the acknowledgement, because others do?<issue_comment>username_1: Not including acknowledgements when it is generally accepted to do so is likely to reflect badly only on you.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: A thesis is not a place to solve grudges. It is a professional document that is eternal. As such, it should be handled professionally and gracefully.
Still, I am having trouble why you do not want to have an acknowledgement section. Do you really believe you have done the entire PHD entirely yourself? Even if your advisor did not help enough, you had some funding right? And someone provided that. Should not he be included in the acknowledgement section? Someone also proofread your thesis. You probably also had co-authors in your papers. As you see, there are multiple people that contributed to your success.
But on a more informal tone. Don't you wish to thank your family or significant other for the support? Or your PHD co-students? The people that you share your office with? You have finished a PHD and especially since it probably was a rocky one this a very good reason to celebrate. Do not spoil the moment with petty grudges. Do what you are required to do, be professional and move-on to better things.
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As an addendum to the above, I have yet to meet *any* PhD student who defended without at some point coming "close to falling out" with their advisor. As PhD programs last longer than many marriages, this is perhaps unsurprising. Odds are, with the stress of the defense behind you, your relationship with your former advisor will dramatically improve. It never pays to permanently burn bridges, and striking your advisor from your thesis acknowledgements will certainly do just that.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: You stated that you have "made up" with your adviser. To be frank, it sounds like you are still harboring some negative thoughts and experiences. You would be best served by putting these negative thoughts and experiences to the side and taking the high road. Acknowledgments won't cost you any money, so give them generously in your career. You have far more to risk by going against the culture of your department by not giving acknowledgments. And, you did state that this adviser was helpful during the first part of your dissertation process. Those efforts are worthy of acknowledgements, even if you had a bad experience later on.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: Like the other posters, I would agree that it is important to write acknowledgements although it isn't easy to get them right. I read them to get a feel for what a researcher might be like and am probably not alone in doing this, especially now more and more PhD theses are available online. I thought the following advice, from: <http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/stefan/thesis-writing.pdf> was useful:
*Once written, try to read the acknowledgement with the eyes of yourself ten years down the line, with the eyes of an employer five years later and with the eyes of the examiners and colleagues now. Always check the acknowledgements for unintended messages: for example, a four-page acknowledgement section thanking everyone in the address book including the cats and dogs of the neighbour's nephew, while barely spending half a line acknowledging the role of one's advisors, may give an unintended message of a broken supervision structure.*
It isn't easy to write acknowledgements relating to somebody where there has been a conflict. Maybe mention your supervisor first, and then you can get away a little more with being less than effusive. And then keep your thanks to other people brief so it doesn't feel unbalanced.
Perhaps read some acknowledgements written by others in your lab or elsewhere, find a few in a style you like and ruthlessly steal/adapt their phrasing to your case "I am grateful to XX for their encouragement, wise commentaries...". There must have been something they got right, at some point, so state that. (Leave the rest for when you warn away potential PhD students who get in touch with you because they are considering joining your former group....)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: You should write the acknowledgements.
Many grants contractually require you to acknowledge the funding entity, you should check the specifics of your foundation.
And yes, thank your supervisor. Consider this: Someone interested in working with/hiring/inviting for a lecture/etc. your supervisor is very unlikelly to read your thesis, so omitting thanks to him will have no impact on his career. On the other hand, someone interested in you will certainly read your thesis and may read the acknowledgements to get a feeling of your personality. Since you are expected to thank your supervisor, the omitted thanks may strike as arrogant, specially because it won't be justified, so it may be harmful to you.
Of course, it shouldn't have a major impact, but still, it won't favour you.
This doesen't apply to omitting thanks to the staff, since an external reader will not know you worked with them, but may make it harder to work with them in the future. From my experience, many lab workers pay a lot of attention to this, and will feel offended by the omision.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: There is a very interesting article, by <NAME>, titled "Dissertation Acknowledgements: The Anatomy of a Cinderella Genre" (2003), that sheds a lot of light on how dissertation acknowledgments operate. He analyzes 240 dissertations, from six different fields, to see what patterns emerge in their acknowledgments.
It's worth a read (even just a skim). Hyland does a lot to show how acknowledgments are much more than just a list of "thank yous" - that it's actually very important as a place for writers to promote *themselves* as initiate academics.
One of his concluding observations is that "acknowledgments can play an important rhetorical role in promoting a competent, even rhetorically skilled, scholarly identity while signaling important professional connections and relationships as well as the valued disciplinary ideals of modesty, gratitude, and appropriate self-effacement" (266).
Here's [the Eric link to the article](http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ779599). If you're not able to access the PDF through your school, I'd be happy to post a link to the PDF (if that's allowed)!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: Life Rule Number One: Never burn your bridges for any reason except ethics and integrity. Your situation doesn't pass that test.
From a purely selfish standpoint, you don't want to seem petty or ungrateful even if you feel that way. You can't know what the future will be like. Someone who might want to offer you a position based on your thesis could get puzzled by no acks, ask around, and feel that someone who can't even "make nice" in such a trivial way would be a poor fit.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: If I were you, I would pay close attention to the implications in the citation above regarding a study of acknowledgements.
You mention "lab" so your field is clearly both "hard" and empirical. If you think that nobody helped you at all in your thesis, your recollections are most likely deluded and selective at best, or your hubris is at a dangerously high level.
Moreover, acknowledgements in part have a character of dog whistles. When you go to publish papers out of your thesis, do you think that an acknowledgement along the lines of, say, "thanks to the attendees at the Widgit Workshop at MIT for their insights and suggestions" carries any signal in the anonymous peer review process?
Summarily, I was young once, so I understand where you're coming from: it was a tough, crappy, job you got through with; it remains, in any field, a rite of passage with roots in the Medieval.
But if you don't get beyond it, you'll just be shooting yourself in the foot.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_10: I feel the need to record a dissenting opinion on this.
It is my understanding that acknowledgments are *not* a required component of a PhD thesis. They are a tradition and a custom, and like most traditions and customs, people participate in them because they find them valuable and enjoy doing them, not because they are obligated to do so. One answer says that many grants "contractually require you to acknowledge the funding entity". Yes, but that's a different kind of acknowledgment: for instance, in many published papers that goes on a footnote appearing on the first page, whereas there may (or may not) be a paragraph in the introduction or at the end of the paper thanking various people. Moreover, a PhD advisor is not a "funding entity" in this sense, and I have never heard of anyone being contractually obligated to thank their advisor. Let us assume that the OP is not.
After reading advice that amounts to "Yes, you should absolutely write acknowledgments in a way that conveys a positive impression of your advisor. Since you in fact feel exactly the opposite way you will have to write them very carefully indeed" a few times, I got a bit worried. I see a personal integrity issue here: really one should not record in a formal document sentiments which are diametrically opposed to those one actually holds. Moreover, all the comments about the career risk one might incur for not including acknowledgments -- well, I must agree that omitting acknowledgments is a suboptimal career move, but such comments make me even more worried. It seems to me that many people here are essentially viewing acknowledgments as a **loyalty oath** that one must make to one's thesis advisor. That can't be good. People stood on principle against loyalty oaths in the past, sometimes with cost to themselves. They were right and courageous to do so. I'm afraid I see a similar principle here.
My point is this: no, actually the OP certainly does have the right not to put acknowledgments in his thesis. Is that the best career move? No, probably not, but it is his choice and he may have good reasons for doing it. Four final comments:
* No acknowledgments at all seems much better to me than acknowledgments which are sarcastic or show bitterness, and probably even better than acknowledgments which are carefully written to extract exactly the level of thanks that a dissatisfied person can muster. I do agree that it is less than plausible that the OP does not have warm feelings about *anyone* (e.g. his family and friends), but writing acknowledgments to your thesis and not mentioning your advisor is also worse than not writing them at all. If you really want to thank your friends and family then you don't need a page in your thesis to do so. (I looked back at my own thesis acknowledgments just now and was somewhat pleasantly surprised by the effusiveness with which I thanked my mother and a very supportive ex-girlfriend. But now I have a sinking feeling in my stomach: I'm not sure either of them ever read my thesis! A facebook message may be in order here...)
* In case people are wondering whether I personally identify with the OP's ingratitude to his advisor: hell no. My first reaction to the post was to roll my eyes at the sentiment that his advisor was helpful for half the time and then so unhelpful so as to make the total contribution 0%. I am struggling to imagine what someone could do to make a contribution so negative as to cancel out years of support. My first impression of the OP was that he is -- to put it mildly -- a peevish ingrate. My second thought? Gosh, this guy would make a much better impression simply by not talking about his advisor at all. Not recording for posterity your own sentiments when you know that they contain inappropriate and unseemly negativity is a sign of great professionalism, more so than just lying through your teeth.
* I recently read a PhD thesis from my own program without acknowledgments. I must admit that I did notice this: when I saw the question I thought "Wait, didn't so-and-so not have acknowledgments in their thesis?" so I looked back and confirmed that it was true. Without giving away personal details, let me say that I have every reason to believe that so-and-so had an unusually positive relationship with their thesis advisor, and that so-and-so has gone on to another academic job and, apparently, a promising career. Why did so-and-so not include acknowledgments? **I simply don't know.** It's not my business.
* In contrast to what some other people have said: other than in the context of my own graduate program, I rarely read people's PhD theses. When I do it is usually to get some exposition or technical detail that I wish they had put into their published work. In particular, I almost never read the theses of job candidates. Does this sound weird? I think it isn't: I read lots of other accounts of the material in candidates' theses: from their recommendation letters, from their cover letters and research statements and -- when I am really interested -- from the papers and preprints resulting from their thesis work. If other people here specifically read PhD theses in the context of academic hiring, I would be very interested to know. Also, as a hirer -- yes, times are tough and we can be very selective, but there are certain things that one does not want to take into account. If I was at a hiring meeting and someone brought up a lack of acknowledgments in a PhD thesis as a point against a candidate, I would say something like "This person really must be great if you want to sink her and can't do any better than that."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_11: You add an acknowledgement not only for your adviser but also for your family, friends, institution etc.
As you yourself said he helped during first half – so do remember the starting is always the most difficult one. Moreover you should be thankful because I think you do not know how difficult it is to even get a PhD adviser in some places.
Just sit back and think – didn’t his “0% contribution” ultimately help you to learn so many things on your own, which you would not have learnt otherwise?
And the most important – your not adding the acknowledgement may show your un-thankful nature and in future (in your interviews etc) you may not always be able to defend against: “why you didn't added acknowledgement?”
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Whilst I can sort of understand why you don't want to offer gushing tributes to your supervisor, why not include a brief statement such as 'I would like to thank the following people for their support in completing this piece of work'.
Then simply list everyone appropriate including your supervisor in alphabetical order.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_13: I stumbled on this thread as I am helping a friend edit his acknowledgments and trying to word something he feels represents how he feels without offending anyone. He is in a similar quandary about the acknowledgement section but instead of hating his advisor is so burnt out by the process and feels the thesis he is writing is so worthless he doesn't want to associate anyone with what he is committing to his thesis. I feel the same way about my dissertation and have planned on not writing an acknowledgements section myself. Only when we were trying to craft his to mask his disgust at his creation did I think about the social obligation of this practice and that it must contain some value for the people who it is written for...
But even as I recognize the social obligation of this practice I am really surprised at all the answers here, and large amount of value that is placed by the respondents to this question on the importance of an acknowledgments section. I feel like everyone has given this issue too much thought and given it way too much value.
Why does an acknowledgements section matter?
If the OP is conflicted they should leave it out and shouldn't mention it, I would be really surprised if anyone (even the advisor notices), unless I am wrong and advisors are starved of praise and desperate for a note in paper that few if anyone will ever read? Many of the posts say it would a bad career move to not include the acknowledgments... are search committee noticing you left one out? That is a stretch... Academic hiring committees have better things to do, and thousands of other pages to read.
I think it is better to leave it out and ignore the situation than it is to write a dishonest one. In the end, two months from now, no one is going to care that you didn't have an acknowledgment section. But if you write one that is really a backhanded compliment your advisor is going to notice and that will further test a weak relationship....
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_14: I am in a similar situation, yet not writing the thesis but I am so tired of my advisor (or well... lack of it) that if I ever reach that day I will not write any acknowledgements at all and by reading the answers here I am even more convinced of doing so.
The thing is that if you write them, they have to be somewhat positive because they may affect your career in a way. So if the consensus is to write something positive just for the sake of doing it, then we can assume that there are plenty of thesis out there with fake acknowledgements (I omit the ironic or sarcastic or double meanings in them anyways). And I think that even worst than no acknowledgements at all or even the real truth.
But on the other side, academia is as fake as any other industry; and so you cannot fight the system, so you must go with it. Which means you have to write nice acknowledgements just because everyone else is doing it and you are expected to do it.
So I think it is better to have no acknowledgements because that does not give any information extra. If acknowledgements are there, they can be positive or nice, but you will never know if they are true unless of course sarcasm, irony and other language tools are identified in them. For negative acknowledgements I think that those are not really needed to be written on your thesis because in the end time will show the truth and you don't want to be the one to point things out about someone (or some people) even if you are right.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_15: Short answer: You don't need acknowledgements at all if you don't want to. I have seen many theses without but this might also be a culture thing of the country you work in (my case is Central Europe).
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/17 | 379 | 1,675 | <issue_start>username_0: I currently work for a well-known company that publishes study materials for a certain branch of mathematics. I have done quite a bit of work under them that has been published through their website (and is used to profit the company), however, no one's particular name is labeled on the materials (they just state the company's name).
Would I be able to include such work on a mathematics graduate school application CV other than mentioning it briefly in my work experience? If so, should I create a section "Publications" or with some other title? ("Publications" seems misleading to me, as it suggests a peer-reviewed journal or other scholarly text of some sort.)<issue_comment>username_1: If you did it, you can take credit for it on your CV.
To answer your second question, I think you should consider who will be reading the CV and what kind of employee they want. If it is a company that produces a similar product, I think "Publications" is okay. If you are applying for a faculty position, I might label it "Teaching Experience".
Update: For applying to graduate school, I would label it "Projects". But there are many options.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: These are not academic publications that you can legitimately claim on your CV. At best, you might be able to describe this work experience in a different part of your CV, but keep your publication section clean. A publication is one that you claim authorship of the given product, whether it is a peer-reviewed article, book, book chapter, monograph, etc. Once you have a stock of publications, then you can create some logical categories.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/17 | 421 | 1,846 | <issue_start>username_0: I contacted a professor about working on research with him. I met with him in person and he let me know he wanted to work with me, that he would be my research advisor, and if I applied to the department he would get funding for me. I applied to the university, got accepted into the program then filled out a TA application.
I was informed by my research advisor that I was selected as a TA and that I would receive my offer letter soon in the mail. It has been several months since I was told that and he checked on the delay and said that the TA offer letters were being held up in the provost's office for some reason. Classes start in August and I still haven't received my offer letter. Is this sort of thing common, or should I start to worry? My research advisor has guaranteed me I will be funded and I have nothing to worry about.<issue_comment>username_1: If you did it, you can take credit for it on your CV.
To answer your second question, I think you should consider who will be reading the CV and what kind of employee they want. If it is a company that produces a similar product, I think "Publications" is okay. If you are applying for a faculty position, I might label it "Teaching Experience".
Update: For applying to graduate school, I would label it "Projects". But there are many options.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: These are not academic publications that you can legitimately claim on your CV. At best, you might be able to describe this work experience in a different part of your CV, but keep your publication section clean. A publication is one that you claim authorship of the given product, whether it is a peer-reviewed article, book, book chapter, monograph, etc. Once you have a stock of publications, then you can create some logical categories.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/17 | 1,001 | 3,835 | <issue_start>username_0: After finishing my PhD in mathematics not long ago, I decided to move away from academia and pursue a career in the commercial sector. I'm currently not affiliated with a university. In the long run, I might return to working at a university some day.
Recently, I recieved an invitation to become a reviewer for Mathematical Reviews. I'm flattered, but also hesitant as I can't fathom how much extra work this will be and if there's a benefit for me, besides learning more interesting things in my original academic field of expertise (which I've moved away from a bit).
1. How much work is it to review 1 paper per months, roughly speaking?
2. Would you see being a reviewer as an interesting CV item outside of academia?
3. Doing the reviews is usually not paid, correct?
This question is similar to [Should I agree to review papers as a postdoc?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/14355/should-i-agree-to-review-papers-as-a-postdoc), which didn't give me quite satisfactory answers since I'm not in academia anymore. It is also similar to [Personal advantages of being a referee once you quit science?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20888/personal-advantages-of-being-a-referee-once-you-quit-science) but that one is not about math reviews, which are different from refereeing a paper for a journal.<issue_comment>username_1: 1. One paper per month seems like a high load, but I'm not as connected
to the journal reviewing scene as I once was.
2. I don't think much of
anyone outside of academia, national laboratories (NASA, Dept. of
Energy, etc), and some commerical R&D labs (Microsoft, IBM, etc.)
will care if you are a reviewer.
3. And, yes, reviewing is typically
done for no pay. Though, I would say that at least for active academics, you "pay" for reviews on your own submissions by doing reviews on others.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'm a reviewer for Mathematical Reviews (now best known by its association with MathSciNet). My experience has been:
* I usually spend about 1-2 hours to read a paper and write the review.
I don't necessarily look to completely digest all the details of the paper, but I at least try to understand what the results are, why they are interesting, how they relate to previous work, and a general idea of the proof techniques.
Note that, unlike the pre-publication peer review process, you're not expected to check the correctness of the proof, nor to make a judgment on the paper's novelty or significance.
* They want you to submit your review within about 6 weeks of being invited.
* You can set your "queue size", i.e. the maximum number of papers you want to have at any one time, to whatever you want. When you submit a review, you can expect to receive another invitation within a few days.
* You can always decline a review invitation if you are temporarily too busy, or if the paper doesn't interest you or fit your expertise, and they will just send it to someone else.
* You can specify your areas of interest (by [MSC code](http://www.ams.org/msc/msc2010.html)) and they send you papers that appear to match your interests. If your interests shift, or if you start getting a lot of papers that mystify you, you can make changes.
* It's a very minor CV item even within academia, and probably even less outside.
* You do get a little bit of extra visibility, since reviews are posted with your name, and seen by anyone who looks up the paper on MathSciNet.
* You do get paid, sort of. You receive 12 AMS Points for each review you submit. Each AMS Point is worth $1 (USD) in credit toward purchases from the AMS (books, journal subscriptions, membership fees, etc). So it maybe adds up to a couple of free books per year.
* Also, if you review a book for them, you get to keep it.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/17 | 1,115 | 4,538 | <issue_start>username_0: Taught courses typically do not reach research level, so there is a significant gap in knowledge that has to be bridged by a graduate student in order to make meaningful contributions to their field. What is the most efficient way to bridge this gap? I could come up with the following possibilities:
1. Find advanced textbooks, prove all the theorems [if maths] and do all the exercises yourself.
2. Organize seminars with other graduate students with related interests
3. Go to conferences or talks given by staff about their research
Is this list exhaustive or is there anything I missed? Which methods of learning are recommended in which situations?
For definiteness, by 'expert' I mean the level necessary to understand current research articles and (in principle) independently reproduce the calculations/proofs.<issue_comment>username_1: For most disciplines, advanced textbooks still provide, albeit necessary, foundations. Conferences allows you to hear what is new and is as such a good way to know where fields are going. I am not sure what you mean by seminars but discussing new papers and topics is always a good way to advance knowledge. But, the major point is to read up on published papers and to focus on the topic of your thesis. The point of research is to advance knowledge and this means you will, or at least have a chance to, be an expert on the field you are researching. So in my view none of the activities 1-3, or combinations, make you an expert, only your own sweat over publications and own work will do so.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The answer to this one is fairly easy. You read, read, and read. And when you're done, you read some more.
My thesis was a study of two specific products/types of databases. Of course, the widely-known "Brewer's CAP Theorem" was a core focal point, so I read Dr. Brewer's paper "Harvest, Yield, and Scalable Tolerant Systems." I then read the paper that analyzed his paper, which (of course) led me to another. And another.
I went to Amazon.com and looked for books about the non-relational database I was focusing on, and found five. I bought (and read) all of them. I looked at the sources for those works, and read more and more.
I went to a conference in Chicago put on by the software company which created my non-relational database of focus. I talked with the people who created it, as well as with others who used it. I took lots of notes, looked through many Powerpoint projects, and followed the sources listed in those as well.
This went on for more than a year.
Fast-forward to now, I (successfully) defended my thesis 11 months ago. Since then, I have taken a new job (that I was recruited for) as a lead engineer, driving big data projects. I don't really consider myself an expert, but it is apparent that I understand that material (and database theory in general) better than anyone else in our company.
So again, read as much as you can find on your topic. Question it. If you have the means, run some of the experiments on your own. And after that, keep reading.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In addition to other informative comments and answers, there is a point that appears to me widely overlooked, namely, that it is hard to rush "maturity" or "experience". Yes, one can speed up "experience\_s\_", but only to a point, since too much so reduces comprehension of them.
In different words, in addition to accumulation, and assimilation, of many, many factoids and ideas, there are ... intangibles, "intuition", all those vague things.
That is, apart from having seen and remembered many facts, genuine experts have so-well assimilated them, have so-well changed themselves to adapt to a subtler viewpoint, that they have "sense" about otherwise-vague situations.
Yes, I am obviously noting that live mathematics is not formal. It is only that the contemporary writing style has various formal/logistic pretensions, not that the *practice* is that.
As a corollary, I think it is simply not feasible to "become an expert" in grad school, or soon, or... although one must be *wanting* that to exert sufficient energy to move in the right *direction*.
(And, as at other locales, I am not a fan of "routine exercises", unless one has nothing better to do. I think "memorization of proofs" is not nearly as good as "trying to see why the proof \_has\_to\_be\_this\_, but perhaps getting the thing into one's head by "memorization" is better than not having it in one's head at all.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/17 | 623 | 2,438 | <issue_start>username_0: From <http://thewallaceline.blogspot.com/2006/11/double-line-spacing-in-dissertations.html>:
>
> It is standard practice to require dissertations to be double-spaced. In the age of word processors, one wonders why this practice persists. This must surely be a legacy from the days when dissertations were typewritten and students were allowed to make corrections in situ rather than re-print. Word processors have eliminated that problem. Double-spacing might also be suitable for drafts which require annotation for editing, but final copies of dissertations are not used in this way and modern techniques such as commenting do this job.
>
>
>
How did this tradition get started? The ability to make corrections on the printed thesis in the days of typewriters sounds like a pretty good guess.<issue_comment>username_1: My understanding was that this is for the convenience of examiners, who may wish to annotate a printed copy while reading the thesis, for reference during the defence. In the UK, at least, where candidates may be expected to make corrections to their thesis after the defence, this is quite common. Annotation is much easier if there is plenty of whitespace on the page.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Why are the final copies of thesis dissertations often required to be double spaced?
>
>
>
Inertia.
>
> How did this tradition get started?
>
>
>
From what I read, with [typewriters](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leading):
>
> Double spacing is an entrenched practice due to the era of typewriters [...]. Typewriters had a limited number of options for leading and double spacing was chosen as a default.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As <NAME>'s answer says, this comes from the typewriter era (I did my undergraduate thesis then). A change in a page meant retyping it completely, so having extra leeway to add/delete a line was critical. Less text on the page meant less retyping in case of an error, also important. I remember my advisor was extra careful to suggest changes that didn't spill over to following pages.
Yes, the *good old days*. How do I miss them...
By the way, the local standard still specifies double spacing, printed on one side only. In practice, the librarians here are thrilled when my students turn in single spaced, double sided printed theses (less precious shelf space!).
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/17 | 1,499 | 6,589 | <issue_start>username_0: Sometimes, when I get the comments of the reviewers of a submitted paper (mine or some else paper), I feel like the reviewers just ignore the paper. More precisely, I feel that reviewers did not read the whole paper. Even more, I feel like they do not even complete reading the abstract (it is a conclusion from their comments of course).
Is it possible that reviewers ignore papers? Maybe because the authors are not known or maybe they did not write the paper well?
My only argument is that authors believe that their paper is a breakthrough paper and it has a very good contribution. Imagine reviewers start reading a paper in a high journal rank and they found (just examples, do not take them as serious ones): "This paper shows that 1+1=3" or "This paper demonstrates that if the determinant of a matrix is 0, the matrix still has an inverse."
Although, I do not think that in a high quality journals, reviewers can do some kind of ignorance. How can one be sure that their paper is well treated? How to write papers that make the reviewers do not throw the paper away.<issue_comment>username_1: I doubt that it is common for peers to disregard the content of a manuscript under review to that extent. However, it is quite usual for authors to understand more on their paper than the reviewers do. The following simple things may help:
1. accurate title, that really absorbs the content of a paper
2. very well written abstract, that says precisely what is done in a paper
3. well written introduction
4. a clear cover letter, explaining what is done and why this is important and new;
5. recommendation of at least a couple of referees for your paper who *should* understand it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Let me expand a bit on Thomas comment.
By its very nature, peer review is a guaranteed item of discussion in all academic discussions. Every author has stories to tell about unfair reviews, reviewers that missed the entire point of the article, reviewers that rejected a paper only to publish something similar themselves, and so on. What is much rarer talked about is that **the vast, vast majority of rejected papers are simply not good enough**! Indeed, this surely also includes a large percentage of those papers that the authors are sure were handled unfairly.
An important point is the following:
>
> My only argument is that authors believe that their paper is a breakthrough paper and it has a very good contribution.
>
>
>
Clearly, all (ethical) authors believe their paper has merit. *Otherwise, one would likely not submit it*. It has to be said that the author's own opinion is not a good indicator of the actual qualities of a paper.
>
> Is it possible that reviewers ignore papers? Maybe because the authors are not known or maybe they did not write the paper well?
>
>
>
Somewhere on this site, I have previously listed reasons why a paper can get rejected, but to be honest I think *"the authors are not well-known enough"* is very low on this list. The second reason (*"the paper is not well-written"*) is more common, but it should be noted that rejecting a badly-written paper is *not* unfair. It is the responsibility of the authors to make sure that their paper is graspable. However, again, I suspect the majority of papers are well-understood by the reviewers, and just rejected because the reviewers were of the opinion that the contribution was not substantial enough.
So why do papers sometimes get very short, high-level reviews, even if the reviewers read and understood the papers? One possible explanation is that many reviewers follow the golden rule *"spend your time on manuscripts that deserve your attention"*. In practice, a reviewer has finite time to invest into reviews. When receiving (say) 5 papers for review, two being borderline and three being clear-cut rejects, it is an understandable decision to spend more time scrutinising the papers that still have a chance, and only provide high-level feedback on the ones that the reviewer sees as clearly too weak.
Now on to your questions:
>
> How can one be sure that their paper is well treated?
>
>
>
The philosophy I try to communicate to my students is to *stop worrying about optimizing manuscripts for peer review and start doing the best research they can*. I am convinced that the best way to ensure that your papers are treated well is to write good research papers.
>
> How to write papers that make the reviewers do not throw the paper away.
>
>
>
Make sure that your papers (1) have a clear contribution, which is evident from the abstract and the introduction, (2) are written as clearly as you can, (3) are correct in terms of grammar and spelling (try to have a native-speaker spell-check your manuscripts), and (4) **have a compelling and relevant contribution**. If Your paper is technically sound but boring as watching grass grow, you *are not entitled to complaining that the reviewers did not read the manuscript carefully*.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Your question is highlighting one of the major problems of the current peer-review process. Numerous studies have been conducted on various parts of peer review, and one of the most consistent findings across these studies is the absence of reliable reviews. That is, reviewers often disagree with each other, and editors often disagree with reviewers. At the same time, these findings are not at all surprising.
I do believe that there are very conscientious reviewers, and those numbers will vary considerably over time and by discipline. I believe there are many persons who are simply unqualified to review for journals. And, I believe that some reviews are not completely objective. Some people may be particularly critical on a given day -- perhaps their grande mocha latte arrived with no-whip when in fact they wanted whip. Or, they just had one of their own papers rejected, which makes them think that the system of reviews is becoming increasingly tighter, so the subsequent reviews are made under a more critical lens.
The bottom line is there are many places where there are faults in the peer review process, and this question certainly highlights one of them. Proposals for improving the system regularly enter the debate, but the current peer review system is not likely to change much over time.
If the review is particularly egregious, you can certainly talk with the editor. But, as a submitting author, you will always have less power and influence relative to the reviewer.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/17 | 976 | 4,142 | <issue_start>username_0: I am often amazed at how neat figures in old scientific publications are. How did authors prepare those plots and diagrams, when there were no computers around? Did they draw them by hand? Were there any special methods and tools involved? Did the authors prepare the figures themselves?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe many of them did the drawing themselves with ink pen, for example. Graphs can be drawn using pins and a metal ruler: you put pins (or small nails) in a measured points of a graph, and then bend a ruler to pass through all nails. The ruler will eventually form a curve, known as a [B-spline](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-spline) interpolant of a given set of points.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Ink on vellum. Depending on the work place the author may have made their figures themselves or in some cases professionals were involved who would take a sketch and draw an ink original. the techniques were basically the same as for any technical drawing using templates for creating text. A lot of techniques went into making nice figures, sometimes including adhesive rasters to create shading effects etc. A asic technique was also to produce originals is a larger size than final so that when reduced in size, small imperfections would basically dissappear in print.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: My grandfather wrote geography books. He had some sheets of plastic with wavy lines on them, used to fill in the seas in maps. The plastic was cut to shape and glued to the paper. I assume similar things existed for other regular fills.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A related subject: preparation of mathematical formulas and equations. These were things that simply couldn't be done (other than very crudely) on a Linotype or similar "hot type" machine. To do it anywhere near "right", skilled typesetters needed to build up the equations *by hand* from tiny pieces of type and lots of pieces of spacer lead and such. Needless to say, this was very slow and very expensive and prone to error. It went "offshore" to lower wage countries, but even then was still too expensive. Crude typesetting programs existed but produced such poor results that <NAME> was driven to produce something that would typeset math to his standards: TeX. TeX (and LaTeX and various permutations) are still the gold standard for setting text, equations, and even some graphs and other figures (such as chemical diagrams) generated on the fly.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Gosh, I feel ancient :)
I graduated just before the Windows became popular. We had 8-bit PCs with MS-DOS and some very basic text-processing software. All the official documents (including my master’s thesis and first research papers) were typed on mechanical (or if one was lucky – on electrical) typewriter. For corrections in the typed document we used a special white fluid (applied it with a little brush over the misspelled letters and once dry retyped the correct ones on top).
All the formulas and figures had to be drawn by hand (using a special ink pen, a ruler, a compass, sometimes a special curved ruler). A piece of grid paper could be glued to the document if necessary, or if the grid was big enough to occupy a whole A4 page, we would buy a ready-made grid page from the university bookshop and insert it where it belonged.
This was the required format for conference papers and all other materials we submitted to the print shop, where they used offset lithography and some other techniques to print conference proceedings, textbooks, etc.
There wasn’t PowerPoint, so the “slides” for presentations were drawn on a big cardboard sheets (A1 or A0), which were then hang/stack/pined to the wall/blackboard. Or, if there was an overhead projector, we did the drawings on transparent plastic sheets.
There was a technician in the department, whose job was to do technical drawings, but usually she was very busy, so I did most of the drawings myself. And, yes, I had studied technical drawing as a part of my engineering degree, it was a mandatory module.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/17 | 1,435 | 6,314 | <issue_start>username_0: Another problem I personally struggle with in peer-review publication process is the situation when review takes really, *really,* **really** long. The precise definition of "long" is probably very area-specific: for example a paper in Maths will probably took longer to review than one in Physics. Many well-established journals and major publishers, sadly, prefer not to specify the "rules of the game" precisely, particularly how long the review process should normally take. Fortunately, I quite often serve as a referee with the very same journals and know the amount of time I am given to write a review. Unfortunately, when I am an author, I do not observe these deadlines to be always met. For example, a notable U.S. publisher would ask a reviewer to send a review in 2 months; but in practice a first review of my paper once took as long as 8 months.
As a rule of thumb, I usually start writing to editors with questions about "the status of my paper" in X+1 months time, when X is a deadline time for a reviewer to submit a review. This strategy is not particularly successful — what I usually get is a recommendation to be more patient. Since there is no "official" deadline time announced, there is no formal ground for complaints here.
Of course, such delays lead to a whole bunch of funny situations, particularly if a preprint is put online (e.g., on arXiv) and the results are presented in some conferences. Follow-ups with no official paper to cite, grant applications in which you can not justify by a solid publication, good research but bad bibliometrics or CV, to name just a few.
Could you recommend an efficient way to deal with this problem?<issue_comment>username_1: There are plenty of reasons why reviews take a long time. First you seem to forget that the time from you submitting your paper until receiving the reviews is not only taken up by the reviewers. The manuscript is probably first scrutinized by a chief editor to see if it is on topic. depending on the journal structure the manuscript might be assigned to another editor who will handle the review process. The handling editor will start to look for reviewers and it is not unheard of that one must ask quite a few in order to get two that accept. Then reviewers have their stipulated time. Once reviews are back the editor needs to look through the comments and make decision on what should happen (reject/some form of revisions/accept) and then provide the author with these comments. So if all this works smoothly it will take a bit of time. Often it is hard to find reviewers and some reviewers may take more time than they should and so the process is extended. Add to that that the editors usually have more than one paper to deal with.
So what can be done? Well not much except try to be quick yourself and set an example. Of course if the time really drags on and there is no response, a well formulated request for status from the editor is in place but when that should be considered is a judgement call depending on the typical time for reviews to be completed in the journal. fortunately many electronic submission systems signal where the paper is in the process which can help judging the timing better.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have found that a polite, terse e-mail to the associate editor with a clear history line often works in getting some response. Occasionally, I have written the editor-in-chief if an associate editor is ignoring me. As Peter points out, there may be legitimate reasons for a delay, including:
* The editor is having a hard time finding a competent reviewer (maybe the area is too narrow).
* Your paper is very hard to understand (sometimes, if it's badly written but seems to have some elements of novelty, a reviewer will try to plow through to understand what is going one).
* The editor needs an additional reviewer in order to break a strong difference of opinion between the original reviewers.
When even the editor-in-chief does not answer in a timely manner (and I have had this only once in my career), your best recourse is to *never* submit future articles to that journal. You will be doing your community (and the next submitter) a service.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Sometimes a long wait is the result of conflicting reviews, because the editor has to restart the clock for a new reviewer who has been invited to break a tie. Other times, a particular reviewer is slow, but the editor prefers a slow review that is of high quality to a quick one that cannot be trusted.
The deadlines given to reviewers don't mean very much. Remember that there's no credit for reviewing, so reviewers may be inclined to put a review aside when they need to concentrate on writing a paper or proposal, teaching a class, handling personal matters, etc.
Of course, none of this addresses your question. The answer is that there is nothing you can do beyond what you have said you're doing. This is just a part of the academic life. It's frustrating, but not as frustrating as the silly deadlines given to authors at the galley stage (often 24 hours, in my field).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: One thing you can do is target journals that have efficient review processes. SciRev (<https://scirev.sc/>) is one website that collates "reviews of the review process", or you could ask colleagues about their experiences.
Other than that, I don't think there is anything you can do other than what you have been doing. As an author it is frustrating, and I can tell you that it's frustrating as an editor, too. When I receive queries of the sort you have described from authors, it does prompt me to check on the paper and either nag the tardy reviewers or invite new reviewers if I think the reviewers who originally agreed have become responsive (though rest assured that I do check on them regularly anyway). My journal asks for reviews to be returned within three weeks, but the average actual turn around is about 2 months. When I receive author queries less than 3 months after submission, I feel it is impatient on the part of the author and am slightly annoyed -- but I still check up on it. If a query comes after 4 months or more, I will chase it up more seriously and feel guilty.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/17 | 1,210 | 5,316 | <issue_start>username_0: I am doing an experiment assumed to be performed in ideal environment although it is not, e.g. resource is fully allocated from a resource pool shared between different organisations. As my experiment is affected by external factors (e.g. a shared pool may not fully allocate all requested resource) the result sometime is different from what I expect. However, since my model is proven to work in an ideal environment, I am sure that if I keep repeating the experiment, I will get a result which is consistent with my calculation, e.g. when a shared pool have enough resource to allocate to my request.
Notably, when I run an experiment, I do it few times to get the average result. Moreover, I'm aware that an environment is not ideal and planning to address it in my future research.
So, is it acceptable to keep repeating the experiment until I get the (average) result which is consistent with my calculation? Furthermore, should I mention in my paper how many times I perform my experiment to get the presented result or just mention briefly about the imperfect environment and a plan to handle it in future research?
**Update:** my research aims to use shared or volunteer resources to perform computation. It is in the early state when I calculate the required resource for a job prior to its execution. In other words, during an execution, I assume that there are enough resources for me, which doesn't always happen. As I said, I'm planning to investigate dynamic calculation in the future.<issue_comment>username_1: No, you shouldn't do the experiment until you get the desired result. This is poor science and borderline unethical. (I'm sure you had no ill intent and that you are trying to deal with real-world complications.)
An experiment is flawed if it is run *n* times but only the results from *n* - 1 are used and reported. (Or anything less than *n*). See [Peter Norvig's page](http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html) under the section "Warning Sign I2: Ignoring Publication Bias".
Beyond this, I believe that your experimental design is flawed. You shouldn't run an experiment assuming an ideal environment when in fact the experimental environment is not ideal. Only in theoretical models do you have the liberty to idealize your environment. In laboratory experiments, you control the environment so you can idealize as much as possible. What you have is an experiment with [confounding factors](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding), which is not uncommon in real-world settings.
The best thing to do is to estimate the effects of the confounding factors through analysis of a theoretical model or a simulation. In your case, which sounds like a queuing theory problem, a statistical simulation should be relatively easy.
With this estimate, you should be able to restate your hypotheses, essentially reducing the expected effects by the "loss" associated with "the shared pool not fully allocating resources when requested".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: When you run an experiment that is expected to have some variability (because it is not in a perfectly controlled environment) then you *must* run it a large number of times. Not "until you get the results that are consistent with what you expect" but "until you get results that are reasonably consistent *with one another*."
Then, when you describe the results, you must say something about how they were distributed (not just give the average). For example:
* "The average execution time of Protocol A was 4.72 ms, with a variance of 0.4 ms. The average execution time of Protocol B was 5.78 ms, with a variance of 0.3 ms."
* "The measured results were clustered in two groups, with 75% of runs falling between 1.3-1.9 ms and 25% of runs falling between 10.5-13.3 ms. We speculate that this is because of X, but we cannot measure or correct for X at this stage."
You get the idea. The point is that you present not just a single numerical value, but also some measure of how consistent the values were.
And yes, you must describe how many times you ran the experiment, whatever you know about the conditions under which the experiments ran, and how you calculated the summary statistics.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: As I understood, you are developing a parallel algorithm (or a computation strategy) that is supposed to work on a highly non-uniform computing environment (both in time and "space" of a CPU network). At a current stage of research, you are not yet ready to address the non-uniformness, and have to make a (significant) assumption that your computational network is in fact homogeneous.
What I would suggest - **do not repeat** the experiment many time, until the (non-uniform by nature) network will suddenly become homogeneous. It would not.
Instead, you could go do the computations on a proper parallel (cluster) station available in your Uni or through a shared subscription. Make sure that during the computations all used CPU's are fully allocated to your problem only, i.e. your (significant) assumption holds.
Do the experiment **once**, report your assumptions and results clearly, explain which adjustments for the algorithms are required to put it on a heterogeneous CPU network. Hopefully this would suffice.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/18 | 1,254 | 5,287 | <issue_start>username_0: I have spend many years during my PhD developing a code base and decided to open-source the code when I finished. It's currently under GPL. The code is used by many different research group around the world, and that was my goal; to provide a useful tool for the research community.
Recently I have been contacted by a company that wants to use the software. My intention was always to charge a fee for industrial use of the code. On the website, it says something to the effect of "GPL for academic use", "please contact me for industrial licensing".
Firstly, do you think this is reasonable approach? Personally, I don't think that industry should get a free ride from my publicly funded research code.
Secondly, what are reasonable terms, pricing and software license for an "industrial license"?<issue_comment>username_1: Your license *is not* the GPL if you add additional restrictions, and your restrictions may turn out to be incompatible with the GPL in subtle ways. Consult an IP attorney.
Fortunately for you, even if your code is GPL, many companies might not want to use it because they might worry about it infecting their product. So, you might be able to charge them for a proprietary licensed version. That being said, if your work came in under a US grant from the NSF or similar agency, its terms may require you to open source the work *period*. Additionally, your university is likely to have an Office of Technology Commercialization or similar body that is responsible for software licensing to industry. At mine, the Board of Regents retains the rights to all software and commercially licenses it with the "inventor" getting half and the university getting half, typically, unless it is open sourced.
You should check with your university and the grant terms that funded your work. Corporations are typically tax payers in their local jurisdictions, so it's not necessarily wrong for them to benefit much as another researcher would from your work (i.e., for free).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: If you own the code, you can use dual licensing model, offering paid commercial version next to the GPL version. While not very respected by GPL enthusiasts, this dual licensing model is not uncommon.
Most of companies really do not like GPL, even if the license terms would permit them to use the software as they plan to use it no problem (GPL is mostly about sharing the modified source code). This can be used to persuade them to buy a commercial license.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The GPL does not restrict them to use your code in in their commercial product. What it means is that if they use it/modify it then when they distribute their software they must provide the source code of their application and yours.
Because many companies don't want to share their code, they can ask you for another licence. Since you are the Copyright owner, you can use as many licenceses as you want.
This dual licensing approach is the one that MySQL used and continues to use now that they were bought by Oracle.
More information about: <http://oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/duallicence2>
Now there loophole if a company uses your GPL code but they don't distribute your software, ie as a SaaS, they are not required to make that code public. In order to fix that the [AGPL](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Affero_General_Public_License) license was created.
Finally if you really want to avoid anyone but you from making money of your product, you could consider the Creative Commons Non-Commercial license as mentioned in this [answer](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/218435/12987)
My recommendation is use Dual Licensing, and stick with the GPL or AGPL
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: As @username_3 mentions, in my particular field also, SaaS is rapidly making GPL moot as a means of earning money from your software; let alone as a means of furthering the goals of the FSF.
AGPL seems to solve that, but it is a bit controversial; it is the most up to date and purist version of FSF's vision out there, but it is also very incompatible with a lot of licenses, including GPL. And that may discourage a lot of use cases you did not intend to discourage.
Personally, I am more a fan of a license that explicitly states its intent (free for academic, not for commercial) than roundabout haggling as to what constitutes 'distribution' or 'linking'.
This [Academic Public License](https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/209586/317799) seem to capture that intent pretty well. Note that offering a license like this is likely to get you rants from zealots how its not Real Open Source. But you can solve that by offering a dual AGPL license option. Hardly anyone might want to use that license in practice, but it will shut up these types, since it doesn't get more FSF-approved than that.
And as a bonus, as mentioned by @username_1 above, it might also get your university IP Commissars off your back. Definitely try and stay under their radar if you can; in my experience the last thing you need in your life is a bunch of clueless lawyers taking a year or two blocking releases of your work while trying to figure out if they can make a buck off it.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/18 | 646 | 2,713 | <issue_start>username_0: Few days back I communicated a paper in a journal and some silly mistakes are there. While citing some other author's paper in my paper, instead of reference number it is showing a sign of question mark. I know that's a mistake while running the LaTeX code. I didn't check in hurry. Shall I inform the editor about my mistake? If yes, then how should I write a letter to convey this?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you should inform the editor. Simply resend the corrected paper, and explain the error. There is no need to write an extensive letter or to make a grand apology. Something like this in an email will do fine:
"Dear Editor,
I am sending you a corrected copy of the paper titled '...', submitted on XX. There were errors on pages A, B, and C in the citations. They appeared as "?" instead of the correct citation, due to incorrect processing in LaTex. This version has the correct citation and I have proof read it for other errors.
Best regards,
Monalisa"
Also - give the file a different name than the original and a different time stamp so there is no confusion between the corrected version and the original.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In mathematics (and I suspect in many other areas), the paper review process usually goes like this:
1. Submit your original paper.
2. The referee's report comes back some time later, suggesting some changes
3. You make some changes and resubmit an updated version
4. items 2 and 3 repeat until the referee is satisfied
5. Now is the time to put the paper into the format required by the journal (e.g. using the journal's style file). Also make any final changes required by the referee
6. The journal will prepare the paper and send you page proofs showing the exact final version of the paper
7. You verify the page proofs (usually there is a short deadline to do this)
As you can see, there are several opportunities in the process when you can fix small typographical problems in the paper. And I have found typographical issues in almost every paper I have refereed, so it is expected that you will need to fix some.
One "trick" is not to put the paper into the style required by the journal (e.g. the journal's special LaTeX style) until the final revision. This guarantees that you have at least one shot to fix any typos, even if the referee miraculously does not recommend any changes.
Note that *significant* changes are something else entirely, and you should avoid them if possible once the paper is submitted. This includes things like rewriting the proof of a theorem or adding new results. But fixing a misspelled word or replacing a "??" with a citation number are fine.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/18 | 3,500 | 14,146 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm entering my senior year of college in the US and I'm starting to consider my options for graduate school next year. My field is kind of blurry, in that I have certain research areas that I'm interested in, but researchers in those areas often fall into many different fields (linguistics, cognitive psychology, neuroscience, psycholinguistics, etc.)
I have some faculty that I'm interested in working with, but I have a dilemma because some people (and schools) I'm interested in are in the US and some are in Europe.
I've been reading about how graduate school typically works in Europe, and it seems to be quite a different beast from the US. Many (practically all) Ph.D. programs in the US that I looked at are entered immediately after a Bachelor's degree, they're fully funded, and the two years of course work at the beginning is to earn the Master's degree. On the other hand, all of the European programs I looked at vary greatly on how their funded (I'm so confused), and require a Master's.
So this brings me to a lot of questions.
Are Master's degrees in Europe funded? And what would happen if I would decided to get a Master's degree in Europe but then come back to the United States for the Ph.D.? Is it possible to go straight into a European Ph.D. without a Master's at all? (I'll be graduating with 18 credits of graduate coursework and 27 credits of independent research).
Does anyone know of any good resources so I can figure out this situation?<issue_comment>username_1: I can not speak for all of Europe but in Denmark the PhD programme is a job. You are hired by the university to conduct research so you will get paid. [You need](http://www.dtu.dk/english/Education/phd/Applicant/Pre_acceptance-1-) a Master's degree to apply for a PhD position, and there are probably some grade point average you would need.
[Here](http://www.dtu.dk/english/education/phd/rules/phdguide/english/-/media/DTUdk/Uddannelse/PhD-Udannelse/Dokumenter/engelsk-ph-d-bekendtgorelse.ashx?la=en) is a link to a .pdf document with the danish legislative framework.
You can apply for the PhD programme even though you have taken your Master's degree in USA. If you want to take your Master's in Denmark you need to apply for it through your own university if you want it to pay the stay. There is also a possibility of getting paid while in Denmark by the governments [state education support](http://www.su.dk/english/).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I'll start with the bad news:
>
> Does anyone know of any good resources so I can figure out this situation?
>
>
>
Such a resource does likely not exist, as the answers to your questions will vary widely between different european countries and even different universities. Europe is historically a hotchpotch of different academic systems.
I will try to give some answers that I think are true in most places. For all of the answers, you will likely find exceptions and differing systems if you look long enough:
>
> Are Master's degrees in Europe funded?
>
>
>
Unfortunately very rarely.
That being said, as aeismail points out, most european degree programs are either for free or (compared to US programmes) extremely cheap. That still leaves you with costs of living and opportunity costs, though.
>
> And what would happen if I would decided to get a Master's degree in Europe but then come back to the United States for the Ph.D.?
>
>
>
I don't quite understand that question. You would have a master's degree, which would allow you to either find a job or do a PhD in the US (however, you could have done both with a bachelor's degree as well).
>
> Is it possible to go straight into a European Ph.D. without a Master's at all? (I'll be graduating with 18 credits of graduate coursework and 27 credits of independent research).
>
>
>
Usually this is not possible. I have heard here on academia.SE that there are universities that make exceptions, but the places that I am aware of do generally not allow to start a PhD at all without a master. However, not all is necessarily lost. Some places (including my current university in Zurich) have established compromise solutions for incoming research students without master's degree. Here, for instance, a professor can apply that you do a research-based "fast track" master, which allows you to skim on the course work and do research with the professor instead of most of the regular master curriculum. This is quite comparable to the US system, but as far as I know it is node widely publicized (I don't think this possibility even appears anywhere on the web page).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I am not even sure it makes sense to speak about “graduate schools” in Europe. In the countries I know, the big divide is between the master's degree and the PhD program, and *not* between bachelor and master programs. A master's degree is mostly another diploma with slightly higher requirements/more focused topic but otherwise not unlike a bachelor's degree in the way it's organized. There might be some exceptions here and there but it would be highly unusual to enroll in a PhD program without a master's degree.
Since tuition fees are relatively low in many countries, funding is not an issue in the way it is in the US (you still need to pay for the costs of living obviously but that's already the case for a bachelor's program). In some countries (e.g. France), people coming from abroad to study are treated exactly the same (which means paying something like EUR 250 plus some money for health insurance and a few other things), in others (e.g. the Netherlands), they have to pay a much higher fee (EUR 13000 per year where I work). In Germany the situation seems to be very fluid, with the rules set at the provincial level and changing all the time but I think fees are at most EUR 1000 per year.
Because local students don't have to pay that much and the fees don't differ much if at all from one program to the other, it's not surprising that you didn't find information about whether the master's program is “funded” or not, it's not a distinction that makes sense at this level. Furthermore, in many countries, support for students who face financial hardship is available from the government and not through the universities. Either you qualify and you can choose the university you want or you don't and you have to pay but you wouldn't specifically look for a “fully funded” program.
After the master's degree, the status of PhD candidates also varies a lot from country to country. In Switzerland, Scandinavia, the Netherlands and increasingly Germany, you are an employee with a reasonable salary (people will tell you it's less than what professionals with similar qualifications get, which is true, but you can still live comfortably). Some form of funding (from the main university budget, a research grant, European grant, corporate sponsorship, foreign government grant, etc.) is therefore a prerequisite. In France or Italy, you are considered a student and working conditions are often poorer. In STEM fields, PhD positions are usually funded and you do get some money and resources for your research. In the humanities, it's not uncommon for PhD candidates to have no funding, sometimes not even a desk and to scrap a little money to get by through teaching or even another job.
Here again, tuition is usually not the issue but living costs are (for at least three years, at a time where you might want to start a family, etc.) Even an unfunded humanities PhD candidate in France does not have to pay much to the university. Unlike bachelor's or master's degrees, I don't know any university where PhD candidates from abroad would have to pay more to be admitted or be categorically barred from some funding (but the situations are so diverse that it might exist somewhere I guess). The only hiring restriction of that kind I know are [research fellowship from the European Space Agency](http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Careers_at_ESA/What_you_need_to_know_about_the_Research_Fellowship).
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Some useful information on studying in the UK may be found from the [Fullbright Commission](http://www.fulbright.org.uk/resources-for/students-coming-to-the-uk). They also provide scholarships for Americans to study in the UK. I don't think there is a more general reference for all Europe as each country has their own system.
To answer your more specific questions:
In Europe most PhDs are funded (at least in STEM subjects) but often this funding is limited to EU residents (due to the money being provided by the EU). For example [UK research council studentships](http://www.findaphd.com/funding/guides/phd-funding-guide.aspx) are only available for UK citizens or residents. Other EU citizens are eligible for fees only (no stipend)
The structure of the PhD varies by country, although you are correct that almost all start after Masters. In the UK the PhD is generally 3 years research with no assessed courses (although a few more specialist ones may have some courses).
Here is another useful reference I just found <http://www.findaphd.com/study-abroad/europe/> which gives an overview of the PhD structure for some European countries.
As you mentioned most PhDs require a Masters. One other option in the UK is to do a PhD at a doctoral training centre ([DTC](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctoral_Training_Centre)) these offer four year PhDs for people with a bachelor's degree. I think the 1st year is mainly taught courses approximately equal to a Master's.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> Is it possible to go straight into a European Ph.D. without a Master's at all?
>
>
>
It very much depends with the country. In Spain, no. On the other hand, in Sweden (at least, Stockholm's University), you need three years worth of credits and at least a certain number of credits on project work. This said, this is the administrational requirement: it is very unlikely you would get hired with only three years; but it is all up to you to show the PI how awesome you are.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_6: Postgraduate programs are, as you've discovered, structured very very differently in the USA and Europe.
First, the caveat: there is doubtless lots of variation across institutions and fields, and I'm basing the below on my limited experience (PhD from UC San Diego and now a postdoc at U. Edinburgh, so I know lots of current UK PhD students). Also, I'm in exactly the same murkily defined field that you're asking about.
My impression is that the general rule is: in the US, PhD programs and research-oriented masters programs are treated together as being a single indivisible unit. This has obvious practical consequences -- for example (and in answer to one of your questions), in the US PhD programs I'm familiar with, if you show up with a masters in hand, this doesn't actually change your course requirements versus someone with only a BA/BS. You'll have to go through a second "masters program" (but probably won't officially be awarded a second masters degree). But it also affects the structure of the program itself. My program had required lab rotations and a structured "2nd year project" that were technically part of our masters coursework, but were explicitly designed to provide a gentle ramp into our PhD research. (Psych departments are usually even more aggressive about this, and will have you running subjects within the first 3 months, ideally in the lab you'll continue in through your PhD research.) You're working in the same environment, with the same cohort, and the same faculty throughout, and the expectation from the beginning is that you'll be going all the way through to the PhD, so there's training from the start on how to "think like a researcher" (which is the main thing taught in PhD programs), the programs can kind of blur into each other, and there's some flexibility about when exactly you start your PhD project proper. This potentially gives more room to try out things that don't work, etc., before you have to write your actual proposal and put your nose to the grindstone. OTOH, it's not uncommon for programs to stretch into 6 or 7 years.
In the European system, by contrast, masters and PhD programs are treated as distinct programs. Sometimes people stay with the same supervisor for both, but it isn't the usual case, and the programs aren't structured with that in mind. The PhD programs as far as I can tell are much more tightly defined: you're expected to show up, start work on a project more-or-less immediately (possibly a specific one that your supervisor has picked out ahead of time and gotten funding for), and be done and dusted in 3 years.
For me, the US system was definitely better, and that bias is probably reflected in the above; but, people are different, and I can imagine the European system working better for others. Also, every PhD is different -- by far the most important determinant of PhD success is the interaction between you and your supervisor. (Well, being funded is pretty important too.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: I got an MA in the U.K., it was a 12 month program and I applied to PhD programs in America right afterwards. I got accepted to a program but they required me to complete another MA degree. They transferred in 8 credits from my MA from the U.K..I’m now working on 24 (two full time semesters) of coursework before I can begin my PhD coursework.
In the end, I paid out of pocket for a one year MA degree in the U.K., and had to do a (funded) year of an MA when I returned home. So, really the only time I lost was the period in between when I was applying. I’d still do it again.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_8: If you’re not from the EU or EEA it can be pretty difficult to get funding from a European university for your PhD (mainly in the UK), if there’s a funding body in your country then that could be your option when applying for a PhD in Europe. And in many universities you would need a master finished.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/18 | 649 | 3,104 | <issue_start>username_0: Few months back I presented a paper in conference and sent the same for possible publication in the conference proceedings. I got no response for a long time and with the consent of my supervisor sent the same paper to a journal with some modifications in the paper. I want to know is it okay to send the same paper to both? As far as I feel, its not right, still I need opinions. Thanks in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: Apparently conference has different meanings in different disciplines. In the fields with which I am familiar, conference publications are either limited to abstracts or are published in proceedings which are just as official as a journal In the former case there is of course no problem but in the latter sending the same paper off to a conference (for proceedings publication) and to a journal would not be correct. Therefore, you need to figure out what norms apply in your field, particularly whether the conference proceedings is a real publication.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You could start from reading the journal publication agreement. It usually is very explicit on whether it is permitted or not to re-publish the results which appear in conference proceedings. In my discipline it is typically not permitted unless **significant** changes to the text and content have been introduced. Therefore, you should decide for yourself how significant were the modifications you made.
If the new paper is "much more" than a conference one, you could keep both, but you should tell the journal editor that this work is based on a conference proceedings which are yet in review.
If the new paper is not significantly different from the conference, you should withdraw one of them before the reviews arrive.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: In any field it is unacceptable to have a paper published twice. Therefore, you should look at
1. Which kind of publication conference has. If it is a formal one, with a known (or even less known) publisher, ISBN, indexing - then it counts like a publication and you cannot publish it as it is in a journal. If those are abstracts proceedings, or sth printed just for distribution to the conference/workshop participants - it should be safe to submit it somewhere else.
2. Journal/Conference requirements - in most cases it will be specified that they look for novel papers, not published and not under submission somewhere else.
3. Most conference publishers (but it is more complicated in your case, as you publish proceedings of best papers in journal, not in proceedings book) would allow you to submit significantly revised/extended paper to a journal.
In your case it is probably best to contact the conference organizers and check if any formal publication planned and if your paper is selected for this publication (if it is not clear from the conference website and reviews). And do not submit to a journal before you clarify all those things - as you can get your paper retracted as double submission, with your department being informed about this...
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/18 | 1,043 | 4,691 | <issue_start>username_0: If a private company provides a grant for some research to be carried out but is hoping for a particular outcome from the research in order to take certain business decisions, should this be described as a conflict of interest?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see this as a conflict of interest, but the issue itself is deserving of careful attention from both a contracts perspective and a scientific perspective. I would advise against any such funding source that puts restrictions on the publication of findings. In particular, you state that the business is "hoping for a particular outcome." Are you still allowed to publish results that are contrary to their expectations -- or, does the contract specifically state they have authority over what can and cannot be published. You will want your grants management officers to carefully scrutinize the contract.
Science is really about answering questions through an open, replicable and systematic process. It is not about providing evidence for an expected outcome. I think this type of funding will be more problematic than helpful for a scientific career.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The company should not impact your choice of research methodology, interpretation of results and the dissemination avenues. If the funding agreement is clear on that, then the "hopes" of a company are isolated from the research stream, and I do not see any evident conflict of interest.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: A company exists to make money. They fund a research in the hope that the outcome will be beneficial for them (as a student works on a project in the hope that there will be good results out of it). There is nothing intrinsically bad there.
The problem may be with the rest of the conditions. But it will be perfectly fine if: (a) They guarantee you are free to publish whatever you consider and (b) they don't force you to get "good results".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Yours and their interests do conflict but this is not how we usually use the work "conflict of interest." Say if your company actually makes cat food, and then you later got recruited as a consultant on setting up a safe cat food policy, your decisions made in the policy task force can be potentially affected by your financial involvement with the company. In that case, you will need to declare to the policy task force that you have a conflict of interest. In most cases, conflict of interest requires more than two parties, or one of the parties having two or more roles.
In your case it sounds more like a threatening to academic freedom and scientific integrity. Some preventive measures should be done now before things turn ugly. Here are some things that I have been doing in various projects, you may consider following any of them.
1. Set up a "statement of understanding." It's a binding contract describing who should have the interpretive rights to the data, and how to safeguard everyone's interest. There isn't a template for that, you'll need to lay out items you cannot risk to lose (e.g. your reputation, your institute's reputation, etc.) and contrast with the company's intentions. Talk to your institute's PR or legal representatives for a consultation.
2. Highlight your value as the neutral middle man. In that sense, express to them firmly that you would like to explore the quality of the product without any prejudice. And explain to them that if their product is substandard, it's better to know now than later when found out by consumer interest group.
3. Agree upon ALL the protocols, big or small, prior to any analysis. The turmoil I got into mostly about reanalyzing data. Some people just don't give up... and if you look at the same thing for enough iterations, good findings can come out just due to chance. Follow the protocols strictly, and meet to agree again on any modification.
4. Keep all documents, e-mails, lab books, etc. and keep copies of them.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: Yes, it is a clear [conflict of interests](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest):
>
> a situation occurring when an individual or organization is involved in multiple interests, one of which could possibly corrupt the motivation.
>
>
>
It does not disqualify your research (as long you make it with full scrutiny, etc; see other answers), but for the sake of scientific honesty you need to mention it (as it can *possibly* alter your motivation, e.g. to get further grants from the same company or to condition probability of publishing on the outcome).
I saw such notes, e.g. that a given scientist works for a particular drug company.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/18 | 1,571 | 6,080 | <issue_start>username_0: I think that in India research institutes will never take a faculty candidate who is over 35. Is it so all over the world?
I am asking this question from the point of view of if someone starts their PhD. at the age of 27 then its unlikely they will be faculty candidates till they are 40.<issue_comment>username_1: Absolutely not.
---------------
Age discrimination is explicitly illegal in the US. (I believe the same is true in Canada and most European countries.) Even as the chair of my department's recruiting committee, I am forbidden to *ask* the age of any applicant.
If you're worried, just don't put your date of birth on your CV. But this really is a non-issue.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: short answer, no. There are 40+ year old new professors who will get tenure after starting work at a new school in the US. There are 35 year old first time science majors landing jobs because of their passion and I recently met a 55 year old who just completed an EET degree who landed a position at a decent firm with a good wage although he has a math phd as well from 30 years ago. It is mainly cultures where age discrimination is the disgusting norm and Google. India may be the worst country on earth in terms of age discrimination and bribery. There are job postings I saw (just out of curiossity from an article on this very subject) explicitly asking for no one over 26 where in the US those positions would say 10+ years of experience or a phd (experience preferred). If immigration is a possibility then it may be the best route. Some other countries have age discrimination issues as well but, generally with the exception of India, countries that were part of the British empire with its legal system tend to be more lenient. You have options. Age discrimination hurts everyone. Experienced professionals tend to demand less, are less restless, and require less training. Maybe a cultural shift is in order?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: (This started out as a comment on username_1's answer, but became too long, and I don't want to clutter his post.)
This is a gross simplification, but what hiring committees care about is your future research potential. In the absence of a crystal ball, they have to extrapolate from your previous achievements: The more in less time, the better. For this, your actual age is irrelevant - it is only important how long you have been an active independent researcher, which usually starts after your PhD. (This also touches on the point @user11192 made.)
**Tl;dr:** It's not age, but age minus time of PhD, divided by number of publications (and grant money squared).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: In some countries academic studies will only start at an age of ~22 due to factors such as military/civil service etc. which may yield:
22 + BSc (3 years) + MSc (2 years) + PhD (4-5 years) + (Postdoc 3-4 years) = 35 to 37
In this case 35 would be considered a typical, or even relatively young age for a candidate.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: This answer stems from a few comments I made to a [related question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28610/am-i-likely-to-be-perceived-as-less-successful-if-i-start-as-an-assistant-profes).
>
> Are old (>35) faculty candidates discriminated against all over the world?
>
>
>
I can't speak to the worldwide aspect of the question. What follows will be specifically tailored based on my tenure-track job hunting experience in the U.S., although it may be applicable in other parts of the world.
As pointed out in [another answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23613/are-old-35-faculty-candidates-discriminated-against-all-over-the-world/23632#23632), it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of age in the United States.
However, I think the more interesting question to ask/answer is:
*Even though it is illegal to discriminate against someone due to their age, does that mean that age plays no role whatsoever in tenure-track faculty hiring decisions?*
Sorry to get your hopes up: I don't have so much a concrete answer to this question; however, I offer an example of something an "older" candidate may face when seeking a tenure-track faculty position.
Being an "older" candidate myself, I noticed on my unsuccessful interviews earlier this year that I seemed to get along just fine with tenured faculty; however, there was clearly some tension between myself and the "younger" tenure-track faculty at several places that I interviewed. If age did indeed play a role in this perceived tension, one may easily see why younger candidates would have an advantage. Furthermore, since most tenure-track candidates are from the same age group, the fact that an "older" candidate doesn't gel with his peers of the same academic rank for "some reason" makes you stick out like a sore thumb.
Ultimately, I think that if age does play a discriminatory role in faculty hiring decisions, it may be that it is an indirect discrimination. That is, in a direct sense, nobody cares about your age or have been trained to think that way. But if you don't have similar personality characteristics of those tenure-track faculty already in the institution's employ, then there is still some likelihood that you will be marked as a bad fit for the job. How high that likelihood is I cannot say.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: It is the ratio of your accomplishments to age that matters. Generally accomplishments saturate with age and hence it appears that there is an age discrimination. I am sure a 50 year old Nobel Laurette will be hired directly as Professor at many Universities.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: My university is planning to hire >100 senior faculty. Presumably none of those people will be young. The idea is to buy the university a world-class reputation. I think other universities that have money and a desire to increase their rankings use a similar strategy. Poorer universities hire younger faculty with an expectation they can be paid less.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/18 | 787 | 3,534 | <issue_start>username_0: Some faculty members are required to perform service to the community. Providing free education that improve societal value is one of the many ways to deliver the service. However, we recently are faced with a difficult situation in this channel, and I hope faculty here who had experience in teaching outside the school or social science researchers working in underprivileged groups will be able to point us to the right direction.
We are a small group of software developers and teachers who give free computer lessons to pretty much anyone who is interested. So far we have taught 32 students and they are all working as programmers in various places. However the dropout rate has been 8 to 1 so far. But lately the big problem is finding new students.
We don't charge money, there are no contracts to sign and we even provide required software and books free of charge. Sometimes we even supply the computers. The classes are online last about a hour a day. Still, even with sharing success stories and having former students themselves talk to new students, we are finding it hard to find new students who would be interested in taking the classes. I personally know people who would rather complain about the unfairness of life than take a job working as a paid intern somewhere.
My question is: What can we do to make free learning more appealing to people who are not in a school environment?<issue_comment>username_1: You have a program that sounds almost too good to be true (e.g., free classes, free software, free books, no contract). And your biggest challenge is that you cannot find new students, right? Well, two things come to mind. First, there is a "catch" -- that is, when it is too good to be true, it probably isn't true. Are there any hidden costs or problems with the program that you have not shared or identified? Second, what is the extent of the mismatch between the objectives of this program and the needs, values, and interest of your target group?
My recommendation would involve careful analysis of both questions. You are likely to find a lot of good information by following up with those who have dropped out. Ask them why they dropped out. Barriers to attendance? Then you need to figure out why more people aren't signing up. Consider surveying individuals who were provided the information but chose not to sign up.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I am a biology education researcher who has created and run free online preparation courses for students entering a college introductory biology course, so I've done a good bit of reading on this subject.
In March 2014, the Public Policy Institute of California published a report on student learning in online courses in California community colleges.
<http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_514HJR.pdf>
They found that students do significantly worse in online courses compared to their own performance in face-to-face courses. Students who showed the biggest negative effect of online courses were:
* younger
* African American or Latino
* male
* those with low intent to transfer to 4-year college
* those with low high school GPA
If your target demographic is within this group, they will find an online course more difficult and unsupportive than a face-to-face course would be. As a researcher, I would like to see if a cohort of your students that meets together to watch videos and work on homework is more successful than a cohort that takes your online version.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/18 | 646 | 2,815 | <issue_start>username_0: Is it possible to do research at the university without acceptance to the university? What I mean that if I have free time and desire to help with projects, can I join some reseach group.
The question is not a legal stuff (I suppose that's legal :) ), but what are the chances that some university lab accept me?
I do not want to search for work position as little afraid about strict timelines. At the end I hope to get few articles that will help me to get to grad school and nice spent time.
Desired field is robotics.
Thanks for ideas and opinions.<issue_comment>username_1: It's not necessarily a problem that you're not enrolled in the university - it's possible for researchers to hire non-students in many cases.
However, it would be difficult to get someone to take you on when you don't want to make any commitment (e.g. get an official job). From their point of view: why should they invest time and effort training you and working with you, when you have no formal connection to them and can disappear at any time?
It may also be legally problematic (depending on the country) for them to allow you to work for free, when it's not part of an educational program for your benefit (like a formal internship program for students, or thesis research).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I believe that this is usually up to the faculty member that is running the research project. A couple of my friends in grad school contributed to our research group prior to their actual grad-school application, so that the faculty would know them better when the application came around.
(My area of research is compilers, different specialty, but still in the Computer Science/Computer Engineering department.)
When/if you do contact faculty members, try to have some concrete ideas and thoughts (and mention that you are looking for experience only for future grad-school applications, not a paid position.) Professors get bombarded with emails about grad students wanting TA/grader/RA positions every day, so you won't get a second thought if you send something generic. If you're very new to robotics, then instead of a concrete research topic, you could say something concrete about your experience and send your resume.
Contributing to a project, especially if it leads to a paper (but even if it doesn't) will definitely improve your grad-school application. It's a good strategy!
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: One way to effect this is to enroll as a "special student" taking one or two courses.
That way, you have not been "accepted" by the university for a degree. But it may allow you to "qualify" for an internship by being a student. Also, if you attend classes for even one or two courses, it makes it easier to make connections.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/18 | 1,524 | 6,419 | <issue_start>username_0: Some postdoc positions are formally advertised. Arguably, even more exist on a "gray market" - they are not advertised, and a person seeking a postdoc is supposed to contact a professor directly.
One ethical concern that I see here is that in some situations even when the agreement between the professor and prospective candidate is made, the position still has to be advertised (e.g. this may be a legal obligation in some countries). The advertisement will attract a number of applications, none of which has a chance to succeed, since the deal about this position has already been made behind the curtains.
My second concern is a bit harder to formalise. Is it true that when a candidate approaches a professor with a request like this, some serious ethical restrictions arise? Is it more difficult to turn the offer down, if you were the one asking for it? Is it more difficult to terminate the postdoc contract earlier than expected (and move to permanent position, for example), if you were the one asking for it?
Should I keep trying to apply only for a officially advertised positions, or should I give up and approach senior professors directly?<issue_comment>username_1: I have no special experience in applying for or managing postdocs, but this is just my take on the ethics.
As regards your first question, I would say it is the professor who is being unethical if he arranges backdoor deals for postdocs, while still openly soliciting applications which he has no intention of considering. I don't see anything unethical about approaching a faculty member to ask if they have or will have postdoc positions available. If they don't want to give you special treatment, they can easily and fairly say something like, "Yes, we will be accepting applications in November, I'll forward you the job ad when it's ready." If they tell you you are a lock and then mislead other applicants, that is their issue, not yours. As an applicant, I can't see that you can be held ethically responsible for how other applicants are (or aren't) considered, since you have no real control over that process.
As for your second question, I think those issues shade from an ethical level down to the level of personal courtesy. My impression is that everyone applying for every job tells the offerer that they are really interested in it, even if privately they view it as only a backup option. I agree this is somewhat distasteful in that it's not totally honest and straightforward, but I don't see any way around it and I think everyone expects it. Unless you were down on your knees begging for the postdoc, I don't think people would consider it a real ethical breach for you to reject it.
Plus, it's easy to avoid getting in too deep by making your inquiry diplomatically: instead of saying "Hey I really really want to do a postdoc with you have you got one?" you can say "I'm looking into postdoc opportunities and your work looks very interesting, will there be any postdoc opportunities in your department/lab soon?" By mentioning opportunities, plural, you make it clear that this is only one of many options you're exploring, and you can avoid appearing to make a commitment at an early stage. There may come a later stage where they ask you for a handshake agreement that you will accept the offer when it is officially made, and if you reject it after such a handshake, that could be considered unethical, but at the early stage you're describing I don't think it would be an issue.
In the end, I think the questions about rejecting the offer or leaving the position early come down to personal and professional courtesy and the desire to maintain good relationships with these people. As a nonacademic analogy, imagine you call up your friend and say, "Do you want to go to the movies?" and he says "Yes" and then you say "Okay, you can go by yourself, I don't actually want to go, I was just asking." You may not be cited by any ethics board for that, but you will be perceived as a jerk. Likewise, if you string people along making them think you want a postdoc offer, and then cavalierly drop it, even if it's not an actionable ethical breach, you may gain a reputation as a sneaky and underhanded negotiator, which will not help your professional career.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think you are making a *much* bigger deal out of this than what it is. Ultimately, you seem to assume that this is something shady that should be avoided, as indicated by your word choices ("gray market", "should I give up and approach senior guys directly"). **This is not the case.** It is not more honorable to score a publicly announced job than to get one that has been offered to you personally and without lengthy official search.
Hence, the ethical implications over other postdocs are minimal to non-existant.
>
> One ethical concern that I see here is that in some situations even when the agreement between the professor and prospective candidate is made, the position still has to be advertised (e.g. this may be a legal obligation in some countries). The advertisement will attract a number of applications, none of which has a chance to succeed, since the deal about this position has already been bade behind the curtains.
>
>
>
This may or may not be true, but it is certainly not *your* ethical issue. This is a problem that the professor has to deal with.
>
> Is it true that when a candidate approaches a professor with a request like this, some serious ethical restrictions arise? Is it more difficult to turn the offer down, if you was the one who was asking for it?
>
>
>
I don't see why this would be the case. A postdoc is a postdoc is a postdoc. You do not bind your soul to this professor for eternity because he has offered you a job directly. Generally, turning down offers may cause some -unwarranted- hard feelings (everybody involved is just a human, after all), but the same is also true for any other job search.
>
> Is it more difficult to terminate the postdoc contract earlier than expected (and move to permanent position, for example).
>
>
>
No professor *should* fault you for terminating a postdoc early to move on to a faculty position. Of course some will, but, again, this has little to do with how you got the job in the first place.
**So if you have a network: go ahead and use it!**
Upvotes: 5 |
2014/06/18 | 1,616 | 6,671 | <issue_start>username_0: I am currently doing a post-doc in pure Math [teaching and research] in the US. The academic year 2014-2015 will be my last postdoc year and I am currently considering my next employment possibilities.
For several reasons, I am considering a job outside academia in Europe [I am an E.U. citizen], for my next employment. As I know about nothing else except for my research in Pure Math and teaching of Math, I could use as much advice as possible regarding this potential transition from academia to a non-academia job. I have read through the many related questions and answers. But I still could not find answers to the following questions.
(1) How early in advance do you have to apply for a job outside academia? Let me provide a bit more details: I really need employment as soon as my current one ends, b/c I need the money to support my living expenses. So I cannot really afford to spend more than one or two months without employment. I am asking this, b/c for academia jobs one typically applies one year ahead of time, things are standard and clear. But not so clear to me are applications outside academia.
(2) Given that I know nothing about programming right now, what would my chances of getting a programming job be? In other words, would I get some sort of PAID training in programming?
(3) Any sort of comments/advice regarding working for a publishing house? [such as: salary?]
Thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: I have no special experience in applying for or managing postdocs, but this is just my take on the ethics.
As regards your first question, I would say it is the professor who is being unethical if he arranges backdoor deals for postdocs, while still openly soliciting applications which he has no intention of considering. I don't see anything unethical about approaching a faculty member to ask if they have or will have postdoc positions available. If they don't want to give you special treatment, they can easily and fairly say something like, "Yes, we will be accepting applications in November, I'll forward you the job ad when it's ready." If they tell you you are a lock and then mislead other applicants, that is their issue, not yours. As an applicant, I can't see that you can be held ethically responsible for how other applicants are (or aren't) considered, since you have no real control over that process.
As for your second question, I think those issues shade from an ethical level down to the level of personal courtesy. My impression is that everyone applying for every job tells the offerer that they are really interested in it, even if privately they view it as only a backup option. I agree this is somewhat distasteful in that it's not totally honest and straightforward, but I don't see any way around it and I think everyone expects it. Unless you were down on your knees begging for the postdoc, I don't think people would consider it a real ethical breach for you to reject it.
Plus, it's easy to avoid getting in too deep by making your inquiry diplomatically: instead of saying "Hey I really really want to do a postdoc with you have you got one?" you can say "I'm looking into postdoc opportunities and your work looks very interesting, will there be any postdoc opportunities in your department/lab soon?" By mentioning opportunities, plural, you make it clear that this is only one of many options you're exploring, and you can avoid appearing to make a commitment at an early stage. There may come a later stage where they ask you for a handshake agreement that you will accept the offer when it is officially made, and if you reject it after such a handshake, that could be considered unethical, but at the early stage you're describing I don't think it would be an issue.
In the end, I think the questions about rejecting the offer or leaving the position early come down to personal and professional courtesy and the desire to maintain good relationships with these people. As a nonacademic analogy, imagine you call up your friend and say, "Do you want to go to the movies?" and he says "Yes" and then you say "Okay, you can go by yourself, I don't actually want to go, I was just asking." You may not be cited by any ethics board for that, but you will be perceived as a jerk. Likewise, if you string people along making them think you want a postdoc offer, and then cavalierly drop it, even if it's not an actionable ethical breach, you may gain a reputation as a sneaky and underhanded negotiator, which will not help your professional career.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think you are making a *much* bigger deal out of this than what it is. Ultimately, you seem to assume that this is something shady that should be avoided, as indicated by your word choices ("gray market", "should I give up and approach senior guys directly"). **This is not the case.** It is not more honorable to score a publicly announced job than to get one that has been offered to you personally and without lengthy official search.
Hence, the ethical implications over other postdocs are minimal to non-existant.
>
> One ethical concern that I see here is that in some situations even when the agreement between the professor and prospective candidate is made, the position still has to be advertised (e.g. this may be a legal obligation in some countries). The advertisement will attract a number of applications, none of which has a chance to succeed, since the deal about this position has already been bade behind the curtains.
>
>
>
This may or may not be true, but it is certainly not *your* ethical issue. This is a problem that the professor has to deal with.
>
> Is it true that when a candidate approaches a professor with a request like this, some serious ethical restrictions arise? Is it more difficult to turn the offer down, if you was the one who was asking for it?
>
>
>
I don't see why this would be the case. A postdoc is a postdoc is a postdoc. You do not bind your soul to this professor for eternity because he has offered you a job directly. Generally, turning down offers may cause some -unwarranted- hard feelings (everybody involved is just a human, after all), but the same is also true for any other job search.
>
> Is it more difficult to terminate the postdoc contract earlier than expected (and move to permanent position, for example).
>
>
>
No professor *should* fault you for terminating a postdoc early to move on to a faculty position. Of course some will, but, again, this has little to do with how you got the job in the first place.
**So if you have a network: go ahead and use it!**
Upvotes: 5 |
2014/06/19 | 581 | 2,316 | <issue_start>username_0: Are professors paid during sabbatical? I'm mainly concerned about schools in the US. Answers about other countries are also welcome.<issue_comment>username_1: Yes. When you're not paid, it's normally called a "leave of absence."
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The short answer is: yes.
Sabbatical is not a vacation but is rather a leave of teaching to focus on research and publication. At many schools it is not automatic but must be applied for and is granted at the provost's discretion.
Some schools will only provide six months of funding, but will release a full year of teaching, making the faculty member responsible for getting grants for the remainder, or effectively working at half salary.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: In a perfect world, yes.
I work in a 400 year old pontifical university in the Philippines. I was tenured in 2012 which is supposed to entitle me certain leave privileges (LOA without pay, sabbatical leave, study leave etc.) I was not only denied any of these entitlement, but was also fired when I applied.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: In most universities in **Australia**, you are paid a full salary when you go on sabbatical. You will also typically receive an allowance that hopefully covers most costs associated with travel and accommodation. You may also get an additional allowance if you are travelling with family. That said, such allowances often do not cover the full cost of travel. In such cases it helps if you have additional sources of academic funds (e.g., grants, consulting funds, etc.).
From what I hear, academics in Australia tend to be eligible to apply for sabbatical more frequently than in other countries (often every three years). That said, obtaining sabbatical is not automatic. You would typically need head of department support presumably based on a strong rationale for the visit in combination with strong research or teaching performance in the preceding years.
Here's a few examples of policies:
* [University of Melbourne Special Studies Program (Long)](http://about.unimelb.edu.au/careers/development/academic/sspl)
* [Deakin University Academic Study Program](https://www.deakin.edu.au/about-deakin/careers-at-deakin/staff-development/academic-study-program)
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/19 | 554 | 2,272 | <issue_start>username_0: I am careful about placing attribution to quotes in assignments. Occasionally, in assignments, I must use quote marks for purposes other than quoting, but my instructor misinterprets this as a "quote missing a citation".
In the Wikipedia article on [Quotation Marks](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_marks), one can find a list of examples of other uses of quotation marks. Suppose I need to use quotation marks to "signal unusual usage" ("Quotation Marks", 2014) or show some "distinction" in "usage" ("Quotation Marks", 2014) or even scare quotes. Is there any way in which I can indicate this, in APA style?<issue_comment>username_1: Normally referencing styles (APA, Harvard, etc.) address the issue of referencing the work of others. The "example" you have given is not an issue of using someone else's work and, therefore, I do not believe it would be addressed in any referencing system.
Your instructor should certainly understand the idea that quotes are commonly used for many reasons, including indicating a turn of phrase which might not be obvious to some. For example, I would not badmouth my boss because I "know which side my bread is buttered on." Clearly this is not a quote but rather a turn of phase, a saying, or an "idiom."
All that said, I do see a lot of student who forget to cite direct quotes and, as an instructor, it is very frustrating to me.
If you are using idiomatic expressions, with which your instructor is unfamiliar, you might add a footnote explaining it to "lend a helping hand."
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: APA does not provide a distinction. It is assumed that all thinks enclosed in quotation makes are either quotes, and therefore attributed, or something "special". The hope is that your text clarifies the reason for the quotation mark. In most well written papers, the reason for the quotation marks is pretty obvious. Therefore APA style does not mandate a difference in usage.
As to why your instructor is flagging them up, it is possible your instructor is using some sort of automated system to find the missing citations or that your usage of quotation marks is excessive or improper. It is probably best to talk to the instructor to figure out what is going on.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/19 | 903 | 3,937 | <issue_start>username_0: This is just a general question regarding UK (and I suppose Western European) masters degrees vs. US masters degrees.
The reason for asking is that I have heard that US masters are considered at the same academic level as UK Bachelors with Honours degrees. This seems like pure hearsay but I'd like to understand if there is any thing concrete in this assertion.
And does equivalency tend to manifest itself in the same ways in commercial environments too?<issue_comment>username_1: I've seen (several) hundreds of students get UK bachelour with honours degrees in 3 years. A master degree in the UK takes another 1 year.
Normally in the US a bachelor degree takes 4+ years and a masters takes another 2 - for a total of 6.
How can 6 years of education in the US be considered equivalent to 3 in the UK? If anything, you could consider a UK master degree similar to a US bachelor degree.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: UK degrees tend to focus on the main degree subject from the beginning of the degree program and thus are more professionally oriented than the US liberal arts education, which requires each student to learn a broader curriculum.
Interesting comparison here:
<http://colematson.com/2012/01/05/oxford-vs-us-an-undergrad-degree-comparison-chart-glossary/>
As for "If anything, you could consider a UK master degree similar to a US bachelor degree." It tends to be the other way around due to the UK degree being a more narrow focus towards the subject area opposed to the US degree having a more broad overview.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The value of a US Masters degree is very dependent on the institution and its requirements.
A number of US institutions mass-market their MS (or equivalent) degrees as a quick way to make money. These degrees (often marketed as 1-year degrees) are basically just a coursework requirement and can be equivalent to a bachelor's degree with some advanced courses.
Other institutions require a serious thesis or project as part of a masters, often requiring publishable results in a significant academic venue. This is similar in style to the "old-school" Masters and is a significant step above a bachelor's degree because it requires self-motivated research and often takes two years to complete.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: The UK and US have fairly substantial differences in their underlying educational philosophies. In my field, in the US Masters degree programs are generally one or two years long and include both course work and research in equal proportions. In the UK, Masters degree programs are a year long and have little to no research requirements. As for the level that the taught components of the programs are taught at, they are pretty similar across the two countries using similar textbooks and covering similar amounts of material in terms of both breadth and depth. The US and UK institutions I worked for accepted students from both countries and while international students often have more difficulties than home students, it is not obvious to me that going UK-US or US-UK is easier.
As for the difference between a US and a UK Bachelors degree. Final year classes taught in both countries again use similar textbooks and cover similar amounts of material in terms of both breadth and depth. In my experience, there does not seem to be a substantial difference between students coming out of US and UK institutions in regards to their preparation for graduate school. That said, there are substantial differences in these students. The US system provides much more breadth of education (e.g., foreign language requirements and general education requirements) that are absent from UK universities. I have never heard an admissions committee member in the sciences argue that student X is is more likely to succeed than student Y because student X is competent in a foreign language.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/19 | 656 | 2,799 | <issue_start>username_0: I had submitted my paper in an Elsevier journal one year back. Now, status update on the submission tracking says "Required reviews completed." However, for the last two weeks still there is no change in the status.
Should I ask the editor what is going on with my submission?<issue_comment>username_1: One year is a very long time for a paper to be under review, at least in the social sciences. Indeed, the change of status is promising, but I think following up with the editor on when the reviews will be complete is reasonable in this case. Indeed, as suggested in the comment (by Dirk), being polite is key.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To expand on Dirk's comment: The status you see means that the reviewers have submitted their reports to the online system, and the handling editor has received an email about this. Now she has to read the comments (and likely look at your manuscript again to see if they comments are relevant), come to a decision, and write a corresponding letter to the author summarizing the comments and justifying the decision. This will in general not take more than an hour.
But you should keep in mind that yours is not the only manuscript (nor, in all likelihood, the only journal) the editor has to deal with. In addition, this is both the end of semester *and* conference season in many parts of the world, so it is reasonable to assume that the editor is just very busy with more urgent deadlines, or isn't even in office. (Remember, editors are unpaid, so this work is on top of the regular duties of teaching, advising and doing their own research.)
In some cases, the final decision even involves two editors (associate/managing editor and editor-in-chief/communicating editor), which doubles the chance of other things getting in the way.
In light of that, I would say two weeks is definitely too early to worry and start contacting the editor; give it at least a month.
(Although I know how stressful the wait at this stage of the publication process is...)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: If the paper was in review for a long time (over a year as you mentioned), it is a very bad sign. Being polite is an obvious solution, but, I am afraid, it may not help. Most likely your paper will be rejected. One of the reasons, the reviewers, who are in the same area of research, are not interested in publication of your work. They will find "convincing" excuse not to publish it. Unfortunately, you've lost a lot of time. Still not late, however. Go to another journal, not necessarily to highly ranked one, and submit it ASAP. Another good option, go to arxiv or vixra and make submission right away. Be wise, something is better than nothing. This is the best what you can do now.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/06/19 | 619 | 2,816 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a PhD student in computer science and have submitted a paper to a conference which details my proposed architecture. However in the month or so since this paper has been submitted my architecture has undergone changes (relatively major), how is this normally dealt with?
If the paper is accepted do I present the work as it was at the time of submission or do I openly state that changes have been made and present the updated version of the architecture?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe you should do what is better to the audience.
In some disciplines/communities it is strongly assumed that conference participants read the abstracts/papers before the presentation, and expect the discussion to follow precisely the material that is published. In this case, of course, you could only comment briefly on the recent changes you've made.
In other fields (such as mine), the abstracts are used only as a means to (roughly) describe the topic of the presentation. It is quite normal to extend the actual talk beyond the scope of the abstract, or reduce the role of some pieces of research advertised in the abstract. In this case, I'd advise you to make a talk that is simply interesting for you and the audience. It can probably include both the original design and your contribution to its recent development. Make sure people in the room understand **why** the changes were needed, **how** you have worked them out, and **what** is the benefits of your new architecture.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I agree with @dmitry-savostyanov in that you should do what's best for your audience.
They've come to hear something interesting and if your work changed, then that seems to indicate that information on why and how it changed would be very relevant to their interests.
In CS, conference papers have a different status from conference papers or abstracts in other fields: they're long, they are actually considered publications, they're usually not published before the event, and most people in the audience will not have read them.
So your audience probably won't be surprised to hear something that's not in the paper.
On the other hand, if you really pique their interest, they may read your paper and feel disoriented or disappointed.
I would say report on the best results you have while being clear about what they'll find in the paper.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_3: In computer science, you have 2 options:
* In case your paper is accepted, you can update the paper for the final camera-ready version. If the changes are not too big, this can be a viable possibility and is actually no too uncommon.
* If the changes are too major, you can prepare an extended version of the conference paper for submission to a journal.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/19 | 647 | 2,966 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently completed a PhD in a research university in U.S. and came back to my home country in South America. I have a position as a faculty member in a state college. However, the position focuses on teaching and academic administration duties. Without a lab and funding, it has been very difficult to continue the research or even to continue a reciprocal correspondence with my research collaborators.
I was wondering if I can ask for suggestions about how to continue pursuing my career path as scientist.<issue_comment>username_1: Jessica, you are certainly in a tough position, because your current incentive structure gives most weight to teaching and administration. Thus, it will be difficult to maintain a strong program of research. The evidence on productivity among faculty shows that smaller more frequent blocks of time leads to more output than binge- or marathon-writing sessions. Try to make collaborations a priority, as this will help minimize your isolation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Where do you expect the funding to come from? In my experience, in UK and other European countries, the research funding comes from successful proposals to the relevant funding bodies. There are research centres that were established and keep going only because the staff there constantly submits project proposals (somebody told me that the success rate is 1 out of 5 or maybe even lower).
You are on your own, so your best bet is to find out what funding bodies can sponsor research in you location. Then you have to come with an idea about a project but keep in mind that most often than not the funding bodies have priorities, which change on regular basis, e.g. every year, and it is VITAL that your proposal fits their priorities.
Whether you personally will have time for research is another matter. If your college is not very interested in research, you might have a heavy teaching workload and would be able to spend time on research during the breaks between the academic terms. You might have enough funding for one or more PhD students, who would do the majority of the work while you supervise them.
There is another option, which might be not applicable in your research field as you mentioned you need a lab but maybe part of the research could be done this way – find undergrad students, who are enthusiastic about your research ideas and would be happy to do some work for free (or as a part of their assessment – coursework, final year project, etc.). That is how I started my research career many years ago (as a 2-nd year student) – one of our professors invited several bright students from the courses he was teaching to take part in a very innovative research. We had the first results after a couple of months, which allowed the professor to secure funding for several further projects. Then we could buy more equipment, attend conferences, there were several PhD grants as well.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/19 | 553 | 2,403 | <issue_start>username_0: I had worked on my math PhD for 4 years before dropping out almost 2 years ago to lecture at a small college. I basically finished almost all of my research but am having trouble finishing my dissertation. This is in part due to the fact that my advisor turned out to be a terrible match for me and not very helpful at all. I want to move up in my career but almost all teaching jobs require at the very least recommendation letters and unfortunately, I have not done a good job at keeping in touch with my advisor. Does anyone have any advice for how I can try to re-establish a relationship with my advisor or maybe choose someone else to work with in order to finish?<issue_comment>username_1: Re-establishing a relationship with an adviser that you left is sort like asking your former boss for your old job. There is certainly nothing wrong with doing that. Just think about how you left things with the adviser, perhaps recognizing and owning where you got off track and offering a plan to move forward. Even if you believe that the problems were that of your adviser, it is best to avoid those issues. Show that you are interested in completing your dissertation and self-motivated -- that is, that you are really prepared to move forward and will be independent to the extent possible.
If this doesn't work, then looking for a new adviser is certainly warranted. However, I think the path of least resistance is probably to patch the relationship with the adviser with whom you had worked. I guess you just want to communicate that you have the time and motivation to get it done, and that you will not be a burden on her or his time. Because you are in a teaching position with a presumably heavy teaching load, it would be good to really take stock of the amount of time and energy you have for completing the dissertation. You don't want to re-establish the relationship only to discover that it is way too much for you to complete.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: To move on in your career you need to (1) finish the dissertation; (2) publish lots of papers in prestigious places; (3) cultivate connections with senior people in the field by going to conferences, refereeing journal articles if asked, etc.
Finish your dissertation, and get a couple good papers published, and probably your old advisor will be happy to write you a good letter.
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/19 | 919 | 3,765 | <issue_start>username_0: I made a conscious decision some time back to pursue a career in academia and I got back into graduate school this year, working in an 'applied computing' area--educational technology. While I thoroughly enjoy what I am currently working on, in the near future, I intend to conduct research in more mainstream computer science areas. My question is, how long would it theoretically take for one to radically switch research areas? I know there is probably NO fixed time frame for this, but I am especially interested in hearing from individuals that did this or attempted to do this early on in their careers. I would also appreciate additional advice on how I could start working towards this at an early stage. Incidentally, I came across an interesting CACM article [1] that ascribes a 10-year 'once-in-a-career' shift, mostly as a result of evolving technology.
[1] <http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2013/10/168170-trends-in-computer-science-research><issue_comment>username_1: I've done it a couple of times in my career so far.
I think the 10,000-hour rule isn't far off the mark.
If you have no other commitments, and have the motivation, you can just about do that in three years, if you manage to avoid burning out. Most people will burn out attempting it: it's three years of work-eat-sleep.
If you think you'll only be working 35-hour weeks, and taking holidays, then reckon on six years.
If you're doing it part-time on top of a full-time job, then 12 years or more.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not quite so sure the 10,000 hour rule applies very well here. There are a couple things that need to be considered -- i.e., substantive expertise and methodological expertise. Although I am not in the area of computer science, the transition from educational technology to mainstream computer science doesn't seem terribly far apart. It seems like you have the aptitude for computer science, so you should not have really significant problems acquiring the substantive expertise. I would be concerned if you were saying that the switch was from educational technology to psychiatry or aerospace.
The other issue is the extent to which your methodological expertise generalizes to this new area. Have you acquired research skills that are relevant to your proposed switch? Do you have the core research skills for your new area? How familiar are you with the research in this new area. And what is the litmus test that you have achieved "expertise" in the new area?
I guess the issue really comes down to how much your knowledge and skills in your current area of work generalizes to your new area. So, I'm not going to put a number on this issue -- I just don't think it is possible without more information.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Hmm, it sounds like you are going to a relatively similar field... In any case, you can probably become proficient enough to be a grad student (or maybe post-doc) in your new field relatively quickly.
I know someone who made the switch from theoretical physics to biology mid-grad-school. It added a year or so. I also am in the process of switching from chemistry (my undergrad degree) to biophysics (in which I'll be getting a PhD starting next week). I'm hoping to be caught up by the fall. Loads of people switch fields at the undergrad-grad, grad-post doc transitions. After that I think it can be harder, at least until you get tenure.
Research (at least in the short term) involves being intimately familiar with a very narrow field of information. On the other hand, qualifying exams (in grad school) would require you to have broad based knowledge of the entire field. So it depends exactly what you will need to do and when.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/19 | 1,987 | 8,186 | <issue_start>username_0: I have had the suspicion that it may be for a while and apparently not all is a product of my mind. Let me quote from [an answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/23675/7571):
>
> In my experience, in UK and other European countries, the research
> funding comes from successful proposals to the relevant funding
> bodies. There are research centres that were established and keep
> going only because the staff there constantly submits project
> proposals (somebody told me that the success rate is 1 out of 5 or
> maybe even lower).
>
>
>
There are **two questions** here.
1. Can a company feasibly focus on obtaining funds in publicly funded research (as a business model) successfully enough to "survive"?
2. Can such a company be started (nearly) from scratch?
In short, the company would be exactly like a research institute (or institution) except that it would be private.
**Reasons why question 1** may not be feasible:
1. I don't see any company doing this kind of thing, i.e. there may be some, but there are not many, which means that it may be hard. It's a bad sign.
2. Public funds seem to be assigned to public entities, while companies can benefit from the collaboration and synergy, but they are expected to get their funding from their work as companies (searching for customers, etc.) In this case the customers would be the partners in the projects and the society itself, but again, this seems to be an "innovative" (maybe naïve, or even plain stupid) idea.
3. Research is a means for something, not an end on itself, that's why the business model should be on something else (point two) and that's why such a company would raise eyebrows on the mere idea of its existence. It may even be against some kind of tacit rule or even written laws.
**Reasons why question 2** may not be feasible:
1. No previous history of success of the company, or products or anything means zero (or negative) trustworthiness and no projects assigned to the company.
2. No partners would like to associate with the company in a project for the reasons in point 1.
3. The most similar case I can think of are spin-off companies that are created from successful research labs, not from scratch.
4. OMG so much communism! Go to kickstarter you hippie!
As **an example**, a possible scenario that could be close to this: Someone writes a paper about a software system that does something not very novel in the state of the art but in a way that is very different from an architectural point of view, leading to good results in practical terms. In short: in theory nothing is new, in practice what was just a dream is now a reality. What is done remains the same in theory, but how it is done is completely different in practice (and now it works). Unfortunately only a proof of concept (PoC) can reasonably be implemented.
Would it be feasible to request funds to continue the development of this PoC (still very far from a commercial product) as a start-up or that simply doesn't make sense?<issue_comment>username_1: From the perspective of the US, there are many research institutes that operate as a private business entity. These research institutes can apply for some federal funding in the same capacity as a research at an educational institution. I see it being possible to start a private company without a lot of capital, although you will need to have a very strong skill set that is in demand. Whether this is a sustainable model really seems to depend on the specialized skills that the business would offer and the infrastructure that would allow it to efficiently prepare grants. Research-I educational institutions in the US have an incredible infrastructure to prepare and apply for grants that would be difficult to replicate in the private sector.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Existence proofs in the US: RTI, SRI, Battelle, Lincoln Labs. Also, there have been many smaller firms that were funded completely from a large number of SBIR grants ($150K to $1M), though the government has cracked down on these "SBIR-mills".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: In Europe, companies exist that primarily live from [FP7](http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html) or, now, [H2020](http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en) funding. They rarely contribute much to projects in terms of research, but often handle tangential issues, such as project management, dissemination, marketing, or association with standardization bodies. Their model works because (1) they do things that none of the research partners actually wants to do, and (2) because they are often SMEs, which is generally politically helpful to get your funding proposals accepted. Further, as writing grant proposals is their core business, they usually also have grant writing experts that have the time to actually keep up with the various changes that the european commission is constantly applying to its programmes and rules (something that many researchers struggle to find the time for).
Formally, these companies often camouflage as either consultancies or technology spinoffs. That is, you will not find it on their web page that their core business model is actually to milk grant programmes, as this is strictly against official funding rules (as a company, you can only apply for funding if you plan to commercialise the results, and you are not supposed to make a profit from the project itself). In practice, the project officers seem to tolerate these businesses - for now.
>
> Can such a company be started (nearly) from scratch?
>
>
>
You will need a reasonable amount of seed money, as the H2020 rules require proof that an organization applying for grants has enough financial stability to likely survive over the typically 3-year project duration. I know from one startup that wanted to participate in a project (for actual technology reasons) which was in fact struggling to cross this hurdle. However, if you have the required seed funding, I see no reason why you would not be able to start such a business. Whether it is a smart business idea is a different question, given that you are basically living off of a loophole in the current funding practices, and you can never tell how long this loophole will stay open.
**Edit:**
I just saw that I missed this question:
>
> Would it be feasible to request funds to continue the development of this PoC (still very far from a commercial product) as a start-up or that simply doesn't make sense?
>
>
>
Yes, at least in Europe there are funding sources for exactly this kind of case. You should inform yourself about the concept of Technology Readiness Levels ([TRLs](http://ec.europa.eu/research/conferences/2013/energy_infoday/pdf/session_3_summary_of_the_calls_open_in_2014_-_philippe_schild.pdf), slide 4), and the different kinds of funding available for each TRL. If you look at [this presentation](http://www.earto.eu/fileadmin/content/01_Seminars___Conferences/AC_2013/2013_PRESENTATIONS/6.SeanMcCarthy_Getting_Ready_for_Horizon_2020__Hyperion__EARTO_Conference.pdf) and go to slide 32, there is an overview over different funding instruments in H2020 depending on the maturity of the idea.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: It may be important to understand that grants for universities are often given to support them as teaching institutions, even if the grant itself is only about research. This means, even if grant seems focused exclusively on research, it is targeted to the educational institution of the supporting country and would not be given to the commercial company, or educational institutions of another country, event if these would be capable of delivering the comparable scientific results.
As a result, while it is not uncommon for a company to join a university on some shared grant, I have never seen a company that would make its major income on such grants. However there are many companies that make business on assisting in research (like sequencing DNA, building curated databases or the like). They major clients are other companies but some richer universities may also order such services.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/19 | 644 | 2,677 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm an undergrad and I would like to publish in a research journal, specifically, ones about chemical pedagogy.
Is it hard to get an article published in a journal?
Are there any other venues which may be easier - i.e. do you know of any say magazines on chemical pedagogy or aimed toward chemistry educators? I'd imagine that the standards for publication in a magazine are lower than in a scientific journal.
Any advice for a beginner at writing and publishing?<issue_comment>username_1: Depends on the journal. You might want to try publishing in your university's undergraduate journal if you don't have backing from a faculty member.
[For an example of a university-specific undergraduate journal, [click here](http://thurj.org/).]
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I would imagine that your best bet is to talk to a faculty member about it. Find a faculty member who is also interested in the topic. They can probably give you good advice on this and may even be interested in co-authoring the paper with you (which is probably more realistic as an undergrad), and honestly going this route wouldn't be too bad for you since your name would then be associated with an expert on the subject, giving you more credibility.
One thing I've learned in college is that if you have an idea, talking to a faculty member about it can get you a *lot* of opportunities. And if you talk to someone and they can't help you, they can almost always refer you to someone else who can be of help.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: If you ask questions "Is it hard to get an article published in a journal?", about journals and in general "Any advice for a beginner at writing and publishing?", etc. then it is very unlikely you will publish something in a reputable journal, based only on a few lines of advice via Internet.
However:
* try looking at student's conferences; very often there are great places to share undergraduate work, and learn how to present results (via posters, talks, sometimes - conference proceedings),
* ask someone from your university to look at your work, and guide you through the first publication (a lot of work, but worth it); but since it's chemistry you do it in someone's lab, right?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Yes, it is hard to publish in a peer reviewed journal.
If it were easy anybody and everybody would do it. That should not prevent you from trying.
Typically a magazine is easier to publish in. The real question you need to ask yourself is "Who is my target audience?" The general public? Or experts in the field? If the general public, a magazine might be the best choice.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/19 | 578 | 2,376 | <issue_start>username_0: When applying for a second Masters, does one's undergrad score hold a lot of importance or does it get discounted in favor of better score in Master's?
Adding more information:
I have a BS in Mathematics from one of the good Indian university colleges. I spent a lot of time in my BS studying only my favorite subjects at the expense of others. I have a 66.67% in BS. Contrast this with the university topper who will be somewhere close to 90%.
I also have an MS in Economics from one of the good (in India) Economics grad schools. My MS score is decent (3.14 / 4.00). Though my batch topper scored 3.44, the typical top score from the school is close to 3.75.
I am considering applying for MS in Data Science (or CS with concentration in DS). I want to understand how much my bad score in BS will bring down my chances of getting a good school.
PS: I currently work as a Data Scientist for one of the leading analytics companies in India (will soon finish a year).<issue_comment>username_1: Your question is difficult to answer confidently because you don't provide information about the program you're interested in or your prior studies. What did you study in the past? What do you want to study?
Did you do well in your undergraduate classes relating to your prospective masters area? Is your most recent masters in an area closely related to that of your second masters? Did you perform well in your first masters program?
To make things easier, you should perhaps call the admissions office of the program/department you're interested in joining. Be straightforward about your situation and they'll likely be helpful in guiding you.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In your situation, perhaps the most important thing that you have going for you is your work experience, since it is in the same field, data science, that you plan to study for.
Your Ms grades are decidedly better than your BS grades, but may or may not be strong enough to get you into the second Master's program (even if your BS grades weren't an issue). What is beginning to set you apart from other candidates is your work experience.
If you don't get in now, I'd apply again in TWO years, when you would be closing in on three years' work experience (the optimal amount). That's the time when you are most likely to be admitted.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/20 | 824 | 3,397 | <issue_start>username_0: I found a list of "potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers" [here](http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/).
I am just wondering if there is a similar list of reputable open-access journals in the social sciences.<issue_comment>username_1: I am not aware of a list of "reputable" open access journals in the social sciences. But, as a safe starting point, the most reputable open access journals in the social sciences have an ISI impact factor.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: The [Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)](http://doaj.org/) is an attempt to create such a list for all fields, including the social sciences:
>
> DOAJ is an online directory that indexes and provides access to quality open access, peer-reviewed journals.
>
>
>
They have a [search function](http://doaj.org/search) that lets you drill down to specific fields.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I would suggest going about this a slightly different way. The reputation of journals derives from views of scholars in a particular discipline. There are many closed access journals that are not very reputable and many open access journals that are reputable. You can figure out the ones that are reputable by looking at three things:
1. What journals are being cited in other journals of known reputation? Journals that get citations in other journals are likely to be publishing decent research. This is not a guarantee, of course.
2. Who is publishing in the journal? Reputable scholars tend to publish in reputable outlets. If a journal has prominent scholars publishing good work there, it's probably a decent journal. This is not a guarantee, of course.
3. Who sponsors and publishes the journal? Reputable journals (especially in the social sciences) tend to be published by or endorsed by scholarly associations. This is not a guarantee, of course.
Thus, rather than trying to find a list of reputable journals, think about how you would evaluate any particular journal. If you find correct answers to any of the above questions, there is a good sign it is a reputable journal since the idea of "reputation" is a social construction that reflect precisely the above criteria.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: OnlineSchools.org produces a list of various [open access journals](http://www.onlineschools.org/open-access-journals/). While I can't say all are reputable, most look like they point to well established and credible organizations or educational institutions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The real problem (and probably the reason for this predatory journal explosion) is that the classic journals have become abusive and predatory themselves. For example Springer/Nature journals will reject your paper without explanation and direct you to one of their fee-paying open access for guaranteed acceptance on resubmission.
Worse, the old classic journals do not do peer review often, make decisions based on profitability of your paper and sometimes take months or even over a year to respond. Some do not ever respond. This includes Springer/Nature which did not respond at all to a submission and did not respond to the inquiry about why they did not respond. So, may be these predatory journals are just as predatory as the old corrupted ones. We may have to switch to the new era.
Upvotes: -1 |
2014/06/20 | 775 | 3,410 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a postdoc working on a research project, which is funded by a grant that runs for 3 years.
After my first year working on the project, I identified a problem which could potentially lead to a new research direction, but it is not directly related to my current project. I am required to work on the problems defined in my current project proposal.
What should I do in this case, given that I may need to wait for another 2 years before I can possibly work on the new problem?<issue_comment>username_1: You might consider starting a journal to record your ideas. I'm guessing that your new idea is pretty good, but you will certainly have many, many more good ideas over your career. This might be a situation when it is best to spend your time thinking, refining, and planning -- as opposed to acting. Having ideas is certainly very good, but you can't pursue all of them. Since you are just starting out your career, I would focus on being as productive as possible with your current project and enhance your skills. You will find that one idea leads to another, and you will eventually have way more ideas than time and money. This is certainly much more desirable than newly minted PhD's who are struggling to come up with a project. Good luck!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Your research project doesn't own you ... it merely pays the bills. If you got an interesting idea related to your project, you have an ethical obligation to discuss this with your advisor. If your idea has nothing to do with your project, you have every right to spend your free time developing it, as long as you maintain appropriate time and effort on your project.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Now you are a postdoc and not a graduate student anymore. As such, you will have many research ideas, that you will not have the time to implement yourself. So, it is time for you to start delegating this work to "less experienced" workforce than you. That means undergraduate, master or PHD students. So, you should discuss it with your advisor that you have a new idea and that you are planning to propose a new undergraduate or MSc thesis. Perhaps he might even propose, working with a graduate student who is a bit stuck at his current stage of his / her PHD, so working in your new idea might be beneficial to both of you.
In any of these cases, co-authorship issues should be discussed early and thorough. For undergraduate, MSc students usually the assumption is that they do most of the work (it is their thesis after all) but you write the paper and you get to be first author. For teaming with PHD students, things are a little bit trickier, so these issues should be discussed in detail, BEFORE the cooperation begins. Also, make sure that your PI is OK not to be included in the subsequent publication (since this is your idea after all). Of course, if you want to include your PI in your "additional" publication then by all means, go ahead (this will also help you bend his objections about the time you will spend on your new project). But if you do not, make sure you discuss it before doing it, so you will not get into hot water.
In this scheme, not only you can multiply the number of your publications more easily and faster but also you help other people, who might be your future collaborators. So, you really have nothing to lose.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/20 | 1,290 | 5,159 | <issue_start>username_0: I've got a project underway that involves human subjects, and I got IRB ([Wikipedia Link](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_review_board)) approval. I'm thinking about my next project while working on this one. I'd like to collect some exploratory data for the next one, and potentially make use of it in any resultant publications. Nothing involves any real risks to respondents, so I feel that there are no ethical constraints binding me.
But as a practical matter, will anyone ever check that any findings were pre-approved by an IRB to be looked-for? What might the consequences of ignoring IRB be?
This is social science.<issue_comment>username_1: I have never heard of a journal checking for IRB approval. However, as @xLeitix notes, your university may care very much, since doing studies on humans without IRB approval may get it into legal issues.
*And* I personally know of one case where departmental colleagues initiated a scientific audit of a professor, requiring her to dig up *all* documentation (filled-in questionnaiers, raw data, ... *and IRB approvals*) for some studies they were concerned about. Everything checked out all right, but if the IRB approvals had not been there, the PI would have been in very deep doo-doo.
So: get your IRB approval, and make sure it's safe and sound, with scans and electronic backup. Keep it for the requisite number of years, even after the study has ended and been published. Inquire of your university how long that is. Given today's cost of storage, I would keep the scan around indefinitely.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: To add to Stephan's answer, most university IRB's have specific protocols for exploratory research which does not involve going through the full IRB panel. Such things are variously named (with various levels of fact-checking and paper work):
1. Exemption from IRB.
2. Expedited IRB.
Here is [one](http://www.irb.cornell.edu/forms/) relevant link to get your started. Moreover, you can always file for amendments or extensions to your existing approved IRB protocol which are usually granted pretty quickly.
One of my advisers always told me to have your IRB bases covered. You never know when or if you could be scientifically audited.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I submit to a biology education journal and they have just started requiring the IRB number or a letter from your IRB saying the project is exempt.
It's possible to get a backwards exemption if your institution is the forgiving type and your protocol is sensible... Getting signed consent and so on.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: >
> Nothing involves any real risks to respondents
>
>
>
While potential risks count against approval, no risk doesn't imply no need for approval.
E.g., if I'd want to measure native blood cells (no treatment but immediately dilute with physiological NaCl, place under the microscope, measure, and destroy). As for the amount, a drop from the finger-tip is more than enough.
For this\*, the *safest* possible sample is my own: I cannot infect myself due to the contact with my own blood. Nevertheless, ethics approval does not distinguish *who* the human in question is, and I'm treated the same as any one else: I need approval.
There are even ethical guidelines that just plain forbid this:
>
>
> >
> > [1.5 No one should work with his or her own blood.](http://www.gre.ac.uk/research/rec/blood-collection-policy)
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Obviously, for all experiments on students & colleagues there is always the question how to ensure that there is no pressure for them to participate. As this pressure could come from superiors, it logically has to include oneself. IMHO this alone is sufficient to require ethical approval for such experiments.
\* things would be *completely* different if the sample were cultured or transformations were involved, etc.: there risks would *increase* if working with own samples.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I agree with all the posted answers that emphasize adherence to all IRB issues. I disagree with anything that suggests it is not that important for social science researchers. Indeed, there are some forms of social science research that is exempt (e.g., use of de-identified and publicly available data sets), but a lot of it must go through the review process.
The part of your question that has not been answered is the **consequences** of ignoring IRB. Federal regulations exist with respect to IRB, so you can be sure that your institution will take it very seriously.
<http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html>
At minimum, you can fully expect an IRB to shut down your program of research if you are in violation of IRB rules and regulations. This is a very serious issue, and you must adhere to all aspects of IRB throughout your research. Indeed, it can be very challenging, but the challenges will be far easier to manage than the consequences if you are in violation.
If you are in doubt about any IRB issue with your research, talk to your IRB directly. Do not assume your research is exempt.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/20 | 2,167 | 9,556 | <issue_start>username_0: My area is mathematics. I have just found another proof of the main theorem in my paper. It is slightly more elegant than the previous proof that I wrote, but the idea is very different. When submitting this paper, can I include two proof in the paper, or must I select only one? Personally, I don’t want to delete either of them, but I don’t know how the editor will deal with this situation.<issue_comment>username_1: I very much understand your personal satisfaction here - it is a pleasure for a mathematician to "cross-proof" a result by two different methods. But what is best for your readers? Are both of the proofs equally aesthetically pleasing and easy to comprehend? Are the ideas behind them really significantly different?
I would recommend you to discuss your proofs with a supervisor or senior colleagues, probably on a local seminar in your group. Collect their opinions on which proof is better and why. Then think again and maybe it will be easier to see which one is preferable.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: If the two proofs are sufficiently different, then it's entirely reasonable to include both of them in your paper. You might, however, want to think first about whether the proofs might actually lead (easily) to different generalizations of your theorem. If they do, then you get two benefits: It's then clear that the two proofs are genuinely different. And you have some more general results.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As another strategy, I suggest that first explain one of the proofs which has more consistency with other contents of your paper and then briefly outline your other proof (maybe in a remark after your theorem). In this way, the reader easily reads one proof and has the option to consider another proof too.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There are three alternatives here:
1) Include the original proof only, perhaps with a remark that you later found a different proof.
2) Include the more recent proof only, perhaps with a remark that you had earlier found a different proof.
3) Include both proofs.
All three of these are certainly acceptable, and depending upon the circumstances any one of them may be best. There is a lot to say here about the nuances of various situations: here is an incomplete discussion.
When might 1) be best? Suppose you have already written the paper and that you have been planning to submit it at a certain near date (and perhaps you have received funding for this work). Suppose that both proofs are relatively long and that including both of them would make the paper close to twice as long. (In fact, the second proof uses material which is not yet present in the paper, including both could more than double the length of the paper.) Suppose that the second proof, although "slightly more elegant", does not have any other specific advantage to it, e.g. no further applications that you can see. Or suppose that it suggests to you a new possible approach or avenue, but you haven't developed it much and would like to spend more time on this than you can spare in delaying the submission of your paper.
Then it is plausible to just submit your paper as is, possibly with the remark about the second proof. Math papers have a temporality to them. By that I mean that although it might be intellectually more satisfying to work out every aspect of a single problem before you submit a paper on it, in practice this is almost never possible, because (i) mathematicians, like other professionals, need to show evidence of work done and put out product in a reasonably regular manner, and (ii) mathematics is potentially infinite: there may well *never* be a natural stopping point. <NAME> settled for a special case of the Taniyma-Shimura Conjecture when he must have suspected that a few more years of work could yield the whole thing. <NAME> wrote a paper solving the Weil Conjectures and then another solving them in a better way (though the first was good enough!) six years later. What chance do the rest of us have?
When might 2) be best? Suppose you've already written up the second proof and/or you know it would be acceptably easy and fast to do so. Suppose the second proof significantly shortens the length of the paper. Then, in confluence with the rest of the circumstances above, it is plausible to submit the paper with the second proof only (possibly with a remark...).
In general, space in strong math journals is at quite a premium. Journals like papers which have "no fat", and they especially like short papers which get in, prove a strong result, and get out. My best publication is five pages long (for the non-mathematicians: this is really short for a contemporary math paper) and it was accepted as is with absolutely no revisions requested or critical comments made. They often don't like papers which have "too much exposition" or "too little content for their length". I hope you can hear my eyes rolling as I type out these sentiments, but I'm just telling it like I think it is. If you write a paper which is "twice as long with the same content", then you risk a journal liking it less.
You can always try to publish the other proof later: one point in favor of withholding the better proof is that it will be easier to publish it later. It will be hard to publish a "less elegant proof that I found earlier" in a journal of the same stature as your original publication, but there are other venues for mathematical content. For instance you could put a longer version of the paper on your own website where you include both proofs -- or, if it seems preferable, a "supplement" to the paper containing the first proof. How important is this work to you and to the community? Maybe some day you will be teaching an advanced course and/or writing a book: that's a great place to include both proofs. Or maybe this work is just one stop for you on the road of mathematical research, and it happens that you were perceptive enough to find two proofs and don't feel the need to publicize both of them. (But please read the second bullet point.) There are quite a lot of "less elegant proofs" that the rest of us do not see.
When might 3) be best? If both proofs are relatively short, easy and fast to write up, and do not add substantially to the length of the paper. Especially, if the proofs really do look different from each other and/or when it seems like each may have its own applications. Or if the difference between the two proofs is itself interesting or is something you'd like to receive feedback on.
Let me end with two (relatively!) quick comments:
* I have recently been in a somewhat similar situation. About six weeks ago I submitted a paper -- relatively quickly after starting work in a certain subfield, for certain reasons that I needn't go into -- for publication. About three weeks ago I found a different proof of the main theorem, say A, of this paper, which all in all I like better: it leads relatively easily to a stronger result B. I am not completely decided on what to do -- certainly it depends on what happens with the submitted paper -- but I am leaning towards the first option. One reason for this is one I didn't mention above because it didn't seem to apply to the OP: there are coauthors involved, and that makes the prospect of slowing down / jeopardizing the acceptance of the paper less appealing. Another reason is that the second proof opens up the possibility of further improvements on Y: in fact, about two weeks ago, after doing some further reading suggested by one of my coauthors, I was able to get an improvement C. I am pretty confident that adding an extra ingredient (which I have not yet mastered) would lead to a further improvement D, and there are still *further* improvements E that I aspire to but do not yet know whether they are possible. Well, how many times should I rewrite one paper? I also freely admit that researchwise I do A and then B,C, probably D and possibly E, then I am thinking in terms of multiple publications rather than just one. And conversely: B and C are pretty good, but I would like to have the chance to see whether I can get to D and E before I publish B and C. These are not easy decisions: perhaps I'll change my mind.
* Publications aside, the experience of discovering a second proof of a theorem is a really important and positive one for a mathematician, more so than senior mathematicians seem to successfully communicate to our students and junior colleagues. I have been thinking recently about the "bipartite structure of theorems and proofs": roughly, proofs are viewed as being secondary objects to theorems, but I think that rather both are basic, and the incidence relation between them is a key one in the traversal of the mathematical landscape. If you two different proofs of a theorem, *try to figure out whether they are actually the same*. If they are, then you'll have made a new (to you, at least) connection between two things you already knew: again, this may not sound so sexy but I claim that it really is. Or if they aren't, then (well, it doesn't follow from graph theory, but I claim that's far more likely than not) you've actually proved at least one further theorem, which you should carefully write down and then look for alternate proofs of. And so forth! (Of course, now that you've heard my thoughts about this you know *how hard* my eyes roll when journals say that they are interested in new results, not "merely" new proofs.)
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/20 | 3,649 | 13,155 | <issue_start>username_0: The open access publishing world has a number of predatory publishers. Many know about [Beall's list](http://scholarlyoa.com/) which identifies publishers and journals that engage in questionable practices. The existence of these questionable publishers and journals makes choosing a quality open access journal difficult. Consortia like the [Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association](http://oaspa.org/) and the [Directory of Open Access Journals](http://doaj.org/) seem to promise a level of scrutiny. For example, [members of OASPA](http://oaspa.org/membership/members/) include the [Royal Society](http://royalsocietypublishing.org/institutional-membership) and [PLoS](http://www.plos.org/community/) and while I cannot find a link confirming it, it seems like the [AIP](http://oaspa.org/member/american-institute-of-physics/) is also a member. To me these are above the board legitimate and well respected publishers. There are also members, like [Frontiers](http://oaspa.org/member/frontiers/), that I am not sure how I feel about. I like that Frontiers is trying to push an innovative model of publishing, but I am not sure that I want them to have a large say in defining "good" open access publishing practices. Finally, there are members like [MDPI](http://oaspa.org/member/mdpi-ag/) which Beall classifies as [predatory](http://scholarlyoa.com/2014/02/18/chinese-publishner-mdpi-added-to-list-of-questionable-publishers/) and [Hindawi](http://oaspa.org/member/hindawi-publishing-corporation/) which while it never made Beall's list, did make his ["watch list"](http://carbon.ucdenver.edu/~jbeall/Beall%27s%20List%20of%20Predatory,%20Open-Access%20Publishers%202012.pdf).
I think I have two questions. First, why do these consortia affiliate themselves with questionable publishers? Second, how can the academic community pressure open access consortia to consider their members carefully?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Why do these consortia affiliate themselves with questionable
> publishers?
>
>
>
Hindawi is a founding member of the OASPA and MDPI, whichever opinion we might have about the quality of its journals, is a major player in the OA business. The OASPA apparently conducted [an internal investigation about MDPI](http://oaspa.org/conclusions-from-oaspa-membership-committee-investigation-into-mdpi/) and seem to be happy about the results. The question might be more: is the OASPA questionable?
>
> how can the academic community pressure open access consortia to
> consider their members carefully?
>
>
>
I would recommend not to consider open access consortia as relevant. Then, not submitting papers, not serving on the editorial board, and refusing reviewing tasks for sketchy journals.
On a more general level, one thing we could do is *reduce the demand* for low-quality, pay-for-publish 'OA' journals by challenging the hiring policies based on publication volume in our local institutions.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: DOAJ, in the last 2 years, has been seriously trying to cope with the problem of fake and predatory publishers and journals. In 2013, the announced they were tightening the criteria for admission of journals.
Here's the list of journals [added and removed in 2014](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/183mRBRqs2jOyP0qZWXN8dUd02D4vL0Mov_kgYF8HORM/edit#gid=1650882189).
They even looked for a network for volunteer [Associate Editors](https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0fPCpIPjZlmWXliVC1nXzl5aFE/edit) to evaluate journals.
In [March 2014](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dr3jnOygvuDlONSBv8lho4McQsEPFd0a5gtxjCmKd9k/edit), they again started receiving new applications, and gave old journals (already indexed) one year to fill in again the new form. In one way or another, there was a big delay, and it seems that just now they are actually [ready for reapplications](https://doajournals.wordpress.com/2014/12/15/reapplications-are-your-journals-ready-are-you-ready/).
A [Nature article](http://www.nature.com/news/open-access-website-gets-tough-1.15674) tells you the story.
For what is worth, I've worked with University of Bologna from 2010 till June 2014, and I managed the OJS platform (basically, a publishing software for open access journals). In that period, I spoke many times to the DOAJ team regarding Unibo's journals, and my personal impression is that they had *too much success* to cope effectively with all the applications.
They need(ed) more resources, more time, more money.
At the beginning the project was supported by the Lund University, but they probably had to find other ways to finance it. DOAJ asks for membership fees, and is now managed by a new committee, [IS4OA](http://is4oa.org/).
It's probably fair to wait for the new round of re-applications to evaluate the website again and see if the old issues are solved or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The academic publishing world has a number of problems with inadequate or completely absent peer review. These problems are present at both open access and subscription journals. The [recent statement from the STM Association also reflects this position that the problems are not just confined to open access journals](https://www.stm-assoc.org/2018_08_09_STM_statement_on_the_increase_of_unethical_and_deceptive_journal_practices.pdf).
The members of OASPA include a heck of a lot of publishers, from very small, to very large, including SpringerNature and Wiley. Elsevier would probably like to be a member but it doesn't meet the stringent [membership criteria for OASPA](https://oaspa.org/membership/membership-criteria/) yet.
Amongst publishers, OASPA membership is seen as a mark of quality. The [Think.Check.Submit](https://thinkchecksubmit.org/) cross-industry initiative encourages researchers to check that if the journal is open access, if the journal is in DOAJ and if the publisher is an OASPA member -- marks of trust/quality. Both DOAJ and OASPA are selective organisations - they don't allow or list just any and every OA journal or publisher.
As @username_2's answer notes, [DOAJ have done good work to weed-out questionable journals from DOAJ](https://www.nature.com/news/open-access-website-gets-tough-1.15674).
The same is also true of OASPA. After the [famous Bohannon sting published in *Science*](http://science.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full) [OASPA responded by investigating](https://oaspa.org/oaspas-second-statement-following-the-article-in-science-entitled-whos-afraid-of-peer-review/) all three of the then (2013) OASPA publisher members that accepted Bohannon's sting article. Those three publishers were [Hikari](http://www.m-hikari.com/), [Dove Medical Press](https://www.dovepress.com/), and [SAGE](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAGE_Publications). Incidentally, two Hindawi journals (*Chemotherapy Research and Practice* and *ISRN Oncology*) , one MDPI journal (*Cancers*) and one Frontiers journal (*Frontiers in Pharmacology: Pharmacology of Anti-Cancer Drugs*) tested in Bohannon's sting ALL rejected the sting article, 'passing' the test.
After these OASPA investigations, OASPA [decided to terminate the OASPA memberships of Hikari and Dove Medical Press](https://oaspa.org/oaspas-second-statement-following-the-article-in-science-entitled-whos-afraid-of-peer-review/). Neither publisher have since returned to OASPA membership.
I do not think that DOAJ or OASPA affiliate themselves with questionable publishers, and whenever this has been pointed out to them, they have both taken appropriate, detailed investigations to weed-out questionable journals and publishers.
I guess it all depends on whom one considers a 'questionable publisher or journal'. I certainly do not consider MDPI, Hindawi or Frontiers to be 'predatory publishers' but must admit I would not and have not chosen to publish with Frontiers or Elsevier because of distasteful business practices.
Organisations like DOAJ and OASPA cannot simply bar new members from trying to join - it is not in their spirit (openness!). But they certainly do heavily vet new membership or listing applications. I don't know what else to say. I found the question to be a little leading tbh...
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: If I understand your question correctly, you're asking about why OASPA and DOAJ associate themselves with MDPI, Frontiers and Hindawi. Only OASPA and DOAJ will know for sure, but I'll venture this reason: MDPI, Frontiers and Hindawi aren't necessarily questionable.
First, something to remember about Beall's list: this started as the work of one person. That means it's easily biased. OA spans from the clearly disreputable on the one end to a very gray area on the other. Beall undoubtedly had good intentions, but if the [Who's Afraid of Peer Review?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who%27s_Afraid_of_Peer_Review%3F#DOAJ_versus_Beall's_list) sting meant anything, Beall was only 82% accurate. In the sciences, a theory that predicts the right result 82% of the time is good but not great; in particle physics we even need a 5 sigma result (p-value 1 in 3.5 million) to claim a detection. I'm not saying Beall was wrong about MDPI, Frontiers and Hindawi, but I will say that "because Beall said so" is not a sufficiently good reason to conclude \_\_\_\_ is predatory.
Now about each publisher:
**MDPI**: See [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPI#Inclusion_in_Beall's_list) for more information. You can see Beall's criticism of MDPI stems from several aspects, such as how MDPI's articles are lightly-reviewed, how MDPI uses email spam, and how MDPI listed Nobel laureate <NAME> on an editorial board without his knowledge. However:
* Many OA journals do indeed review lightly. For example I once attended a talk by a Springer spokesperson who talked about a journal which reviews for correctness, not novelty (can't find the journal now, but [PLOS ONE has the same policy](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/journal-information)). Viewed one way this is laudatory - it makes peer review less random by eliminating one completely subjective facet! Viewed another way, this is terrible - it makes it seem as though the journal will publish old results known for hundreds of years as long as the author is willing to pay. Which is closer to the truth? You'll have to come to your own conclusions.
* Email spam. Although everyone finds them annoying, what constitutes email spam isn't universally agreed on. If you receive an email from someone you don't know with "Dear Professor Strongbad, I saw your question on Academia.SE and find it interesting, would you like to write an editorial on predatory publishers for my journal" - would you call that spam? Some people would, others would not. Also, what exactly isn't email spam anyway? If you never emailed people you didn't know personally, you would never be able to expand a journal large enough to be self-sufficient.
* Finally the Mario Capecchi case was later shown to be the result of inaccurate communication by Capecchi's assistant.
**Frontiers**: again, see the [Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frontiers_Media#History). You'll note that, similar to MDPI, there were established academics who defended Frontiers. Although the volume of allegations against Frontiers in the article is both larger and harder to justify if true, it's also the case that a Frontiers journal rejected <NAME>'s sting paper. [OASPA](https://oaspa.org/frontiers-membership-of-oaspa/) and [COPE](https://publicationethics.org/news/cope-statement-frontiers) both investigated Frontiers, and both decided that Frontiers meets their membership criteria.
**Hindawi**: once again see the [Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindawi_Publishing_Corporation#History). I don't want to rehash everything I wrote about MDPI and Frontiers since a lot of it also applies to Hindawi, but I'll add a few specific things:
* Hindawi was one of the pioneers of OA. In 2007, they converted all their journals to OA - this was both 1) before OA really took off and 2) pioneering, since even today most big publishers don't use a complete OA model.
* Hindawi is big. With over 400 journals and tens of thousands of published articles a year, Hindawi is a big fish in the OA pond.
* A Hindawi journal also rejected <NAME>'s sting paper.
* Some of Beall's criticism of Hindawi apparently focused on how high its profit margins are (apparently higher than Elsevier's). This not only has no relation to the quality of Hindawi's editorial process, it's also the case that Hindawi's article processing charges are lower than average, and they're based in Egypt, which as a developing country has much lower labour costs than the Netherlands-based Elsevier. One could say that Egyptians are bad at publishing relative to the Dutch, but that's borderline racism.
**tl; dr: it's not a given that any unbiased observer will conclude that these three publishers are disreputable. Accordingly, it shouldn't be surprising that some OA consortia are willing to count them as one of their members.**
Upvotes: 3 |
2014/06/20 | 392 | 1,676 | <issue_start>username_0: I am in the process of writing a paper that I think introduces a novel concept. There are some related factors (perhaps even foundational factors) that should be worked out in order to perfect my idea. I plan on putting these ideas in a 'Future Work' section of the paper. However, I have no interest in actually doing anything I put there. After this paper, I want to move on to another topic.
Should I include those ideas in 'Future Work'? Should I state that I have no plan to work on them myself, so as not to leave anyone interested in the work 'hanging'?<issue_comment>username_1: It depends how you phrase it. Do not write *This will be shown in a subsequent paper*. Do write *This and this still needs to be done*.
I think it is very informative to inform the audience of the next steps that need to be taken in this research. For example, shows you are aware of shortcomings of work done so far, and it can be useful to refer to in funding applications. However, there can be *many* reasons why next steps are not actually carried out. It might be your personal interest, but more often than not, project-specific funding runs out, PhD students or postdocs finish and move to new institutes, etcetera.
This is particularly true for PhD theses. The final chapter may be full of future work, which, in many cases, is never carried out.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Instead of having a 'Future work' section, you could, under the 'Conclusion' section, discuss briefly in what ways you believe the current work can be improved. You do not have to state that you have no plan to work on the ideas yourself.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/20 | 3,079 | 13,117 | <issue_start>username_0: How you as professors would prefer to be informed in this case? That is, how to turn down a Postdoc fellowship offer that you have already signed a contract.
The reason in my case is I get an even better offer at another fellowship foundation. But the fact that I contacted the professor, we applied for the fellowship together, I got it and accepted it, make me feel quite awkward...<issue_comment>username_1: I think the main thing is "as quickly as possible." You can either call or email, but don't wait any significant amount of time. It will be awkward, but too bad.
**EDIT:** I'll note that when I wrote this answer, I think the question didn't specify that an actual contract had been signed, so I assumed that the OP just meant an informal acceptance. Obviously, once the contract is signed, you're bound to follow its terms, and as Pete and username_2 say, there are certainly ethical considerations beyond that. I would probably state things in somewhat less absolute terms; while I think <NAME> is missing some aspects of academic culture, I think the question of precisely where this obligation ends is a good one. Does signing the contract create a moral obligation to do the full term of the fellowship no matter what the contract says? I don't think that would be most people's position. username_2 says it's OK to quit after a year but not immediately, (which I think is mostly a convention based on the fact that in the US jobs go on an annual cycle, so a year later an employer can position themselves better). What about after six months? The very fact that there isn't a precise answer shows that it is a judgement call, but you do need to exercise judgement in a way the OP seems not to be. You are, when considering a change like this, obligated to assess what kind of damage doing this switch would cause (for example, to the research of your prospective sponsor) and judge whether the benefit to you really outweighs this. It certainly hasn't yet sounded to me like it would. **END EDIT**
Rather than just bluntly specifying that you're backing out, you may want to lay out the situation with the first professor, and ask if there is a way to reconcile things (maybe you can spend some time in professor 1's lab with funding from the second fellowship?). I think it will "save face" if you can think of it as some kind of hybrid of the two positions rather than you simply dropping the first professor.
I would also think carefully about just how much better the other fellowship is. I'm not an absolutist about changing your mind after accepting a job, but it is a pretty major step and one only to be taken if the other possibility is **much** better. You run the risk of seriously burning bridges, especially if you don't have a compelling reason (say, strong personal considerations, or a permanent job vs. a temporary one). You don't indicate what the difference is, but if it's just a bit more money or slightly better location, then you should probably just suck it up and stick with your original commitment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: *How to turn down a Postdoc scholarship offer that you already signed the contract for*?
**You don't.**
I am all but a hardliner when it comes to such topics, but signing a contract and then not taking the offer is a major breach of trust. This is not "close" to burning bridges. Unless the other side is the most understanding person in the world, this is going to go down **really badly** with the other side, and mark you forever as an utterly unreliable person, whose word cannot be trusted even after the paperwork is already filed. Frankly, if it is just about location and salary, I would strongly advise against changing your mind. The only time when this *could* be acceptable is when you get offered a faculty position instead of a postdoc.
**Some Edits:**
After some more discussion, reading Pete's answer, and a good night's sleep, here are some additional clarifications to my answer:
<NAME>: *"I wonder whether they're working on the assumption that in a typical contract the questioner has already contracted to work for the full duration of the scholarship without notice period"*
No, that's not my assumption at all. I think it is perfectly ok to quit a two-year scholarship after one year, because something better has come up. However, to me there is a world of a difference between quitting after a year and effectively handing in your notice before your job even started. I do remember that there is a question here somewhere about what the shortest acceptable timeframe for quitting a postdoc is, but I can't find it currently.
Also, the comparison between postdocs and professional contractors is in this context quite helpful. I have been an software engineering contractor for a short time, and I would have **never** signed all the legalese paperwork for a customer and then immediately backed out because a better-paying customer came around. As a contractor, like a postdoc, you are living off of reputation, and this kind of thing is *not* good for it.
*"Isn't there a chance that the other person would be ok with the OP cancelling the deal?"*
Of course there is. Maybe the OP's original postdoc advisor does not care so much about this position anyway. Maybe the original postdoc advisor is really just that happy for the OP that he found a better post. However, in all the discussion so far, the OP has to the best of my knowledge never indicated that he plans on *discussing* with the other person. This question is all about *telling* the other person that he has changed his mind. There's an important difference.
<NAME>: *"Why should it "could be acceptable is when you get offered a faculty position"?"*
This is really just an amendment of the previous point. Even if you get offered a faculty position, you should not just *tell* the other person that you're out after all. You explain your situation to them carefully, and maybe they will understand and you will be able to renege without burning any bridges. The probability of the other person being understanding is much higher if the other post is objectively much better than the original one, which would be the case if comparing a tenure-track position and a postdoc position. A better-paying postdoc does not qualify.
<NAME>: *"this should not hurt anyone!"*
I am not sure why you would say that. The other person thought she is going to have an additional postdoc for a specified time frame, and now she isn't. How is that not very bad for her?
<NAME>: *"Are you saying you keeping all of your promises all the time?"*
I would say I try to. Anyway, a **signed contract** is certainly more than just a promise.
Anyway, I feel like I have said all there is to say on this matter. Still, I have created [a chat room](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/15245/getting-out-of-a-signed-contract) for this question, and should the OP or anybody else want to discuss this issue further, I invite you to discuss it in the chat room. As the commenting escalated a bit last night (surely my fault as well), I will not be answering any comments here directly anymore.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I upvoted both of the other answers, but in my heart I agree with username_2: academics live and die by their honor in a much more extreme way than is the norm in the contemporary Western world. I should admit that my views on this are more absolute than those of *some* of my colleagues (with whom I have had occasion to discuss issues of reneging on signed contracts). When I hear people say that it is okay to behave absolutely unethically -- even illegally, but counting on the fact that your former employer is not going to hunt you down and pursue a surely thankless legal action -- because they have to look out for themselves first, it really worries me. Such a person is baldly stating that ethics can be thrown out the window when the consequences are important...which is of course the time when ethical considerations matter most.
What stops a person who has reneged on a job from reneging on a future job? What stops them from engaging in unethical academic behavior in any of a hundred different ways? Beyond the student level, academia is almost entirely self-policing. In my field, if someone releases a preprint, and I respond by saying that I have independently proved the result but hadn't released it publicly yet, there will be some followup questions and discussion, but unless I give them an excellent reason not to, *people will believe me*. In science, every time you write a paper describing an experiment you did, you don't submit a videotape of yourself doing the experiment, you submit a written description of the experiment...*and people believe you unless they have an excellent reason not to*. Whenever you submit a paper, it gets sent to a referee, whom you trust not to try to steal the work. And so forth: only a small amount of "justified unethical behavior" brings this crashing down.
Once upon a time I was myself in the position of having accepted -- via an email correspondence, not via filling out a contract -- a postdoctoral position. Just a few days later I got offered another postdoctoral position. The first position was a great one, but it involved moving to Canada. The second position was probably even better: it was at a top 10 math department in the US. (Financially the second position was significantly better.) But the first position was one that I hadn't even applied for originally; rather, my thesis advisor had made some phone calls and the offer came quickly: people had taken some trouble on my behalf. What did I do? I told the people offering me the second job that I was grateful for their offer but had to turn it down because I had already committed to another. In retrospect, I still feel like the second offer might have been even better for me. But a tremendously eminent mathematician went on the line and offered me a job when -- for a few days -- no one else would. Anyone who knows me knows who this person is. I can be a prickly person at times -- I certainly felt like the "loud American" during my 2.5 years in Canada -- and I imagine that this guy and most of his colleagues know me as slightly eccentric but *professionally reliable*. Having people know you as professionally reliable is really priceless if you plan on staying in the profession: for instance, we later arranged for someone to transfer part of his NSF postdoc from this Canadian department to my own department.
What should you do in academia if you want to back out of an agreement? It's simple: you *immediately contact* the party you've made the agreement with, you explain why you want to back out of the agreement, and you see what they have to say about it. They're not going to be thrilled, but they can convey to you how much hardship they will actually incur by your backing out of the agreement. If it is only a moderate amount, they will probably give you their blessing and the agreement can be mutually dissolved. If however backing out of the agreement would turn out to really be a significant, tangible, medium or long-term loss for them, then you should honor it. The OP has done something in the comments which he surely does not realize sounds absolutely obnoxious to more senior personnel: he's made all kinds of assumptions that his reneging will not be so bad for his employer. And he's making them in the face of evidence that this employer actually did go to trouble: applying for a fellowship is certainly trouble! If this is an externally funded position then it cannot easily be filled with someone else, and the faculty supervisor may well already have made plans and committed resources for the OP's arrival. Or maybe not, of course. **Ask!**
Finally, the OP doesn't seem to understand why getting a tenure-track job offer might make a difference. The difference is that every postdoc wants to get a permanent job eventually, and every postdoctoral supervisor and institution wants that out of their postdocs. Therefore, if you **ask** to renege on a postdoctoral job because you'd like to take a tenure track job instead, it is much more likely that the response will be: "Bummer for us, but congratulations for you!" *or* "Well, can you come work here even for a very short time? That will inconvenience us minimally, you'll get some further training and experience, *and* we'll be able to say that we placed our postdoc in a tenure-track job. It's a win-win!" It is however still possible that reneging on a postdoc for a tenure-track job may be unacceptable to the employer. If they tell you that, then you go back to the tenure-track job and say "Look, I *really* want this job, but I have some prior commitments. I am the type of person who honors my prior commitments even when it conflicts with my short-term best interests. Surely we can work something out?" It is likely that the position can be held open for an extra semester or year.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/20 | 644 | 2,384 | <issue_start>username_0: I, personally, have never see any authors in IEEE transactions listed as "co-first" authors, as such
```
<NAME>†, <NAME>†, and <NAME>
...
† These two authors contribute equally to the work.
```
Is this allowed in IEEE transactions?<issue_comment>username_1: I have never seen co-first authors either ... you can use alphabetic ordering to indicate more-or-less equal contributions, or you can use partial alphabetic ordering (the first group is alphabetically ordered and the last group is not), or non-alphabetic to indicate that the first author contributed the most.
Ultimately, the system only works when co-authors are honest to the public about their contribution. If you're worried that co-authors will cheat you out of credit, you probably should not be working with them.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it is allowed. Google scholar is your friend in such cases.
I employed [this query](http://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&as_epq=contributed+equally+to+this&as_oq=study+paper+work+article&as_eq=&as_occt=any&as_sauthors=&as_publication=IEEE+Transactions&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&btnG=&hl=it&as_sdt=0%2C5), which looks for publications with "IEEE Transactions" in them, the text "contributed equally to", and one in (text | paper | work | article).
The results show several papers published in IEEE Transactions, which specify multiple equal co-authorship. *The way this is specified seems to be non standardized*.
For example, <http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNB.2006.875054> specifies that "The first two authors contributed equally to this work." in the space reserved for details such as when the manuscript was received and revised.
In <http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TED.2009.2034804>, the equal contribution is specified in the ACKNOWLEDGEMENT section of the paper.
Both ways look good to me. The first case is likely achieved by communicating the authors' contribution in the cover letter / space for staff communication. The second case is achieved by simply writing the contribution in the text body.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Some people use alphabetic sorting of authors.
Assuming that the first author contributed "most" is a very fragile and questionable approach.
This is *not even* consistent within a field.
It's largely the personal preference of the supervisor, usually.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/20 | 1,618 | 6,690 | <issue_start>username_0: Inspired by [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23725/do-ieee-transactions-allow-for-any-co-first-authors) and [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5867/practical-implications-of-noting-equally-contributing-authors?rq=1), I continue my ongoing quest of understanding the concept of **co first-authorship**.
My question are:
* In which fields does this notion even exist?
* If the notion exists in your field, do recruiting committees (e.g., faculty search committees) actually care about this?
The background of the second part of this question is that it seems to me that a little footnote in a paper should be easy to miss for a committee, and even if a committee becomes aware of the claimed dual first-authorship, I find it hard to believe that the paper will actually be counted as another "first-authored" paper.<issue_comment>username_1: I have not seen co first-authorship in engineering or computer science papers. That said:
* Any committee can find reasons to accept or reject a candidate. Ultimately, if you have an advocate, it will be his/her job to find out and explain your contribution to the work. It is much more important to develop a local advocate than it is to have high numbers.
* Authorship deals only with what happens *before* the paper is published. However, what you do after publication (e.g. give talks, produce extensions) is no less important in cementing your ultimate contribution to the field.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In theoretical computer science and mathematics, authors are (almost) always listed alphabetically. There is simply no such thing as a "first author", except lexicographically. Equivalently, *all* authors are co-first authors.
In my experience, recruiting committees generally understand and respect this practice, but (at least in computer science, where order by contribution is more common) they do occasionally have to be reminded, especially for candidates whose last names start late in the alphabet. One sentence in the CV and/or in a recommendation letter usually suffices.
For non-theoretical CS, I have seen CVs that indicated equal contribution of co-authors. Again, one sentence in the CV ("Stars indicate co-authors who contributed equally") made the notation clear, and the recruiting committee understood and respected it.
As Ari and gefei say, having a local advocate is **much** more important that having another (co-)first-author paper. If nobody on the faculty is willing to pound on the table and *demand* that you get an interview, you won't.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I have seen co-first authors in the social sciences, but it is not very common. It is usually indicated in a very small footnote that the "authors contributed equally" or something to that extent. Given that this practice is the exception than the rule, it is hard to imagine that committees (in the social sciences) will give much attention to this in whatever decision that is being made. Thus, I am in complete agreement with you that a 'co first-author' paper will actually be counted as a 'first author' paper.
For me, co-first authorship doesn't really mean much to me (in the social sciences). It is hard for me to believe that the contributions of the co-first authors were equal. Did they really quantify the actual intellectual contribution? Did they really work equally as hard? Did they really write equally as much? It would be impossible to balance every aspect of the work, so every co-first authorship paper in the social sciences is based on different divisions of labor, so the title co-first authorship really doesn't mean much.
(BTW, I would be very interested in seeing a 'highly cited' paper in the social sciences that is co first-authored.)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: As already said, the notion of fist author barely makes sense in mathematics. It is a common and important notion in (at least some part) of biology, with the additional and complicated provisio that I have heard of second-named-co-first-authors which where really not-as-first-author-than-the-first-author-but-more-than-the-third, even when the names are marked as a balanced co-first-authorship.
With respect to the second question, you should keep in mind that it is one's job to write one's CV in a way that stresses the important points. So, in addition to underlining one's name in the list of authors for each publication in one's CV (which seems common in the fields where author order matters), I would advise to make it very clear, at one glance, which papers in your publication record are first-authored or co-first-authored (so that they are shown on the same level).
Below are two easy ways to do that (to be adapted if you need to also highlight last-authored papers).
First, you can split your publication list in two, with in the top part all first-author and co-first-author papers, and in the bottom part all other papers. If you number publications, you can use a common numbering, e.g. first-authored papers are numbered 1, 2, 3 and the other papers are numbered 4, 5, 6, etc.
This makes it easy for a committee to count the number of first-authored papers and the total number of papers you have.
A second solution is to mark all first-authored and co-first-authored papers by a clear sign (e.g. bold star), with an explicit footnote explaining the meaning of the sign.
But you certainly should not expect committees to actually open your published papers to see if by any chance a little star somewhere credits you for co-first-authorship. They can do it if they want to check your claims, but you have to claim it clearly.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I work in a Psychology and order of authorship matters and co-first author papers are not unheard of. As for how search committee treat them, I think you might be missing how search committee work. There is no formula in terms of how papers are weighted in terms of authorship. We want to make sure a candidate has a strong publication record. Order of authorship doesn't really matter for this as much as being associated with strong papers. In some ways we don't care how hard you worked for the publication. The second thing we look for is wether you could continue to carry out the type of research in the papers. Co-first author papers raise more questions about this then single first author papers. Generally the rest of the publication history, CV, and research statement can clarify this. I would suggest making sure your research statement makes it clear what type of research you can do on your own.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/20 | 1,442 | 5,850 | <issue_start>username_0: There have been many questions in the past about choosing an affiliation to write on your papers. This one has a nuance that is a bit different from having two jobs.
I am currently between two jobs (PhD student and postdoc) and currently not academically affiliated to either. I am currently writing a paper and I am trying to figure out if I put my PhD affiliation or my postdoc affiliation.
The reason for the PhD affiliation is because a lot of the work was done there.
The reason for the postdoc affiliation is because then anyone could contact me for correspondence with respect to the paper.
I feel there must be a hard and fast rule to this, so I was hoping someone could enlighten me.
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest using the postdoc affiliation (precisely for the reason you mention and also because you will probably still be there while the paper will be reviewed) and thanking for support the university where you did your Ph.D. in the acknowledgments.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I would say that the affiliation should be the place where you did most of the work that leads to the paper. When I read a paper, I immediately assume that the work presented in the paper was carried out when the author was affiliated with the affiliation listed there. In your case, it would be your PhD affiliation. If you put your postdoc affiliation, it would give the wrong impression that the paper is a product of your postdoc, and your postdoc affiliation, rather than your PhD affiliation, wrongly gets the credit.
Getting a paper published takes time. By the time it gets accepted, you might have started your postdoc. Then you should also include your postdoc affiliation for correspondence purposes.
---
See, for example, this [guide to authors](http://www.nature.com/ncomms/authors/submit.html#Submission-policies) from *Nature Communications*, where it says,
>
> The primary affiliation for each author should be the institution where the majority of their work was done. If an author has subsequently moved, the current address may also be stated.
>
>
>
Also see this [guide for authors](http://www.elsevier.com/journals/applied-energy/0306-2619/guide-for-authors#38000) from an *Elsevier* journal, which seems to be the standard across *Elsevier* journals, where it says,
>
> If an author has moved since the work described in the article was done, or was visiting at the time, a 'Present address' (or 'Permanent address') may be indicated as a footnote to that author's name. The address at which the author actually did the work must be retained as the main, affiliation address.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: It should be possible to list both affiliations. While I have not worried about this myself, I do remember going to a seminar at UPenn in the summer between my PhD and my postdoc. My introduction included both affiliations. I was a little surprised (and pleased) by that and kept an ear out for it afterwards: it is a reasonably common thing to do.
Why do you list affiliations at all? Here are some reasons.
1) It gives readers a chance to contact you.
2) Some employers require or request that you mention them. If they are providing you with financial support, this seems reasonable. (Especially if you signed a contract saying you will!)
3) You give yourself a veneer of legitimacy/prestige that can (unfortunately) help your submission get taken more seriously. Often by doing this you telegraph to insiders who your famous thesis advisor is, which could (unfortunately) get you more alacrity and respect in the processing of your paper.
To address these: I think 1) is almost obsolete. If you are an untenured academic, you should have a webpage. Then anyone who reads one of your papers types "T....K.... math" into google, and presto, they can contact you. By the way, if you are transitioning from one temporary job to another, then neither affiliation is going to be very useful in the long term. I have papers which tell readers that they can reach me at "Montreal" and "MSRI": the latter might have been true for a month or two, but no longer.
2) is serious of course, but if you are between affiliations you are probably not being financially supported by either one. It may be though that you are just putting the finishing touches on work that you did at the first institution. That's a good reason to list the first institution. The fact that it doesn't make much sense to list an institution that you are no longer affiliated with *instead of* an institution that you are currently affiliated with is then a good reason to try to list the second institution as well.
3) Well, what's more prestigious than any one academic institution? The answer seems obvious...
---
Let me briefly respond to something written by @username_2:
>
> If you put your postdoc affiliation, it would give the wrong impression that the paper is a product of your postdoc, and your postdoc affiliation, rather than your PhD affiliation, wrongly gets the credit.
>
>
>
The OP is a mathematician, and math papers are not products of their institutions. Listing an institutional affiliation means exactly that: you have (or had, during part of the period when the work was done or the paper was written) an affiliation with that institution. (It doesn't even *necessarily* mean that you had financial support from them, although that is usually the case.) None of the institutions at which I was a postdoc can or do claim any ownership or credit for any of the papers I wrote while I was there. They get to record for all time that they had the good judgment to hire someone who went on to a tenure-track job, [which one of them does](http://www.dms.umontreal.ca/~andrew/QVNTS/Former%20Postdocs%202011.html).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/20 | 975 | 4,244 | <issue_start>username_0: I am a first year grad student with an expunged felony in the state of Arkansas. I am looking for advice on if and how I should communicate this with my adviser. The felony is due to a drug crime and took place ~decade ago. I ask this because through out my academic career I may need to go to conferences in other countries and this may affect my ability to get through customs and enter those countries hosting the conference.
I am looking for other students who were in the same boat, professors who have dealt with similar situations, and in general opinions from advisers on how they would like to be approached in situations such as this.
Thanks for the communities knowledge in advance.<issue_comment>username_1: You don't need to explain the details. Here is the most I would do. If the situation comes up (e.g., your advisor suggests you attend a conference that would require international travel you are not comfortable with), tell your advisor how this will affect your professional work: e.g., you would prefer to publish in domestic conferences, you are not comfortable travelling internationally, or whatever the implication is. Your advisor doesn't need to know the details of why (e.g., that you had a felony).
Of course, you can always explain these details if you feel comfortable doing so. That will depend upon the nature of your relationship with your advisor. But you shouldn't feel like it is mandatory to explain this aspect of your personal history. This is a professional relationship, and in professional relationships, you only need to provide enough information to allow you to meet your professional obligations and goals.
Basically, think of it this way. Why does your advisor need to know? What will the implications be, in terms of how it will affect his advice to you? Then think about how to convey the implications without the unnecessary details, and whether there is even any need or value in conveying any information at all. That might help guide you figure out what to explain. You might find you never need to explain anything related to this to your advisor.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Three points:
**Don't tell them.** Whatever the reason you're thinking of telling them now, their primary interest in you is academic, and yours should be the same. The last thing you want to do is distract them into thinking about you in any other context than your field of study. As much as they're on your side, you would much prefer them to think about you doing research than drugs.
**Talk to a lawyer.** Just to be safe, because you're venturing into legal territory, and we're not a bunch of lawyers, for the most part.
**Your motivation is probably not valid** I think the impetus for even suggesting this is unnecessary. I don't know your field, but the likelihood of you *needing* to travel outside the US is probably not there. Unless your advisor has said something like: *"We always go to this convention in Zurich, and you'll be expected to go next year..."* in which case, see the prior advice point.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The downside of making it known is you open yourself up to potential discrimination. I think there are 4 categories of people. Those who could care less, those who are going to discriminate no matter what, those who won't spend the time to get to know you because of the issue, but if they already knew you would be fine, and hose who would be fine from the outset, but would be upset because you tried to hide it. I don't really believe you can hide the expunged felony from everyone without hurting personal relationships with your colleagues. Therefore you need to weigh the people who will not give you a chance against those who will be upset by the apparent deceit. To me it is a no brainer. Telling people know will mean a few missed opportunities, but probably not a big deal. If your PhD supervisor or post doc supervisor finds out later and becomes so against you they stop writing letters of reference, then that is a disaster.
I would suggest mentioning it in passing to your supervisor. Then follow it up a few days later more formally asking if he/she thinks it is going to be a problem.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/21 | 2,214 | 9,546 | <issue_start>username_0: I have finished three years of work in a Ph.D. program. I've published one conference paper as sole author, and have recently sent out another paper to a prestigious conference.
I started a project last October with a professor who does not have anything to do with my dissertation. He asked me early on to do a lot of work so I asked him who is the first author, and he said he would be. I've already written the full literature review for this journal paper, and came up with the framework by myself. He has only advised me on it.
Now, I have a clear idea about my dissertation, and I have to write my proposal and defend it this fall. So, the work with this professor is rather burdensome to me right now. So far, he has not worked on it at all. I've written six or seven out of the 15 pages of the journal paper. The main thing left is data analysis. He wants me to do the data analysis and write it up as well, and recently he also asked me to write introduction of the paper. At this point, I thought, he wants me to write the whole paper, which he can edit at the last moment and become first author.
Since this paper does not have anything to do with my dissertation, I do not want to work with this paper anymore. I told him I am busy with my own research, it seems like that he will wait until I finish writing the paper.
What should I do? I do not want to cut the relationship but he is asking too much which I think is unethical. Any strategic advice will be appreciated.
---
**UPDATE:**
I talked to the professor and said there must have been misunderstanding about the responsibilities as a second author in my part and as a first author in his part. I said that I understood that writing literature review will meet the responsibility as a second author.
His brief comment on the e-mail was that he wrote a conference paper already, and this journal paper (that I'm working on) is a developed version of the conference paper. So, he did the major work already for the conference paper that is why he is the first author. And he stated that I am supposed to write a literature review and to do the data analysis for this journal paper.
OK. He has integrity in his position. I remember that he said something like this when we started this paper 10 months ago. But the problem was that his position was not re-enforced again, and the lit review I've done took off to a different terain. That means, I did a lot of creative interpretation of the framework. (Sorry, to technical folks. This is social science study using business management theories. The upfront literature review is very significant. My dissertation uses machine learning and NLP stuff. yes, this paper is unrelated with my dissertation).
Anyway, the reason I'm writing this update is to provide the professor's perspective that I've got to learn recently. So the major lesson I've learn through this experience is to keep reinforcing (in emails) about my understanding of my and his responsibilities on this project.<issue_comment>username_1: First of all: Good call to talk about authorship issues at the beginning, rather than only once troubles started! Now authorship issues do occasionally have to be re-negotiated depending on the course the project takes.
There do seem to be potentially two separate aspects in your question:
A. What to do if I have contributed as much as I am willing as a secondary author, yet the first author keeps asking for more?
- Point out that you have done X, Y and Z, and that you are only willing to do significantly more if you are the first author (fundamental reading + commenting remain unaffected of course).
B. I started a side-project, and I no longer want to work on this AT ALL.
- Make clear to your co-author that you have no intention to work on this project anymore, and that this pertains to the future, too. Either give them free rein to continue the project without you (either with you on the author list or not, depending on your preferences); OR make sure you are still available for basic reading/commenting, but simply nothing more extensive.
In both cases, if the coauthor shows a significantly stronger reaction than "medium annoyance", then maintaining a positive relationship to them is futile anyway.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The professor is putting it off until you present your dissertation. What happens then? Are you still employed by your institution?
If you have an position somewhere else, congratulations! Just tell him that you have other obligations, and that you will be available for comments and discussion, but your new employer would want you to work on their projects.
If you are going to remain at your institution, and don't have anything else that will pay your bills, you could use this project to improve your CV. I don't know in your field, but only two conference publications sounds on the weaker end (in technical fields in Sweden people usually finish with four first author journal papers after four years). If you don't have anything else (yet), you can ask him to hire you. If funding is not available, you may decide to work with him anyway, but letting him know that your main priority is finding a new job, and you will leave as soon as someone offers to pay you. You may also decide not to work for free, and you could tell him that.
In the case that you decide to actually continue with the project, you should discuss authorship again. You have done most of the job so far, and you have the work he wants you to do as a leverage. You could appeal to his humanity (~~as if professors had any!~~) and say that you are in a critical point in your career and need to strengthen your CV.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Since I suppose bad language is not allowed here, I'll be restrained. Suffice to say, as an academic I think that is a basic professional principle is lacking here: if you, with existing career, wage and pedagogical duties, are writing with a student, they should be first author. Always. Every time. No matter what.
Two reasons: first, you already have all the power and privileges. Students are not there to be consumed. Second, you don't want to be seen to be exploiting someone who is vulnerable to your power over them.
Short answer: this person sounds like a dick. Put them off, finish your PhD, get a job, then tell anyone following on after you to avoid writing with them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In all this mess you are suffering, I am trying to put myself at your position as I am also a researcher. As you said you don't want to cut the relationship so we will have to be polite as well as have to refuse his work also. Unfortunately I have to ask this - how much will it take to end up all his work? (Sorry to ask but what if, just be strong and complete it and end up with all mess). Next, can't you show you cannot do it efficiently now because you busy in your work. (You can do this by asking some questions about data analysis related to his work again and again and again and again.)
And if we can't do anything with him, do you have any friend/colleague who can help you with his work or what you can do is say your professor to provide you a helping source as you have your work also (say politely) and assign most of the work to source provided by guiding him/her.
If nothing actually working - than just do your work! Only your work will make your profile strong, once you done with the degree from there - nobody can do anything. If you had decided to be in this research field - you will occasionally come across these type of problems or worse. Don't worry! Just take it as a lesson for your future.
And the most important thing - when you are a professor never ever let anything like this happen to your student. I know it's not your problem's solution but this will help any other student in same trap.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: Practical question: How important is it to you that this paper be published?
If you don't do it, will it be?
If the answer to the first is "very" and the answer to the second is 'no", you're sorta stuck. What's right, and what will achieve the desired outcome, are different things.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I suppose this will have been dealt with in other threads, but the meanings of "first" and "second" authors do vary with discipline. For instance, in theoretical CS it is most common for authors to be listed in strict alphabetical order by last name, regardless of level or type of contribution. In the sciences it is more common for the "senior author" (who is primarily a mentor and may have conceived of the problem and the solution framework, but probably hasn't done as much hands-on work or writing) to be named last. In engineering it can be a bit arbitrary, reflecting the authors' perceived order of importance or some other understanding. (Though I work in engineering and applied CS, I personally follow the sciences' style, so I am almost always the last-named author in my papers, with my students or other junior co-author(s) being named first even if I have done a lot of hand-holding.)
On the main issue, I find it quite surprising that your professor wrote a conference paper which he now says has been extended, but you knew nothing about it. How could you not have known? In most cases the conference paper would be the first point of departure while extending for a journal, and I'm sure this is true across disciplines.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/21 | 1,772 | 7,552 | <issue_start>username_0: Currently I am working towards Master in Computer Science degree, hoping to be done by the end of the year.
Last month a new professor moved to our University and now there are open Phd positions in his research group. I decided to work on a Master thesis provided by this group, however before starting to work on the master thesis I want to finish my exams. Additionally, I am interested for the Phd positions as I like the area of research, but I believe that it is highly unlikely that the Phd positions will remain open until I am done with the thesis. Having in mind that I have the exams to finish first, it will be ca. 6-7 months from now until I am completely done. And I believe the positions will be filled by then.
I don't know how to proceed now. I think the best asset I have in hand at the moment is the fact that I am going to work my master thesis in the group of this new professor. But other than that, there are some downsides because he does not know me as a student as he just moved to our university. Also, I don't have any publications to impress him, and my grades got slightly worse lately.
What is the best thing to do now? There are multiple options:
1) Leave the exams aside; Start working on the thesis, after starting to work on the thesis express interest in the Phd position. Ensure that the work of the thesis is high quality so the Professor is impressed.
2) Express interest in the Phd position from now. Finish the exams, and then start working on the thesis. During the process improve the grades to impress the Professor.
The dilemma here is, if I wait long to finish everything, by then the places might be gone. On the other side, if I act as soon as possible, I think as if I don't have much in hand to impress the professor.
Please consider this question having in my the context of my exact situation and then from a general view point evaluate on what could happen in the typical case.
I am sure, here we have more experienced Professors and Graduate student that could provide insightful information and suggestions.
EDIT 1: Additionally, what is the typical time frame needed for a Phd position to be filled, I believe 6 months is more than enough, or?
EDIT 2: What if there is an application deadline? And the deadline is at least 6 months away before you get the Master degree? Is it worth applying? I believe no Professor would wait for a student to get his degree for 6 months and then give him a position? My basic instinct says "go for it" there is nothing you would loose at least you are not going to regret that you didn't do it, however when thinking rationally all the odds seem against
Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: If you are currently working on a master's thesis in the group of the professor with whom you'd like to a do a PhD, the best thing to do is **set up an appointment and talk to him.**
As an advisor, I don't need to have a published paper to see whether someone in my own group is a competent researcher or not. I can see this by interacting with the person, through reading their project updates and emails, and by talking with other the more senior members of the research group (who sometimes will work with the students more closely than I can).
Given that the goal of an advisor is to select people they believe will become excellent researchers rather than simply the "top students," someone who is an "internal" candidate is often a better option than taking a chance on someone whose work the faculty member hasn't been able to observe directly.
[That said, however, I think there is also something to be said for considering going somewhere else for a PhD than the place where you did your bachelor's and master's degrees, when it makes sense to do so.]
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Talk to the new professor ASAP, since he will be the one to make the decision about admitting you.
When someone moves to a new school/job, they are "unsure" about how they will be accepted at the new place. The best thing you can do is to give him a "welcoming gift" in the form of a student who will do what it takes to get into his group. Assuming that your qualifications are halfway decent, being among the first to welcome him may be all it takes to get it.
The professor may well have preferences as to whether you should do your thesis or your exams first. If he expresses a preference, follow that preference in order to "qualify."
On the other hand, he may say, I'll hold a spot for you until you complete both your thesis and exams. Getting a commitment at this early stage is way different from waiting until you are ready, and applying then.
It's like the airlines; they have a bunch of "cheap seats" for people who buy tickets "early." If you wait until the day of the flight, you will have to pay "full price."
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think the answer depends strongly on where the money comes from. I third the advice to talk to the professor in question immediately.
In the US, for example, the answer will partially hinge on whether the money needs to be spent on a project that starts now or soon, say National Science Foundation grant money, or is coming from the professor's startup package and has a much longer or unlimited time horizon. If it's the latter, then they may not be too worried about when you might start, and therefore might be willing to make a commitment on you now for a position in a year.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: People need to eat, so they need jobs. One does not need to wait until a time limited job is finished before searching for a new one.
There is nothing wrong with politely showing interest in doing a PhD in his research group. The fact that you are at the same institution means he can just go to your Master's advisor and informally ask if you are good for the position, and probably trust it more than a recommendation letter.
If he wants you on board, comes the starting date that the funding requires; but this is something only he can know, and will tell you upfront if he needs to fill the position before you finish. Even in this case, showing interest may put you on his list in case he gets another grant, or could forward you offers from other groups. If he *really* wants you, sometimes there are ways to get you in; for example, if the university does not require you to have a master to enrol on a PhD.
Regarding the timings, announced positions usually quote a deadline. You may want to wait to be closer to it so you have more time to build up your thesis, but on the other hand, the longer you wait, the bigger the chances your application will just join a big pile for review. In this case, probably the sooner the better, because it is unlikely your thesis will radically improve in a few of weeks (you will get progress, of course, but not a breakthrough that is not visible already).
Lastly, as username_1 said, I think is very important for a researcher to move around institutions, and when possible and makes sense, even countries. I did my undergraduate in Spain and a Master's in Sweden, and I can see they are very different systems; so they sort of complement each other's deficiencies. On the other hand, I know brilliant people that studied all the way to the PhD in the same university, and plan to become lecturers there some day. As such, they don't get "new input"; they have the same weak points and deficiencies as the people who taught them, and they will just perpetuate it.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/21 | 510 | 2,123 | <issue_start>username_0: On a publication (thesis, paper, other), when should I write an equation *inline* and when should it be separated and numbered from the text?
I've seen publications containing both styles, but I don't know if there is a rule to choose among them. My field is applied computer science.<issue_comment>username_1: A numbered equation always takes a separate line, so there is no question here — if you need to refer to some equation later in the text, it deserves a separate line and it needs a number.
If your equation is as long as a line, or even longer, then again — it should always be placed out-of-text.
To answer the rest of your question, we should think a little how we (e.g. your readers) read inline equations, and how we read equations on separate lines. First of all, inline equations merge into the text, and provide some smoothness (it is just like you speak and draw on a whiteboard at the same time). In contrast, equations of a separate line break the text (just like you write a long equation on a whiteboard and take a big pause to let your audience reflect on it).
If there are no pauses in the text, it is hard to comprehend. Too many pauses raise similar problems, because it becomes difficult to focus on the most important pieces then. My advice is to think about the role of each equation and put only the most important equations in a spotlight of a separate line.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It's matter of style. But always think about the reader - what is the most convenient for her/him.
I agree with most of points raised by [Dmitry](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/23770/49).
However, when reading publications I often see too many inline equations, which make it harder to comprehend. It often happens due to space restrictions.
My personal stance is that only very short and simple things should be put as inline equations (like $x \in {1,2,3}$ or $y=Ax$). That is, ones that at the same time are too technical to deserve a separate line and short and easy, so they can be read with the sentence without any pause.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/22 | 493 | 1,970 | <issue_start>username_0: Are Masters degrees from German universities of applied sciences (Fachhochschulen) eligible for PhD?
If I do a Masters in any of the German universities of applied sciences (Fachhochschulen), would I be able to apply for a PhD in any other Universities/research institutes in Germany?<issue_comment>username_1: The basic answer is **"Yes, but. . . ."**
A master's degree is usually the minimum prerequisite for admission to PhD programs in Germany. However, many faculties within various German universities have established "qualification" procedures for degrees they do not believe to be "equivalent" to their own. This usually includes some combination of coursework (with the associated exams), plus evaluation of the master's thesis to show equivalency to the expected degree.
These criteria are often applied not only to international students, but to students from German *Fachhochschule* as well. However, these policies vary widely between universities, and between different departments at the same universities, so you should contact the specific programs you're interested for more details.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Since you have asked this question, the situation has changed. It is now becomming more common that people with a master degree from a university of applied sciences (or Fachhochschule, FH) are doing PhDs. The barriers that @username_1 mentioned still exist, but the willingness of university professors to supervise FH-students has increased. Often FH PhDs are done collaboratively between a FH (were most of the reserach is done) and a "regular" university (were the main supervisor is located, although the FH profoessors co-supervise as well).
There is even the possibility to do the PhD not at a "regular" university, but at a FH itself - withouth a univerity based supervising professor. This is so far only possible in 6 of the 16 Bundesländer (federal states) of Germany, though.
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/22 | 2,744 | 11,230 | <issue_start>username_0: My situation is somewhat similar to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/5997/what-to-do-with-an-accepted-phd-thesis-that-extensively-presents-quotes-as-parap?), but I'm the plagiarizer.
Six years ago I did my Master's degree by coursework at university X, and wrote the Master's thesis under supervision of well-known Prof. A. For many reasons that I don't want to list here, I plagiarized. The first part of my thesis was background, and the second part was the original contribution.
In the background part, I copied an entire chapter from textbook T about algorithm S. Algorithm S was invented more than 50 years ago, and is described in several books, including the very well-known T. I didn't paraphrase at all, I started by citing T, and then copied the whole chapter word by word.
The contribution part is actually contribution. One year after I left the school, Prof. A found another student to extend it and published the extension with me as the second author. (The paper included the algorithm and experiment in my thesis, but I didn't write a single word of the paper.)
I have moved to university Y to do a PhD. I have published several papers in top conferences and have very good relationship with several well-known researchers. I want to advance in academia.
Will the Master's thesis destroy any possibility of a future academic career? If someone read my Master's thesis, it is very easy to recognize, since the part from the textbook is in perfect English, and the rest is in **extremely** poor English.
Can I contact the university to submit a revised Master's thesis which re-describes the algorithm S? This is the last thing I want to do.<issue_comment>username_1: Plagiarism is plagiarism and your existing thesis is the one which got you your degree. Since you have received your degree, the possibility is to confess to the plagiarism resulting in, possibly retraction of the thesis and removal of the degree. There have been a few highly publicized cases of plagiarism of PhD theses by people who have come to hold high positions in society (Example [one](http://www.ithenticate.com/plagiarism-detection-blog/bid/97166/Another-Month-Another-German-Plagiarism-Scandal#.U6Z6aECmW78) and [two](http://www.dw.de/german-ex-education-minister-schavan-loses-plagiarism-appeal/a-17511623)). The exposure of these cases have led to them losing both their position and their degree. Having plagiarized your way to the degree could easily backfire at any time if, as you say, someone finds out. Now, we all make mistakes in life so I would think the best way to act responsibly is to contact a lawyer or the legal department of the university to discuss the matter and a way forward.
Regarding your publication, it seems as if it would not be affected by the story since it is your original work that has been published and I doubt that the authors copied the plagiarized chapter into the paper.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I cannot tell you what the university will do if you confess; I am not employed in a position which would be involved in such a decision, and besides, I think that this will depend on cultural and legal factors, plus the personality of the decision makers in your case.
But I still think that it is better if you confess. There are several reasons for it:
1. Your own inner peace. By contemplating confession and posting here you show that you have matured and have higher integrity and a better understanding of academic rules and the seriousness of plagiarism than back when you submitted your thesis. If you don't confess, you will have to live with both 1)the guilt of not only having made the mistake once, but still actively deceiving people,
and 2) the anxiety of being discovered someday. I have been on both sides of a "hidden guilt" situation (although when it was on academic matters, it concerned milder cases), and I can tell you from experience that it is a bad situation, especially for the person who feels guilty and dreads discovery. It burdens you with a stress which can permeate to many unrelated areas of your life and make you miserable.
2. Your risk of discovery rises with time. Nowadays, universities start to routinely employ plagiarism software. Who knows what funky electronic agent will snuffle in your old thesis ten years from now? Twenty? What if such software becomes so ubiquitous and cheap that employers start running it on your old theses when you apply for a job?
3. If you confess, you will suffer negative consequences - but not nearly as bad as if you are discovered by a third party. Confession, especially if you are repentant, shows that you are capable of feeling remorse, have high integrity, also courage, and are willing to take responsibility. Being caught makes people see you as a cold-blooded fraud not deterred by social emotions like guilt and remorse. This makes you dangerous to them and reduces their empathy for you. They are much more likely to be lenient if you confess than if you are caught by others.
4. The later it comes out, the worse for you. If you are either caught, or confess yourself much later (e.g. because you notice the negative effects of guilt and anxiety - and yes, this happens, I have witnessed such late confessions), it will have negative effects on your career. But right now, you are at its beginning.
* You have relatively little to lose yet. If you wait until later, you will have much more to restore after such a reputation blow.
* The younger you are when it happens, the more time you have to build a solid career without having to start anew. At times when you advance into more leading positions, it would be better that this story is a thing of the past, forgotten by most, than that it hits you out of nowhere.
* The sooner you confess after the mistake, the less reputation you lose. The less time you carry the problem hidden around, the less callous you appear, and also people feel less deceived.
* Once it comes out, everybody who has relied on your thesis being correct will be miffed. The more your life progresses, the more this number of people grows. If you confess early, you limit this number.
5. Your university is not interested in a public scandal. The dean doesn't want to open the morning paper and see a "university duped by brazen plagiarist" title. They will be unpleasantly surprised by a private confession too, but they will not feel that the situation is out of their control, or that the worst that can happen has already happened. They will have some incentive to cooperate with you, as long as you confess. If you are caught, their best strategy becomes to distance themselves from you and denounce you.
6. Time has shown that redemption is more beneficial to society than punishment-as-deterrent. This has been repeatedly shown in many situations: religious context (most of the New Testament is based on it, even though many Christian churches have historically been on the side of harsh punishment), law enforcement (prisons which are pleasant for the prisoners show better reformation rates) and parenting. So many people who have advanced to leadership positions have the wisdom not to mete out severe punishment for misconduct. Especially if you indicate that you are unlikely to repeat the mistake (and a confession is a very important part of it), they can be lenient. There is no guarantee that the leaders of your university will share this belief, but it is not exceptionally rare either.
They will still have to enforce some consequences. It would be both unfair to the students who played by the rules to get their degree, and damaging to the university's reputation to just let you have your degree when you did not follow all requirements for it. But they will not be vengeful, seeking to end your career. This is something which certainly happens when academic misconduct is caught much later by a third party after the fact, see the German examples username_1 cites (and notice that in some cases for the German politicians, their plagiarism was limited to a few sentences), but also cases like [this one](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Hauser) in which a renowned professor's academic career came to an end after academic misconduct (although not plagiarism) was proven.
You may want to find support before you go straight to the people who have the most to lose from the news. The behavior of your current employer is also hard to predict (they might be legally required to terminate you if a Master's degree was required for your acceptance into the Ph.D. program), but if you think they will be on your side, you might want to talk to them first so, when you come to the university, you have somebody who can testify that your current level of work is as good as one of a person who obtained a Master's degree regularly. Especially if you have coauthored with somebody with a good standing in your community, they may be interested in helping you rather than having a publication in coauthorship with somebody whose reputation was destroyed (but gauge them as a person too, some people will prefer to just drop you and forget you).
I hope everything turns out to the best for you. As <NAME> said, we are all human and make mistakes. If you are willing to repair the damage yours caused, this makes you a better, not a worse, human being.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Edited completely, given correct comments below stating that I seemed to be advocating non-confession.
I think the comment above both understates the case re punishment - you likely would lose your degree and your place on the PhD programme and admiration for your confession won't count for much - and overstates your likelihood of being caught. Universities archive dissertations for x years then pulp them.
What is strong is this: you lied, the weight of that won't make for a comfortable career and you deserve a consequence, at least on the facts as presented.
In short, should you confess, be prepared for another career.
Apologies for coming across like I don't take the ethical issues seriously. My intent, very badly put, was rather to prepare you for the worst if you come clean.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I realize that I may be late in seeing this and answering this, but I believe confessing is the way to go. I am a university administrator who has handled cases of plagiarism. In some cases, the plagiarism was discovered years after the student had received the degree. On discovery of plagiarism, the matter generally goes to a disciplinary committee. For academic misconduct, disciplinary committees look for remorse on the part of the student in considering penalties. In instances where sufficient remorse is shown, students are given the chance to revise their thesis instead of depriving them of their degree. In your situation, the revision is not difficult because it is in the "review of literature" part rather than the "innovation" part. There is no issue of whether the revised work will be degree-worthy, which makes it easier on the examiners who will have to review and approve the revised thesis.
Upvotes: 4 |
2014/06/22 | 1,258 | 4,819 | <issue_start>username_0: I am considering a post doc in the Netherlands. I am a bit spoiled -- currently doing a post doc in the US with a salary of about $75000. I found a PI in the Netherlands whose project sounds very interesting and it seems like I may be able to have a bit of freedom in forming collaborations. But the PI had quoted a salary of 2000 euros (he didn't actually know, but just took a guess when I asked him to estimate). Though I currently have no better offers, this sounds like too big a step backwards that I am wondering if I should spend more effort searching for other jobs.
I would like to negotiate a better salary when I interview with the PI. Is 2000 Euros reasonable? I saw a post with a [salary table](http://www.vsnu.nl/files/documenten/CAO/Salarisschalen_2013IenII.pdf). But I'm not sure where on the scale I fall. Should I be a E10-1 because this will be my first year on this particular job? Or can I hope for a E10-4 because this will be my fourth year as a post-doc? Is there any way I can supplement my salary by applying for external grants? (I guess there are few of those for non-EU citizens...) I have a husband and school-age children, and since I am not sure whether my husband will be able to have income, I want to be able cover our necessary living expenses with my salary/benefits so I can concentrate on working.<issue_comment>username_1: You can expect rather more than that.
* 10/0 corresponds to a second year PhD student (functieschaal P). A postdoc typically goes on somewhere around 10-5, plus a point per year. So you might hope to be somewhere around 10-8.
* To get your annual salary, multiply these numbers by 14: 12 months plus two bonus payments. Don't ask me why.
* Coming from abroad you are probably eligible to be paid under the "30% rule", where you get the first 30% of your salary tax free.
Thus, *after* tax you can expect to get something in the region of €35-40k ($48-55k). Be aware that living costs may be higher than you're used to in the US.
Of course, you shouldn't rely on this information: talk to the HR department. But the situation isn't as bad as you fear!
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: There's isn't that much room for negotiation in general, since all these university-related things are fixed by law. You've already found the CAO tables which determine salary. Depending on how badly they want you over there, a PI might be able to get you entered in a higher 'trede' (10-x), or even a higher 'schaal' (x-1). I would say it's nearly impossible that they would put you on 10-1, but don't hold me to it. What you have going for you is your high previous salary, because new employers sometimes do take this into account as far as possible, and your being from outside the country which can have its own benefits. A few things to keep in mind:
* the 2000 the PI mentioned would be after tax, and in my estimation quite the lower limit in terms of net monthly income
* the PI has only limited influence on salary, you really need to talk (or have the PI talk) to HR to know exactly what you're in for before you make your decision.
* quite a lot of benefits are included and already deducted, which makes a comparison of raw numbers between the Dutch and US salaries a bit tricky. There may moreover be quite a few differences in terms of vacation time (a *lot* of holidays, really), benefits such as bicycle plans, whatever...
So I would advise you to get an overview of
* your exact current benefits, health care costs, pension plan, plus your current pre- and after-tax salary,
* your potential future benefits, health care costs, pension plan, plus your new pre- and post-tax salary (especially if being from abroad has extra tax benefits as mentioned by someone above, I don't know about that), depending on
* the 'trede' and 'schaal' they would put you in to start with. The one thing to ask your PI is to find out which trede and schaal HR could (would) give you, then contact HR to find the answers to your other questions because - from my experience - there's a good chance the PI won't know all these details.
75.000 dollars sounds like quite a good salary to me, but without knowing what that got you, what's included, and so on, it's hard for me to say how much (or if any) of a step backwards you'll be taking.
The last thing to note: living expenses (mainly housing) can differ quite a lot across the NL, so what you effectively save each month also depends on where the institution is. World of difference between e.g. Amsterdam or the provinces outside the 'randstad'.
Good luck on the decision and potentially the position.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Found the answer now: pay scale 10, step 8, 3381 euros monthly before taxes and other deductions. Thanks for all the answers!
Upvotes: 2 |
2014/06/22 | 352 | 1,390 | <issue_start>username_0: Can I use full word plus its abbreviation in parenthesis in a chapter title?
here is my case:
Chapter 2
Human Immune System (HIS)
is it correct? Is there any differences if the the full word have appeared before in the previous chapter content.<issue_comment>username_1: I can not say this is incorrect, but it is probably unorthodox. If there are no strong reason to put an abbreviation in the title, you may wish to introduce it in the first sentences of the chapter itself.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In general, the only abbreviations that should be used in "headlines" and titles are "standard" ones that are normally (or at least very frequently) written in their abbreviated form. So, something like *Escherichia coli* could obviously be written as *E. coli* in a title without problems. (Similarly, in my field, we have an algorithm entitled "particle–particle particle–mesh" which can be written as "PPPM" or "P3M" without detriment.)
However, any abbreviation that *you* have introduced in the course of writing should probably be avoided *unless* the alternative is too unwieldy. Moreover, you should not normally use both abbreviations and the expanded text unless you're using the title to define the abbreviation: for instance,
>
> *SAUCE*: Simplified Abbreviations for Unwieldy Complex Expressions
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/22 | 1,250 | 5,411 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a fork of my question [homework-testing-method-for-schools](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23750/homework-testing-method-for-schools-how-to-encourage-good-practices-and-design) but i'm taking it in another direction.
I was asking about a homework testing method that'll encourage students to write better code and reduce the TA's proofreading task to a minimum.
I was thinking of using unit testing, (or anything else you can think of), in order to turn students in the right direction (design wise), and hopefully giving them good thinking and coding habits (we're talking first programming course in collage).
so my new question is:
1. If you think there's something wrong and not educational about unit testing students code please explain why do you think so..
2. If you think this is a good (or just an o.k) idea please tell me if you have any ideas of how to design the tests.
thank you for your answers.<issue_comment>username_1: A lot of what I said as an answer to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/20578/use-of-automated-assessment-of-programming-assignments/20823#20823) is probably also applicable here, so I will not repeat it.
>
> If you think there's something wrong and not educational about unit testing students code please explain why do you think so..
>
>
>
I don't think there is anything particularly wrong about unit testing student code, but it will likely not do away with manual grading or direct lab sessions entirely. All things considered, the way how TAs traditionally check programming assignments (build, run, check behavior against assignment description) is pretty close to what a unit testing framework does anyway.
>
> If you think this is a good (or just an o.k) idea please tell me if you have any ideas of how to design the tests.
>
>
>
The major challenge I see is that you want your tests not only to serve as a framework to check whether students implemented the right functionality, but also to check whether they did it in the right way. I think unit tests and generally automated grading will *not* be able to help you here, aside from limited hard-coded rule checking.
A lot of the problem is already encoded in your use of terminology. You say you want "unit tests that do white box testing". This isn't really feasible, IMHO. Unit tests test interfaces. So, to cut it short, I do not think that unit tests will help you in this regard.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As a tester I would suggest giving a couple lessons on testing itself, its techniques and TEST DESIGN. The latter is useful to write proper set of tests. Anyway, teaching them good habits of writing tests for their code is a huge plus.
As an advanced task for one of the latest your lessons I would suggest you to switch the roles with your students: tell them you are going to write a class with given interface and defined behaviour, and their task then would be to write unit tests that would 1. cover the described behavior and 2. find some bugs (probably, left in the code by your intention). That would teach them writing test based on the desired behavior, not the implementation.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: I have been involved with two classes that used automated testing in different ways, and in both cases is was an excellent idea that was generally well received by students.
One was a class on compilers, which naturally encouraged the use of regression-testing because most assignments were to write a piece of software with specific functionality. In this class, every assignment had two sets of detailed regression tests: one was provided with the assignment to be used during development. The other was kept secret and revealed only when the assignment was returned. Grades were a mixture of the two sets of results: the first batch was "easy points" that everybody was expected to get, the second set was the real differentiator demonstrating that a student's solution was sufficiently general and deep.
The other class was a large (300+ student) artificial intelligence class, where automated testing of homework was introduced in order to lighten the grading load and allow the TAs to spend time on small-group tutorials instead. In this class, all of the homework was done through the automated system, including both coding and non-coding questions (e.g., numerical calculations, multiple choice), and students could submit their answers, check if they were correct, and resubmit again and again until their got it correct. As such, homework was viewed as "required practice" and everybody was expected to eventually get all of the questions correct, though we didn't care when. The grades for the class then came almost entirely from quizzes, exams, and projects, with the homework percentage used as a *multiplier* on the total (well, technically it was multiplication of a complex formula that essentially amounted to: "If you blatantly ignore the homework, we'll drop you a letter grade").
So in sum: automated testing can be an excellent solution and I think more classes should adopt it. It requires a bit more up-front investment, but can pay off both in terms of time and in terms of pedagogical value. How exactly you design it and integrate it depends on the goals, as illustrated by these two examples, and I'm sure there are many more.
Upvotes: 1 |
2014/06/22 | 3,851 | 16,068 | <issue_start>username_0: It seems to me that it is impossible to prevent cheating (as in: communicating and getting help from outside) if one allows students to use the restroom during written classroom tests.
Excluding creative solutions involving full-body searches, Faraday cages or invigilators in the stalls, the most practical way to prevent it seems to completely forbid the students to leave the room.
Of course, this seems overly penalizing to students with small health problems or personal emergencies, since they would have to retake the test.
**How is this problem dealt with in practice in universities? What is the best solution?**<issue_comment>username_1: How do other uni's deal with this?
==================================
I've attended courses in two universities and have been an exam supervisor in another academical institution.
In all those cases only one student could go to the bathroom at a time.
A supervisor would accompany the student up to the bathroom door and wait until the student would return.
Sure, the student could hide a book, laptop, anything in the toilet stall.
If it's a good exam these methods are not going to get the student anywhere as a good academical test requires that the student can use his brain, not just reproduce knowledge from a book.
Therefore I think making a big deal of cheat prevention is not necessary.
What's the best solution?
=========================
Not allowing students to take bathroom breaks is inhumane. I think the solution I experienced and described above is the best you'll get without exaggerating.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Interesting question. We had similar discussions recently in our lab as well. Our conclusions after discussion were that, practically, you can either (1) let students go to the rest rooms and live with some potential for abuse, or (2) not let students go to the rest rooms (barring medical reasons, of course).
We could not come up with a solution to let students go to the rest rooms *and* prevent them from cheating, if the students are prepared and reasonably cunning. For instance, in our university some large exams have the policy that students that want to use the rest rooms are escorted by one of the TAs to the door of the rest rooms. While this prevents some avenues for cheating, it does not help if the student stashed the lecture material in the rest rooms or just calls his pal when inside. Another approach was at some point that mobile phones had been collected, but clearly there is no guarantee that every student has exactly *one* mobile phone. Essentially, we decided that collecting mobile phones is a futile effort (as also discussed [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/23099/preventing-leaking-exam-papers-cheating-using-phone-cameras)).
>
> How is this problem dealt with in practice in universities? What is the best solution?
>
>
>
In my current university, the status quo is "let students go to the rest room, and live with the avenue for cheating". In my previous university, the rule was "there are no rest room breaks" for every exam taking less than 2 hours. For 2 hours or more exams, see above.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Forbidding use of restroom facilities is extreme and more than a little ridiculous. If a student is resourceful enough to defeat your exam's purpose *(which should be to measure a student's capability in a particular subject)* without your certain discovery given only the use of a few minutes and a toilet, then probably your exam needs some work and/or that student deserves whatever grade he/she is awarded.
What's more, forbidding the use of facilities comes with some liability. From Brian Freeman, Esq.'s [*Bathroom Rights*](http://www.brianwfreeman.com/bathroom-rights/):
>
> ...The same court said, in an earlier case, *“However primitive and ordinary, the right to defecate and to urinate without awaiting the permission of government…are rights close to the core of the liberty guaranteed by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. When government undertakes to eliminate or to impair either or both of these rights, it should be required to make a strong showing of necessity for the restrictive measure.”* Indeed, we all have the “basic liberty of access to the bathroom when needed.”
>
>
> People who believe they have the authority to deny access to a bathroom, especially teachers and educators throughout the country, need to be aware that denial of a pupil’s right to use the toilet could carry significant liabilities. Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a state actor can be held liable for both compensatory and punitive damages, including paying for the winner’s attorney’s fees.
>
>
> In addition to liability under § 1983, a defendant could also be held liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Depending on the facts of the case, other potential liabilities could arise from prohibiting a person from their bona fide need for access to a toilet. For these reasons, all people, especially young students, ought to be able to use the restroom whenever needed, without be required to first obtain permission.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_4: In almost all exams which I have taken, leaving the room while taking an exam was not forbidden. *BUT returning to complete the exam* was expressly forbidden. The penalty for taking a break was confiscation of the exam material, with no possibility of resuming the exam. (Note that these exams were almost all less than two hours long.) Students were strongly encouraged to take a bathroom break immediately before beginning the exam.
This avoids the problem of actually forbidding the student to use the bathroom, but does impose a significant penalty. If you have not completed the exam before your bathroom break, you must hand in the incomplete exam and are not permitted to finish if/when you return.
Presumably, students who can document a medical necessity for more frequent bathroom breaks are entitled to special accommodations, most likely including taking the exam separately, as a proctored exam in the academic testing center. This is not a perfect solution to the problem (what about students who are briefly ill or suffer from test-anxiety that causes them to need frequent bathroom breaks?), but the solution has worked well in my experience.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: The basic solution to the problem of bathroom breaks and the possibility of cheating is to design the test in a manner that best negates the benefit of cheating.
For instance, avoiding multiple-choice and fill-in-the-blank type questions is an obvious step. Similarly, including questions that require multiple logical steps to successfully complete makes the likelihood of useful cheating much lower. Similarly, having multiple copies of the exam with slightly different variants of the problems (for instance, using slightly different data or assumptions) will also make it harder to cheat in a meaningful matter—students may have to spend many minutes getting the answers they would need, for relatively little benefit.
Also, allowing students to have some access to course materials during an exam cuts off one obvious reason for cheating—to access materials that they wouldn't otherwise have.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: Although this is not often how things are done, here is a suggestion for improving exams, whilst addressing your problem:
An exam is meant to test the ability of the student to apply what was taught in the course. If this knowledge is to mean anything "after the course", then the conditions in which the course is administered need to mirror the real world closely. This, in turn, should mean that the *understanding* needed to do well in the exam should not hinge on the ability to *memorize* (I am a big fan of "open book" exams — bring in the reference material, it cuts down on cheating), but rather the ability to *synthesize* and *apply* — two things that are very hard to get help with during a bathroom break.
The other solution is to divide the exam into a series of shorter exams — say 1 hour exams followed by a 15 minute break, followed by another hour, etc. The intermediate results are handed in before each break, so there is no point in obtaining help during the breaks. Regular short breaks will refresh the exam takers, and give them a chance to go to the bathroom if they need to.
In line with this suggestion, the idea that "people cannot concentrate on a task for more than 45 minutes" seems to be widely believed — [see this for example](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8560/how-long-is-it-possible-to-maintain-concentration). If that is indeed true, the above makes even more sense.
And if the exam is such a coherent whole that it is not possible to break it up (for example, it requires three hours of solid writing of a single essay) then good luck to the person who attempts to get help during a bathroom break …
In summary:
* allow the students to have reference material
* break the exam into shorter pieces
* test understanding and synthesis, not memorization
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_7: Not an example from a university, but from my school's finals (A level, wich will grant you access to take a class at university) which I find is neither inhumane nor impracticable:
* Bathrooms are checked before the tests are starting. Out-of-class
access is restricted during that time for the specific bathrooms. Not following that restriction will lead to a penalty.
* Every test has 2 supervisors, one of each gender.
* Only one student at a time is allowed to use the bathroom at the same time from all courses participating in a test.
* Time of leaving / re-entering the room will be noted on the test paper.
* A supervisor of the matching gender will escort the student to the bathroom and **can** check it before/afterwards.
* While the student is in the bathroom the escorting supervisor is advised to only enter the bathroom if the average time is exceeded massively (usually 2~3 min for men, 3~4 min for women) for privacy reasons.
* Time is noted in a separate file with a sign of the respective supervisor outside of the room (also to doublecheck if students from different courses are outside of the room the same time for potential comparison of the tests from those students).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_8: Just witnessed around 20 to 25 people cheating on "bathroom trips" today after taking my last college engineering exam. It was a really fundamental/fair exam so I(and many others) finished around 50 minutes early and was waiting in the hall for a friend. I noticed the amount of people going to the bathroom during the 2.5 hour exam just seemed odd considering people rarely get up like this during lectures. Later I had to use the bathroom and when I entered the restroom there was a guy from class on his phone scrolling through lectures figuring out how to solve the problems on the exam. He found the solutions and went back in the room. Well folks, I guess that's how you get A's in college these days.
The issue: Cheating is now taking place "outside" the classroom.
Solution: Assign faculty (TA, grad students, etc.) to monitor outside activity.
Issue: Some TA's are cheaters themselves and have friendships with undergrads
Solution: Professor will monitor outside activity and TA's will watch the class for cheaters. If unethical TA's are giving answers to their friends, others in class will let the professor know about it anyway and the TA will be in some trouble.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_9: In India (at least in my university) a problem like this is pretty common. My university follows the following procedure:
* A supervisor/external checks the bathrooms before the commencing of examination.
* A security guard/volunteer is given duty to sit in front of the bathroom throughout the span of the examination. This duty could be given to whomsoever is free and ready to volunteer including the staff and the faculty. Every bathroom is assigned a volunteer.
* The invigilator makes sure that only one student is allowed to use the restroom at a time.
This particular method leaves little room for students to cheat during the written examination.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_10: First as a student, and then over 28 years as a teacher (first at high school and then at university) I've witnessed all sort of cheating strategies: appointments at the restrooms, radios (when cellphones didn't exist), programmable pocket calculators stored with a wealth of information (and with the reset procedure duly intercepted in case the professor used to pass to reset all the calculators), girls with pieces of paper attached to the legs under the skirt, etc.
So, my point is: if students want to cheat, they will.
Strict vigilance might give students a hard time cheating, but do we really want to spend our time and TAs' time watching students and escorting them to the restrooms? During a 2-4 hours exam I can do a bit of useful work: research, preparing the next exam, grading other exam papers, reading a paper... and if I really want to spend some time doing nothing, I'd rather read a novel than staring at one hundred faces.
Therefore, my suggested strategy against cheating, any kind of cheating, is: design the exam as to make cheating as ineffective as possible, and as detectable as possible during the grading phase (multiple choice questions? no, thanks).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_11: The solution is to give students one question at a time. When the students turn in one answer, they get the next question. Students can take a break anytime they want. However, it is now more reasonable to have the students lose credit for just one question, if they have received that question but not turned in that answer. If there are 10 questions in 100 minutes, students only need to wait a maximum average of 10 minutes to take another break (which is much more reasonable than waiting an hour).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_12: Ask your students to copy and sign their name to an honor statement, e.g., "On my honor, I will neither accept nor give unauthorized aid" and then leave them alone to take the test unproctored. You can do this even if your campus is not an honor code campus.
My experience is that when you make your students responsible and aware that it's their job, not someone else's, to ensure they're honest, that that goes a long way toward getting honest behavior. You won't eliminate the problem, but you will reduce it significantly. And I'm not alone in that experience: In the 2015 documentary, "(Dis)Honesty: The Truth About Lies", <NAME>, a Duke Professor of Psychology and Behavior Economics, describes various experiments to find out what conditions make people more or less likely to be honest. What he found (among other things): Honor codes work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_13: Maybe you're approaching the wrong problem. Instead of trying to avoid students that cheat, why not eliminate potential gains from cheating?
Example: Instead of asking students whether or not a piece of code will compile (easily compiled and checked online), ask them to discuss whether a piece of code is a good idea for a given problem. Nobody can effectively google the answer to
>
> Is this implementation of List good when creating an application for
> doing X? Outline how you would improve.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_14: If somebody asks to go to the washroom, ask them to leave their phone on their desk so that they cannot take it into the washroom. Apart from that, it is hard to micromanage cheating because you can't predict that a student will hide a textbook here or some notes there. Simply put into the syllabus that phone policy and you'll have covered a large portion of what the student intends to do. If I was going to cheat on a test, looking at my phone would be the first thing that I did.
Upvotes: 0 |
2014/06/22 | 1,616 | 6,443 | <issue_start>username_0: I have just finished my master degree (TU Vienna) and I am working 20 hours per week. I have talked to several professors in my field of interest and they said that the earliest position for a PhD would be in December, because of funding.
However, I think I could take the route as external researcher and do my PhD by working 20 hours per week and devoting the other 20 hours to my research.
By browsing some posts here I have read that a lot of you consider an external PhD as inefficient (it takes a *long* time, etc.). Why? What are the reasons for that? Can't such a PhD be done within 3 years?
>
> UPDATE
>
>
>
**PS.:** What are mostly the reason that it takes so long?<issue_comment>username_1: Being a PhD student is a **full-time job**.
True, "officially" you may be assigned to 20 hours of "study" and 20 hours of "work" by the university, but this is just a way to determine your salary, and does NOT reflect the amount of time you actually spend on research studies.
In the U.S., the nominal time for PhD is about five to six years average. This assumes the student is a full time student. While some people finish their PhD in three years or less, this is truly exceptional. The average is six. (This was the case at least in the school I attended, in the Computer Science department. Length may vary in other departments.) It also depends on what you aim for in your PhD: is graduating after publishing just one paper good enough for you?
Now let's do the math. If it takes about six years to finish a degree, assuming full time, then how much time would it take for a part-time student? Take into consideration also 20%-30% extension of time due to context-switching, but also reduce 15%-25% of the time due to being more efficient (it's easier to waste time when working full-time, in my opinion).
You arrive at 10+ years.
Then again, I know people that worked part-time and studied part-time, and were able to complete their PhD studies in four to six years. I also know people that took five to six years to finish their MSc degree (which nominally takes two years), due to having another full-time job.. It depends mostly on your abilities and aims from PHD (but also quite a bit on your luck).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: And to add to what <NAME> said, if you work at half the speed, it will take you longer to produce scientific results, duplicating the chances that you get scooped.
This said, it is common for medical doctors and some nurses with a full time job to do a PhD, but that is a whole different beast (and does take many years).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: This advice is based on Computer Science mostly, and it may or may not apply directly to you. As far as I understand your area is only marginally related to Computer Science through the fact that you're interested in Algorithmic Trading.
Everything depends on two factors: **your goals** and **the speed with which you are able to learn and create the things that you need to do in order to achieve your goals**. If your goal is to be a professor at TU Vienna, then you will obviously at some point need to submit a PhD thesis and later a Habilitation thesis. The PhD thesis can have 3 to 6 papers in good conferences and one - two papers in some journals, and your habilitation thesis will consist of a minimum of 5 articles in good journals (A-level journals). You will also have to submit some grant proposals and after you manage to get those grants to finish them successfully (typically the requirement is to have EU grants or ERC grants). So you will have to produce at least 15 conference articles, 8-10 journal articles, 2 thesis, and 2 grants in order to get to an Assistant Professor or Professor in Vienna. If you manage to get every paper accepted first time when you submit it (something unheard of), you will still need 6 - 15 years to get to Assistant Professorship or Professorships (counting from the first year of your PhD). Keep in mind that at TU, Assistant or Junior Professorships appear only once at two years or so (and just one position). Most of the people I know from Vienna (TU Vienna, WU, IST Austria, etc) were able to finish PhD thesis in 4-5 years (full time) or 7-8 years (part-time), so there is no reason to consider that it might take a decade.
The system also makes you quit really fast (after 1-2 years) if you do not want (or you are not able for some reason) to put in the effort that is required in order to create at least a decent thesis. The professor will stop talking to you if you don't make any progress for a number of months, for example, or if your papers are not accepted at top conferences. What you need to understand is that your supervisor is your guide, but you will eventually make the journey alone. The supervisor will just help you polish your articles or thesis.
These being said, before applying for a PhD, I would check the CVs, thesis and articles written by TU Professors (<NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, <NAME>, etc). It helps a lot, as their expectations are that you will produce some work that is at least partially connected to their last articles (so that your work will also fit into their various research projects). Also try to talk with some of their students (you can easily detect them by looking through their CVs - they might have a PhD students entry - or through DBLP or Scholar by looking at their latest publications and identifying collaborators that only published few papers in the last 2-3 years). Try to understand what a PhD means, what are the expectations, and what is the amount of work you need to put in order to get to good results.
I would also recommend you to check these interesting slides from one of the professors I just mentioned: <http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/~silvia/research-tips/>.
The idea is to **try to estimate the expectations, the amount of work needed and the time you think you will need in order to fulfill this work**. The actual number of papers depends a lot on the domain in which you are working, but also on the quality of the outlets where you will publish (you might end up with a smaller number of papers if all of them are only in the top outlets for your field). Good luck!
Disclaimer: I do not directly work with any of the persons already mentioned, but I do work at a university from Vienna.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2014/06/22 | 513 | 2,286 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a master's in mechanical engineering from a pretty decent college in my country with a GPA of 7.9/10. I'd like to know what constitutes a good application to a Master's program in CS (ML, to be precise) and how I must choose my Universities that are safe and in those I have a chance.<issue_comment>username_1: One thing that stands out in your question is your mechanical engineering background. That suggest a leaning toward more "theoretical," and less "applied" areas of computer science.
Computer science programs come in many varieties, and in your shoes, I would give the most weight to the ones "heavily oriented toward theory and simulations." Those are probably the "safest" and "best chances" for you.
**Note**: I have amended my original response based on comments below.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Overall, your MS in ME will be viewed positively when you apply for MS in CS with Machine Learning specialization. What will matter most are how many computer science courses you have taken (and grades you received) and how many relevant math classes you have taken -- calculus, probability & statistics, linear algebra, numerical methods, optimization. The project work you have done in simulations could be very relevant and helpful, too, if the software you wrote was something more than procedural programming or deterministic simulation.
In your Statement of Purpose, it would be to your advantage to make a strong link between your ME education and work experience and your goals in CS-ML. Are there applications or problems that arise in ME that you want to address with ML methods? Are there particular methods of optimization or classification that you've encountered in ME that you want to explore further in other settings?
Regarding what schools to which you might apply: I would suggest that you aim at CS departments that are part of an institution with a strong "engineering" culture or focus. In the US there are many colleges, universities, and institutes that have an engineering focus, including the Polytechnics, Case Western Reserve, <NAME>, Carnegie-Mellon, and many others. In contrast, the CS departments at Yale, Harvard, etc. have less orientation toward engineering.
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.